21–30 of 265 posts
LLMs have truly killed obfuscation. It only worked previously by making things extremely tedious but AI doesn't care about that.
The US Department of War IP adresses baked into the firmware is the bigger story here. Note to self: never buy a Korean security product.
The Canadian Navy very recently made a major choice and agreed with you
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=hanwha+oc...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do know of at least one company who has black-holed the entire DoD ip space and are using it for internal space, which is why I gave a speculation warning... it's really strange regardless.
I recently troubleshot an installation for someone where at some point in the past they'd picked 1.1.1.0/24 as their address range because "all that 192 stuff was silly and too complicated". You know, I'm not sure I can explain how I feel about this properly without waving the shotgun around.
If you're gonna do that, though, it's better if you use fd00:... or one of the other assigned ranges so it's still in the standard range. OSes use this as a heuristic for source address selection.
LLMs have truly killed obfuscation. It only worked previously by making things extremely tedious but AI doesn't care about that.
And it's worth considering that obfuscation only ever worked against casuals for whom tedious was a bridge too far. Nation state actors and criminal hacker groups, on the other hand, consider the tedious entirely worth it.
Entirely without LLMs, I'm imagining an office of North Korean compsci graduates doing astonishingly tedious tasks, for whom an office job on a basic Linux computer and slightly better diet and nice apartment put them in the top 1-2% of living standard in the country.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
how did "same MAC" lead to "access to everything"? Was the website's security based on MAC, which presumably is supplied by the client? If so, I guess.. typical IoT.
buy any dongle that sells for under $100 on amazon. they all have the same mac, and come with 'bespoke' apps to let you do things to your car. those apps are all thin wrappers on code widely shared; they use the MAC of the dongle as the keystone for ID. Short story: buy one cheap dongle on Amazon, dump the MAC (00:11:22:AA:BB:CC IIRC; it's been 15 years since I cared) and you have auth to all of the apps everywhere.…
LLMs have truly killed obfuscation. It only worked previously by making things extremely tedious but AI doesn't care about that.
And it's worth considering that obfuscation only ever worked against casuals for whom tedious was a bridge too far. Nation state actors and criminal hacker groups, on the other hand, consider the tedious entirely worth it.
I bought some ambient room lighting recently. You cannot control them without a proprietary app. This bugged me ... so I grabbed an APK from the Google store, unpacked it, and found essentially keys to the kingdom: api keys for the backend, api keys for shopify, etc. Haven't done anything with this knowledge yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do know of at least one company who has black-holed the entire DoD ip space and are using it for internal space, which is why I gave a speculation warning... it's really strange regardless.
I recently troubleshot an installation for someone where at some point in the past they'd picked 1.1.1.0/24 as their address range because "all that 192 stuff was silly and too complicated". You know, I'm not sure I can explain how I feel about this properly without waving the shotgun around.
I bought some ambient room lighting recently. You cannot control them without a proprietary app. This bugged me ... so I grabbed an APK from the Google store, unpacked it, and found essentially keys to the kingdom: api keys for the backend, api keys for shopify, etc. Haven't done anything with this knowledge yet.
There's a lot of public keys that don't give you any special access, unless the dev is really bad. Anyone who cares about security will be using App Attest or the Google store equivalent.
I have something hilarious to tell you about IoT apps
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I recently troubleshot an installation for someone where at some point in the past they'd picked 1.1.1.0/24 as their address range because "all that 192 stuff was silly and too complicated". You know, I'm not sure I can explain how I feel about this properly without waving the shotgun around.
Yet another thing ipv6 solves. Yeah you can do the officially supported fdXX:XXXX:XXXX:... but you can also just pick something like 1::1 and it's unlikely to conflict with the current global range. If you're gonna do that, though, it's better if you use fd00:... or one of the other assigned ranges so it's still in the standard range. OSes use this as a heuristic for source address selection.