*Vulnerability, not exploit.
97 posts • joined 11 Apr 2007
I agree about the fleet autonomous vehicles but I think the Powerwalls are unrelated, they are a benefit if you have solar rather than directly related to private vs fleet autonomous vehicles.
There are interim advances being made where the privately owned elec vehicles can be used in a similar way to a powerwall but it's not likely to benefit the consumer unless your car is parked at home all day being charged on solar, it seems like it's a big boost to smoothing out the peaks in the grid.
Re: 16 billion
Seems like the real value would be in the battery tech, energy storage is going to be an exploding market...I'm not sure if battery will be the tool of choice but it's probably going to have its place.
I'm not close enough to know who is owning the patents in this space on next gen if it is Tesla then that would be a reason to invest, if it's just a brand using other folks tech then the yeah it's a ponzi.
Re: Insiders as a threat
It doesn't change the problem but it likely increases the scope, the ability to monetise financial information without these kind of forums in a safe way is more difficult.
When it comes to purposefully installing malware it again it removes the requirement to handle the end to end engagement as well as plausible deniability.
I think it's a significant shift.
Re: Sympathy for the Devil
I'd be really surprised if the weaknesses that are public with the D-Link products are forced on them by government organisations. I suspect occams razor, it's more likely a lack of focus on security.
Why bother forcing someone if there are plenty on table just through incompetence?
Re: Lawyer speak
I get your point but I think it's over egged. A statement to say they are secure would be meaningless I agree, but that wasn't what was proposed, industry best practice salted and hashed is different from the statement 'they are secure', but it's also a huge improvement on not giving any details in that area.
Recommendations to change if re-used elsewhere would be issued anyway as you point out, why not?
As we know it's all about time and effort to crack rather than it being impossible to break.
Re: There are no legal issues! The tool doesn't attack the hacker!
Ok replying to a REALLY old thread here but I'm reading up on this in general.
I agree you aren't attacking the AP as such but you would be denying anyone connecting to it, so is it no longer functioning? Are you denying service? Yes, obviously that is the point of the Deauth.
So it is kind of a DoS on equip you don't own but for the greater good...I think it's grey at best.
Re: What is the attack vector ?
This is changing with things like self service in the UK, we have a greater exposure to the user.
Also these machines don't exist in a network vacuum as such depending on how the network is configured there is exposure here.
With regards to prevention, it seems like a no brainer candidate for application whitelisting.
True there are different motives but the only motive here is money, Stuxnet isn't really comparable it was also low and slow trying to hide itself and the damage it was doing for as long as possible.
It's a profit exercise, as another poster points out sometimes to stop these kind of things as a government you would need to show your hand in terms of tooling and control. It doesn't always mean they couldn't stop the attackers just that it's a balance.
It could be a government but I think it's way less likely than an organised crime group.
Unlikely to be state sponsored generally they are after information and so are low and slow. The last thing a state sponsored attacker would do is raise a flag.
This is classic organised crime, lots of these gangs are moving from drugs into malware because of better margins and less chance of getting caught.
I agree with AC, Google don't shove the data they gather in your face.
It's a smart move but at some point a drive for profits will cause Google to play the cards they so carefully gather in a more overt way. I think if/when they overstep the mark people will finally think about the broad amount of data they are gathering and that may drive some competition in the search space again.
Amazon Top it
It may just be a stunt and short lived re: 29p tracks but I've used amazon a fair bit for MP3s and they have been V. competitively priced with no DRM and high quality.
No DRM and cheap, why would you use iTunes again? I think Apple needed some serious competition to kick them into gear and this might do it.
Images in google
They already shoe-horn in images in the normal search results. Anyone remember google being quick and image free once upon a time?
I hate the YouTube vids they shoe-horn in (Who owns YouTube again?) with thumbnails.
But now ads in image search, another fine way to slow down your searching and bloat your bandwidth.
Thanks google for 'improving my experience'
Someone recommend and competitor I wont feel dirty using.