121–130 of 274 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I'm not a BitLocker user or expert, but I thought I'd read that if you used a BitLocker PIN, the exploit didn't work. If the gov't asked MSFT to deploy an exploit, wouldn't they make it work PINlessly?
No idea what's happening here, but the First Rule Of Major Bug Bounty Programs is that everybody involved on the vendor side is actively incentivized to pay out. In many cases, there are people whose internal metrics depend on payouts. Payouts are causes for celebration in these programs. Microsoft is almost certainly[†] not trying to save money by screwing over bounty claimants. This might not be true of small compa…
The bug this guy brings up is very obviously a Bitlocker backdoor and raises very serious questions about what Microsoft is doing with the encryption. Pretty certainly they're able to decode the volumes without the user's key, which is extremely concerning. Looks like they're trying to make it disappear, but it's in the wild now.
This exploit is cool but there are similar exploits discovered in any given year and nothing really reeks of a backdoor; this one seems to be gaining attention mostly because Microsoft’s robo-call level initial response caused the researcher to dramatically crash out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ever considered these aren't the full set of exploits the researcher discovered? Or that he can find more since he found these? If I found a bunch, I'd certainly withhold a few as insurance.
Sure, but GitHub and Gitlab aren’t the only two ways to share code on the Internet. The conspiracy theories about two unrelated companies shutting down his git accounts to prevent him from releasing these supposed exploits are reaching pretty deep into conspiracy theory nonsense. The conspiracy theories can’t even agree if he was banned for posting them or because he hadn’t posted them but might post them.
No idea what's happening here, but the First Rule Of Major Bug Bounty Programs is that everybody involved on the vendor side is actively incentivized to pay out. In many cases, there are people whose internal metrics depend on payouts. Payouts are causes for celebration in these programs. Microsoft is almost certainly[†] not trying to save money by screwing over bounty claimants. This might not be true of small compa…
[1] - https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/cyber-security/mi...
Surely, the public string of exploits means he can find gainful employment from any of the various spooks?
I know quite a few extremely skilled people who aren't employed in a technical field. Usually it's some combination of not working well with others, lack of formal credentials and the means to acquire them, or a criminal record. Government work also means you have to be morally okay with what the government does (or willfully ignorant), able to pass a background check, and be willing to go through the security cleara…
Researcher seems a bit unhinged.
This often seems to be the case for the most expert researchers, all a bit quirky. Anyone remember SandboxEscaper? I think they are deceased now but they were dropping Windows 0 days left and right. That person was quite a character. It's hard to describe it without potentially incurring the wrath of someone here but those who know, know.
> most expert researchers, all a bit quirky.
No idea what's happening here, but the First Rule Of Major Bug Bounty Programs is that everybody involved on the vendor side is actively incentivized to pay out. In many cases, there are people whose internal metrics depend on payouts. Payouts are causes for celebration in these programs. Microsoft is almost certainly[†] not trying to save money by screwing over bounty claimants. This might not be true of small compa…
The bug this guy brings up is very obviously a Bitlocker backdoor and raises very serious questions about what Microsoft is doing with the encryption. Pretty certainly they're able to decode the volumes without the user's key, which is extremely concerning. Looks like they're trying to make it disappear, but it's in the wild now.
As far as we know, having TPM+Pin or TPM+Startup Key breaks the exploit. TPM only was always known to be basically ineffective against threats like laptop theft, TPM only would only protect you if the drive was stolen out of the machine, which in that case, this exploit also would not work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
False analogy isn’t a deflection, it’s a logical fallacy.
Because you don't agree doesn't make the legitimate callout (i.e., victim-blaming “what were you wearing” vs. calling someone “unhinged” after they've endured repeated abuse/stress) a logical fallacy. Rather it positions you in opposition. Everything you disagree with isn't incorrect.
It reads to me like Microsoft didn't pay him what he thought he earned from the exploits (i have no idea who is in the right on that), and then he published a zero day with no notification and threatened the company. Doesn't seem ridiculous to ban them at that point.
Again, I don't know the details so I cant say who is in the right, but the researcher comes off as a little bit unhinged and entitled. Not paying a bug bounty is 'ruining my life'?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
If a government agency wanted to sweep this under the rug, don’t you think they’d just pay the bounties for the guy instead of giving him more ammunition for his crusade? I think it’s more likely that the guy is just being as abusive to these services as the quotes in the article where he’s talking about crushing their bones
It seldom pays to presume competence.
No idea what's happening here, but the First Rule Of Major Bug Bounty Programs is that everybody involved on the vendor side is actively incentivized to pay out. In many cases, there are people whose internal metrics depend on payouts. Payouts are causes for celebration in these programs. Microsoft is almost certainly[†] not trying to save money by screwing over bounty claimants. This might not be true of small compa…
Read the write up on YellowKey. [1] It sounds like, in at least some instances, he's publishing official Microsoft backdoors probably used by US intelligence agencies et al. It turns out that Bitlocker is insecure and backdoored. Something noooobody expected after TrueCrypt just mysteriously and suddenly shut their doors one day, removed all downloads, and recommended everybody move to Microsoft's BitLocker. lol. [1]…
I'm still far from thinking this is a backdoor. It tricks the boot environment into deleting a file and then it doesn't ask for a password. The exploit is nowhere near bitlocker, the problem is that bitlocker without a boot password requires the whole OS to preserve security from boot through the login screen.
And where's the claimed version that works when a PIN is set?