Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Anonymous GitHub account mass-dropping undisclosed 0-days

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 407 posts

Re: Anonymous GitHub account mass-dropping undisclosed 0-days

#271

Post by fluoridation »

woodruffw wrote: post #204
dspillett wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Potentially, but for many projects things like that are tools that you want to control access to anyway. Anyone wanting to update the CI/CD process who isn't a trusted part of the project should be having their changes properly reviewed by someone who is anyway, at which point the reviewer is the trusted user not the random external entity.

I don’t disagree with that, but I think GitHub has shown that projects want to have their cake and eat it too. GitHub has also shown that it’s incredibly easy to design an insecure CI/CD that satisfies that goal, but I see that more as a symptom of them being first-to-market rather than an inherent quality of the problem.

Wait, isn't this about protecting the machine running the actions? If someone hosts a project on Github and allows anyone to run actions, it's Github's problem if there's a vulnerability to exploit. It's their installations that are going to get compromised, not necessarily the project's data.

Re: Anonymous GitHub account mass-dropping undisclosed 0-days

#272

Post by semilin »

jmmcd wrote: post #241
djmips wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those aren't even em-dashes and yet there's a huge thread talking about them.

It's interesting that Claude also over-uses en -dashes. It's very willing to create compound-noun-phrases, especially in that compressed-summary-paragraph it often writes. The 0-days-vibes-vulns that started this thread looks a lot like that, but it could be Claude directly, or just Claude's style influencing people who spend too much time with it.

Those are just hyphens, actually. En dashes are for ranges (e.g., 1–4, which is admittedly hard to distinguish from 1-4), not compound words. Point stands though—LLMs do love compound words and dashes in general.

Re: Anonymous GitHub account mass-dropping undisclosed 0-days

#273

Post by gwerbin »

andrepd wrote: post #62
Retr0id wrote: post #17

I took a look at the Ghidra ones (because I use Ghidra), and I'm unimpressed: https://github.com/bikini/exploitarium/blob/main/ghidra-12.1... The first requires being able to overwrite binaries in the Swift tool directory. Yes, if you overwrite binaries executed by ghidra, you can trigger code execution. This is not a surprise. The second, idk, I'm not familiar with TraceRMI (but it's probably worth noting that "RMI"…

> Yes, if you overwrite binaries executed by ghidra, you can trigger code execution. > but it's probably worth noting that "RMI" stands for Remote Method Invocation This reminds me of someone submitting a (clearly vibecoded) vulnerability report claiming to have found a way to execute arbitrary SQL. The project in question? An SQL server... https://github.com/tursodatabase/turso/pull/4322

The Turso example is a little ironic because their homepage brands them as a product intended for use primarily by AI agents.

Re: Anonymous GitHub account mass-dropping undisclosed 0-days

#274

Post by linzhangrun »

ofjcihen wrote: post #104
Retr0id wrote: post #17

I took a look at the Ghidra ones (because I use Ghidra), and I'm unimpressed: https://github.com/bikini/exploitarium/blob/main/ghidra-12.1... The first requires being able to overwrite binaries in the Swift tool directory. Yes, if you overwrite binaries executed by ghidra, you can trigger code execution. This is not a surprise. The second, idk, I'm not familiar with TraceRMI (but it's probably worth noting that "RMI"…

Was just thinking it would be hilarious if these were all known CVEs hiding the next Shai-Hulud inside of them and waiting to compromise security hobbyists rushing to download them.

The design purpose of Windows Sandbox :)

Re: Anonymous GitHub account mass-dropping undisclosed 0-days

#275

Post by BoxFour »

Izkata wrote: post #269
BoxFour wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> yes it was illegal to sexually abuse animals No, it wasn't. The laws are quite explicit about what "abuse" means, and if you take a gander at most laws (including Washington state's circa 2000 or so) in the context of animals it usually explicitly refers to physical harm (for example, mutilation) or improper living conditions. Charging them under Washington's existing abuse laws would've required the animal to be p…

#2 can be split into two sides, and not everyone believes one of those is sexual abuse. Edit: Removed video link because the second half was gross and unrelated. May try finding another clip, but the first half was of Cenk Uygur from The Young Turks about a decade ago saying he'd legalize cases where the person pleasured the animal. Edit2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QUUcQqBkJA

I'll be blunt: I don't really feel the need to argue about that point. It's sexual abuse.

Re: Anonymous GitHub account mass-dropping undisclosed 0-days

#276

Post by breadwinner8 »

albroland wrote: post #254
newguy33 wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. That FFmpeg code execution is absolutely nasty

Maybe I'm missing something but the ffmpeg buffer "exploit" involves passing a custom exploited buffer callback to parse a RASC file that presumably has been crafted to contain a packet that can exploit the custom buffer passed in? I don't see how this would be used in practice in the wild as to achieve the first step (custom buffer invocation) would require you to already have access to the machine to even invoke ff…

The custom get_buffer2 path is not something the attacker needs shell access to invoke. It is a normal public libavcodec API used by applications embedding FFmpeg. The attacker’s input is still just the crafted RASC/AVI media. The target application invokes FFmpeg/libavcodec during normal media processing. The PoC uses a custom buffer provider to make the heap layout deterministic and to place a demonstrable callback pointer next to the decoded PAL8 plane. That proves the bug can redirect control flow in a valid libavcodec decode flow. It does not mean the exact same file will pop calc under stock ffmpeg -i everywhere, but definitely not impossible. I popped a few shells today with it on a few websites for testing purposes. Reported it to them all, of course.

Re: Anonymous GitHub account mass-dropping undisclosed 0-days

#277

Post by Dylan16807 »

BoxFour wrote: post #267
Dylan16807 wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using the legal definition of "abuse", yes it was illegal to sexually abuse animals. Their actions didn't qualify. That's what warrants clarification here. I appreciate your definition of abuse here but it's confusing in a discussion about legality.

> yes it was illegal to sexually abuse animals No, it wasn't. The laws are quite explicit about what "abuse" means, and if you take a gander at most laws (including Washington state's circa 2000 or so) in the context of animals it usually explicitly refers to physical harm (for example, mutilation) or improper living conditions. Charging them under Washington's existing abuse laws would've required the animal to be p…

And my point is that sexual abuse is a subcategory of abuse.

You didn't imply until now that I was wrong about animal abuse already being illegal. In that case, a bestiality law doesn't fix the actual problem, right? It's a band-aid partial fix.

Re: Anonymous GitHub account mass-dropping undisclosed 0-days

#278

Post by xbmcuser »

utopiah wrote: post #58
drob518 wrote: post #30

There is going to be a flurry of this sort of stuff as the AIs get smart enough to find them. It will naturally die down as the legitimate ones are fixed. Yes, there will always be some level of this, but I’d expect it to be low and the exploits found to be increasingly complex. This is a time of transition.

> a flurry of this sort of stuff as the AIs get smart enough to find them. I really think this characterization is misleading. It's not "getting smart", only more tailored toward a specific usage, better curated dataset, better harness, better prompts, better labeling of results, documentation of failures and success, etc. The outcome is (hopefully) overall better but this anthropomorphized wording makes it sound lik…

I think you are giving the word "smart" a meaning or implication that it no longer has or is used with. It is common to say Google Search or Siri got smarter/better or dumber/worse, so I don't see saying LLMs getting smarter is any different.
Post reply on HN