81–90 of 158 posts
Perhaps there's something nefarious here, or perhaps it's just looking for a Chromecast or Apple TV?
I saw the same message yesterday from Spotify when I tried to use Chromecast. At least it prompted me for the permissions when I took that action, so it was clear why.
Tiktok doesn’t support chrome cast (I think)
Perhaps there's something nefarious here, or perhaps it's just looking for a Chromecast or Apple TV?
Any discussion of intent is always going to be speculation. All we can think about is what such a thing would be capable of if it were somehow malicious. The first possibility that comes to my mind would be sniffing Ethernet MAC addresses because it could be done without any sort of device-specific support built in to the app. Assuming your local devices’ manufacturers are following Da Rulez, the first part of their…
Not only does TikTok have a ton of overt data about users but also contemporaneous data like usage patterns and physical location. Then using the app to collect and exfiltrate information about all manner of foreign networks. I can pass off that data to my government run hacking [2] groups [3] as well as regime-favored businesses for some really great market research.
[0] https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bytedance-says-china-unit-hol...
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybersecurity_Law_of_the_Peo...
So just use their web site. Honest question - why do people use apps for such?
Because that’s how is used. The concept of apps and web sites being separate things, or being different, or preferable to one another isn’t on the radar of 95% of people, it’s a blurry shapeless vagueness the mind glazes over if it’s ever forced into recognizing its existence, and immediately discarded afterwards. You’re asking a forum of power users/creators, where a loud minority completely unironically still use d…
Is using a desktop or laptop for non-work activities ironic somehow?
Just to add: Scanning networks to gather data seems pretty popular these days - smart tvs have done so, and even the ebay site used to portscan visitors [1]. [edit] And of course, there's WebRTC leaking your local IP - which ublock origin can specifically block [2]. [1] https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/ebay-port-sca... [2] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Prevent-WebRTC-from-l...
That's a clear violation of the CFAA. This crime carries prison time. How come they threw teenagers in prison but not the people responsible for doing it en mass?
Just to add: Scanning networks to gather data seems pretty popular these days - smart tvs have done so, and even the ebay site used to portscan visitors [1]. [edit] And of course, there's WebRTC leaking your local IP - which ublock origin can specifically block [2]. [1] https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/ebay-port-sca... [2] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Prevent-WebRTC-from-l...
It only “leaks” your ip if you are trying to use webrtc features with a vpn, otherwise web rtc is perfectly fine to use without concern for most people.
"Keep in mind that this feature is to prevent leakage of your non-internet-facing IP adresses. The purpose of this feature is not to hide your current internet-facing IP address -- so be cautious to not misinterpret the results of some WebRTC-local-IP-address-leakage tests found online."
That said, my Firefox 91 and Safari don't leak local IPs regardless of the ublock setting.
Warrants more investigation perhaps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume signal is udp hole punching to get around NAT.
What's some good resources on understanding NAT and udp hole punching that explain it in an intuitive manner?
Beyond the basic take on it there really isn't an intuitive single explanation because "simple" things like "NAT traversal" quickly turn into "Full-cone NAT to Port-restricted NAT with UPnP behind CG-NAT" individual corner cases endlessly fighting the need to just go to IPv6.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any discussion of intent is always going to be speculation. All we can think about is what such a thing would be capable of if it were somehow malicious. The first possibility that comes to my mind would be sniffing Ethernet MAC addresses because it could be done without any sort of device-specific support built in to the app. Assuming your local devices’ manufacturers are following Da Rulez, the first part of their…
You can also just take the collection of devices typically on the network, hash the MAC addresses all together, and now you have a unique identifier for a household
So why it happens exactly would be interesting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a clear violation of the CFAA. This crime carries prison time. How come they threw teenagers in prison but not the people responsible for doing it en mass?
How is this a violation against the CFAA?
So just use their web site. Honest question - why do people use apps for such?