151–160 of 229 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Limits the blast radius to only the files that the more limited user has write access to.
The files I normally have write access to are my important files though. Immutable snapshots/offline backups help with those.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there any downside to unironically doing this? Seems like it'd actually work.
It’s not much harder to just harden your system to not be vulnerable in the first place, and that protects your from a lot more.
'just' harden the system is not easy.
But installing something like a vmware guest driver is easy, as even a non-technical user can do it following some basic instructions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I would argue most malware comes down to uneducated users doing the wrong thing This feels unnecessarily harsh. Those users are the victims of criminal activity. The protective controls could be a lot better. Windows doesn't offer immutable local file versions to protect against ransomware running as a non-privileged user. It doesn't offer any protection if a single application suddenly starts to overwrite huge amo…
As someone working in infosec for a largish 2000 seat organisation - it's honestly not inaccurate. No matter how much accessible information security training we try to provide and the EDR controls we implement, >95% of our incidents involve an end-user following (sometimes extremely obvious) phishing links. And contrary to what you've said, Windows Defender (in conjunction with Airlock) has actually saved us from ra…
That just shows that security training is insufficient and admins need to design their systems and networks to account for that fact. Clicking links is part of everybody's job and should not pose a risk to your organization. Enable 2FA for everything exposed to the internet to mitigate phished credentials.
Stop trying to fix the user: https://www.schneier.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Stop-Try...
There is evidence that this will worked for ransomware like Patya and for groups like Fancy Bear or Cozy Bear and Conti. Mostly because the Russia gov. unofficial guaranties immunity if the target is not Russian. Also, if you identify as Russian or write Russian in the chats or mails to them, they will de-crypt your systems for free.
There is evidence that this will worked for ransomware like Patya and for groups like Fancy Bear or Cozy Bear and Conti. Mostly because the Russia gov. unofficial guaranties immunity if the target is not Russian. Also, if you identify as Russian or write Russian in the chats or mails to them, they will de-crypt your systems for free.
Also, if you identify as Russian or write Russian in the chats or mails to them, they will de-crypt your systems for free. I wonder how that works in this era of AI translation. Not quite the same but I remember there was a Russian shareware author who gave free licenses to Russians.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I wonder how that works in this era of AI translation Simple translation isn’t enough to show cultural proximity. Patterns of speech are different. You can try to use AI to do the entire conversation, but e.g. Claude will refuse to give you exact phrases, since he is correctly assuming it is a social engineering attack.
Prompting a good LLM to convincingly act like a native isn't hard, neither is jailbreaking it if necessary. The hard thing in this case is verifying that it really does that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Prompting a good LLM to convincingly act like a native isn't hard, neither is jailbreaking it if necessary. The hard thing in this case is verifying that it really does that.
You're assuming prompting an LLM to behave like X will automatically result in the LLM behaving like X for any X. Some things are out of the LLMs ability: I'm sure you'll get something if your prompt is "You are a 300-IQ nuclear physicist with a doctorate in material science. Describe the design of a cold-fusion reactor", but there is no guarantee the LLM has fidelity to your prompted persona, though it will try to g…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or you know... just use Linux
There's nothing magical about the Linux security architecture, when it comes to malware, aside from abysmal Linux market share. If it were popular it would be targeted. That's not to say there's no value. It's a case of security by obscurity, at best. The Unix security model is much more simplistic than Windows NT. Everybody disables SELinux so there's no meaningful capabilities functionality. Assuming you actually d…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or you know... just use Linux
Right tool for the job. Linux for deploying stuff to, Linux or mac for working on the stuff you’ll deploy. Windows for games and everyday use. They’re all superior in their category and it’s too obvious to spend time arguing about.
Windows is good for work though because if it starts updating during the work day, or breaks, you can do nothing and still get paid. And if it leaks your company data, it is not your problem also.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or you know... just use Linux
> Or you know... just use Linux ...where namespaces provide excellent technology for hiding malware making linux one of the best platforms to turn into a evil host.