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

The newest Instagram “exploit” is the goofiest I've seen

0xsid.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 528 posts

Re: The newest Instagram “exploit” is the goofiest I've seen

#501

Post by parable »

brianmcnulty wrote: post #498
xk3 wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the solution was to do the same thing that the hackers did?? > "tell the Meta support AI that the account is hacked and ask it to send the verification codes to an arbitrary email address they control" I agree it seems like they could later use the same flow to get access again but maybe Meta has blocked some location spoofing now

Not exactly, I think part of the tools it has access to allows it to perform an "investigation" into recent malicious activity and account changes that may have occurred that were likely unauthorized (such as changing from an email used for a long period of time to a new one). I think this AI-version of this check was originally broken and just allowed any email but has now been fixed to only be emails that look like…

The bug still exists - two of my friends have lost access to their accounts as of an hour ago. They've partially recovered but are unable to change their passwords, so their accounts are still technically in the hands of the attacker(s).

Re: The newest Instagram “exploit” is the goofiest I've seen

#502

Post by Krasnol »

71bw wrote: post #395
Krasnol wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I support radiologies...I have seen things, patients wouldn't believe. MRI in helium off the shoulder of the CS student. I watched DICOMs corrupt in the dark near the PACS gateway. All those moments will be lost in time...like unsaved reports in rain. Time to reboot

We seem to work in very similar fields. I tend to work on the back-end line. To put it lightly: it is all a big shitshow. Vendor lock-in, non-standard communication, network admins who have no idea what they are doing, radiology imaging clinics with no IT staff at all (even on-call external people) or places that had their network set up 15 years ago by a guy who is now long dead or otherwise MIA. And then, inevitabl…

Yes, seen it all. I love how the girl is still talk weeks later.

It is a great field though. The wide range of tech you're confronted with is astonishing and all of it live 24/7.

I wish I'd have discovered the field earlier in my life, there is so much room for improvement.

Re: The newest Instagram “exploit” is the goofiest I've seen

#503

Post by cactusplant7374 »

jubilanti wrote: post #171
cactusplant7374 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you sue? I assume there is a financial motive with this crime.

Sue who? Meta? You "consented" in the Terms of Service to waive your right to a trial and only get forced arbitration by an arbitrator of Meta's choosing. Sue the anonymous person who stole your account and sold it to someone else, who is probably nowhere near your jurisdiction? Good luck.

At least sue to get it back. Isn't holding stolen goods a crime?

Re: The newest Instagram “exploit” is the goofiest I've seen

#504

Post by brianmcnulty »

parable wrote: post #501
brianmcnulty wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not exactly, I think part of the tools it has access to allows it to perform an "investigation" into recent malicious activity and account changes that may have occurred that were likely unauthorized (such as changing from an email used for a long period of time to a new one). I think this AI-version of this check was originally broken and just allowed any email but has now been fixed to only be emails that look like…

The bug still exists - two of my friends have lost access to their accounts as of an hour ago. They've partially recovered but are unable to change their passwords, so their accounts are still technically in the hands of the attacker(s).

Yeah, it seems another ATO bug has popped up. I haven’t looked too much at it personally, but I hope Meta plans on taking their Meta AI Support Assistant offline until it undergoes far more rigorous security review.

Re: The newest Instagram “exploit” is the goofiest I've seen

#505

Post by vgudur297 »

miki123211 wrote: post #434

When thinking about the security of AI agents, one should ignore the agent entirely. Consider only the tools that the agent has access to. Assume that, if the attacker can interact with this agent, they have full and unfettered access to these tools. If those tools are secure, the agent is secure. This framing doesn't consider context poisoning attacks, on which much has been written already and which merit their own…

[flagged]

Re: The newest Instagram “exploit” is the goofiest I've seen

#506

Post by parable »

brianmcnulty wrote: post #504
parable wrote: post #501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bug still exists - two of my friends have lost access to their accounts as of an hour ago. They've partially recovered but are unable to change their passwords, so their accounts are still technically in the hands of the attacker(s).

Yeah, it seems another ATO bug has popped up. I haven’t looked too much at it personally, but I hope Meta plans on taking their Meta AI Support Assistant offline until it undergoes far more rigorous security review.

It seems pretty trivial to just add a check in the agent's tool call to determine if the email is actually the one on file (or one that has previously been on file). I'm not sure why it's taking them so long to remediate.

Re: The newest Instagram “exploit” is the goofiest I've seen

#508

Post by leftbehinds »

lo_fye wrote: post #492
lo_fye wrote: post #471

HELP? I woke up to a bunch of notifications on my phone from the past 30-60 mins, indicating that people in in Montreal, Argentina, and Kathmandu had attempted to login to my account, and at least one had succeeded. I'm nowhere near any of those locations, and I didn't get any 2FA messages. I tapped Instagram, and it asked me for a new password, so I set one, and it just hung and did nothing. My Instagram, Facebook,…

UPDATE! At around 12:20pm, after hours of trying anything I could, the Desktop version of Facebook Web's Meta AI Support asked me to upload a video selfie. Then it asked me when the issue began, and as soon as I said around 7am this morning, their AI was like "Ah ha!" -- It asked me for my alternate email address, which I provided, and as soon as I clicked a link in that email, I started getting email about Pages bei…

[dead]

Re: The newest Instagram “exploit” is the goofiest I've seen

#509

Post by miki123211 »

terminalbraid wrote: post #443
miki123211 wrote: post #434

When thinking about the security of AI agents, one should ignore the agent entirely. Consider only the tools that the agent has access to. Assume that, if the attacker can interact with this agent, they have full and unfettered access to these tools. If those tools are secure, the agent is secure. This framing doesn't consider context poisoning attacks, on which much has been written already and which merit their own…

But the agent could be trained on sensitive data that could leak which could enable a different attack. Saying it's safe to "ignore" anything that exposes information is dangerous. You might as well claim social engineering isn't real as long as the person doesn't have direct access to the thing you want.

That's yet another class of attack and a pretty rare one. Very few agents run on fine-tuned models, but even for those that do, the same framing exists there. You should assume that anything that goes into the training data must be considered public information.

Re: The newest Instagram “exploit” is the goofiest I've seen

#510

Post by miki123211 »

wolvoleo wrote: post #446
terminalbraid wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the agent could be trained on sensitive data that could leak which could enable a different attack. Saying it's safe to "ignore" anything that exposes information is dangerous. You might as well claim social engineering isn't real as long as the person doesn't have direct access to the thing you want.

Agreed. The agent and tools are different types of vulnerabilities. Both are important especially if you have dedicated finetuning (which won't be user dependent of course). But also stuff like RAG: usually support agents have access to all internal support kbase material. Including stuff you don't want to leak verbatim. And there's other things to consider too like your agent being used to run other people's prompts…

> Including stuff you don't want to leak verbatim

This is exactly what I mean; if you give your agent access to some knowledge base through RAG; you should assume that this knowledge is now public information. If you don't want it to leak, design your agent so that it doesn't have access to it.

Post reply on HN