Miscellaneous Tech News
-
@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@Dashrender said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Bottom line, if Google Project Zero discovers a vulnerability, and chooses to hide it from me, and I get compromised because they were complacent (or whose), I think that there is criminal culpability. If they research the software that I am running, that's fine. If they find a vulnerability, though, telling me makes them innocent, not telling me makes them guilty. If you are going to do security research you have ethical responsibilities and, hopefully, criminal ones as well.
They have made the choice to do the following - report to vendor, put a 90 day clock on it. Either the vendor makes a public announcement within 90 days or Google does.
This has been happening for years, and as of yet, I don't believe google's been sued over it.
No, but it sure seems like they should be. Why do they have such a choice to get to make?
I assume they did because they considered the greater good. Not saying it's right or wrong.. just that it is.
-
@Dashrender said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@Dashrender said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Bottom line, if Google Project Zero discovers a vulnerability, and chooses to hide it from me, and I get compromised because they were complacent (or whose), I think that there is criminal culpability. If they research the software that I am running, that's fine. If they find a vulnerability, though, telling me makes them innocent, not telling me makes them guilty. If you are going to do security research you have ethical responsibilities and, hopefully, criminal ones as well.
They have made the choice to do the following - report to vendor, put a 90 day clock on it. Either the vendor makes a public announcement within 90 days or Google does.
This has been happening for years, and as of yet, I don't believe google's been sued over it.
No, but it sure seems like they should be. Why do they have such a choice to get to make?
I assume they did because they considered the greater good. Not saying it's right or wrong.. just that it is.
"The Greater Good" is generally a term used for "knowingly doing wrong and not bothering to defend it." There's no greater good in doing the wrong thing, it's still wrong. They would just be attempting to redefine "good".
-
@Dashrender said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
they considered the greater good
Google and "the greater good" are not good friends. Never have been. Not saying that they are the evil empire. They are more, in the middle. But as big businesses go, they aren't exactly well respected as far as "being good" goes. Not their claim to fame. I believe that their claim to fame is anti-trust and spying.
-
Man has two guesses to unlock bitcoin worth $240m
We've all been there - brain fog makes us forget our password and after eight frantic attempts, we have just two left.
That's the situation for programmer Stefan Thomas but the stakes are higher than most - the forgotten password will let him unlock a hard drive containing $240m (£175m) worth of Bitcoin. His plight, reported in the New York Times, has gone viral. Ex-Facebook security head Alex Stamos has offered to help - for a 10% cut. Bitcoin has surged in value in recent months. One bitcoin is currently worth $34,000. But the cryptocurrency is volatile. And experts are divided about whether it will continue to rise or crash. -
@mlnews said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Man has two guesses to unlock bitcoin worth $240m
We've all been there - brain fog makes us forget our password and after eight frantic attempts, we have just two left.
That's the situation for programmer Stefan Thomas but the stakes are higher than most - the forgotten password will let him unlock a hard drive containing $240m (£175m) worth of Bitcoin. His plight, reported in the New York Times, has gone viral. Ex-Facebook security head Alex Stamos has offered to help - for a 10% cut. Bitcoin has surged in value in recent months. One bitcoin is currently worth $34,000. But the cryptocurrency is volatile. And experts are divided about whether it will continue to rise or crash.This is what scares me about cryptocurrencies. Seems like everyone has this happen to them. It's so easy to essentially ransomware yourself.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@mlnews said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Man has two guesses to unlock bitcoin worth $240m
We've all been there - brain fog makes us forget our password and after eight frantic attempts, we have just two left.
That's the situation for programmer Stefan Thomas but the stakes are higher than most - the forgotten password will let him unlock a hard drive containing $240m (£175m) worth of Bitcoin. His plight, reported in the New York Times, has gone viral. Ex-Facebook security head Alex Stamos has offered to help - for a 10% cut. Bitcoin has surged in value in recent months. One bitcoin is currently worth $34,000. But the cryptocurrency is volatile. And experts are divided about whether it will continue to rise or crash.This is what scares me about cryptocurrencies. Seems like everyone has this happen to them. It's so easy to essentially ransomware yourself.
I did some crypto stuff myself. No idea if i got to a single coin, but no idea what wallet i used or where the password etc are
could have $34,000 somewhere lol 
-
@hobbit666 said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@mlnews said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Man has two guesses to unlock bitcoin worth $240m
We've all been there - brain fog makes us forget our password and after eight frantic attempts, we have just two left.
That's the situation for programmer Stefan Thomas but the stakes are higher than most - the forgotten password will let him unlock a hard drive containing $240m (£175m) worth of Bitcoin. His plight, reported in the New York Times, has gone viral. Ex-Facebook security head Alex Stamos has offered to help - for a 10% cut. Bitcoin has surged in value in recent months. One bitcoin is currently worth $34,000. But the cryptocurrency is volatile. And experts are divided about whether it will continue to rise or crash.This is what scares me about cryptocurrencies. Seems like everyone has this happen to them. It's so easy to essentially ransomware yourself.
I did some crypto stuff myself. No idea if i got to a single coin, but no idea what wallet i used or where the password etc are
could have $34,000 somewhere lol Yeah, everyone seems to have that story. From my personal experience, it seems that 90% of cyptocurrencies have been lost. No wonder the value is so high! lol
-
Like JB I’ve lost like.5 Bitcoin
-
@Dashrender said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Like JB I’ve lost like.5 Bitcoin
That's a LOT of money!! Holy cow. That's enough to buy a decent used car!
-
@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@Dashrender said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Like JB I’ve lost like.5 Bitcoin
That's a LOT of money!! Holy cow. That's enough to buy a decent used car!
Well it is today, when I lost it 15 years ago it was like 50 cent
-
@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Yeah, everyone seems to have that story. From my personal experience, it seems that 90% of cyptocurrencies have been lost. No wonder the value is so high! lol
For me i just lost interest and thought it wouldn't come of anything. Also couldn't afford to run things 24/7
-
@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Bottom line, if Google Project Zero discovers a vulnerability, and chooses to hide it from me, and I get compromised because they were complacent (or whose), I think that there is criminal culpability. If they research the software that I am running, that's fine. If they find a vulnerability, though, telling me makes them innocent, not telling me makes them guilty. If you are going to do security research you have ethical responsibilities and, hopefully, criminal ones as well.
What's the legal statute that you are referencing when making this statement about criminal culpability?
Truly asking.
-
@NashBrydges said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Bottom line, if Google Project Zero discovers a vulnerability, and chooses to hide it from me, and I get compromised because they were complacent (or whose), I think that there is criminal culpability. If they research the software that I am running, that's fine. If they find a vulnerability, though, telling me makes them innocent, not telling me makes them guilty. If you are going to do security research you have ethical responsibilities and, hopefully, criminal ones as well.
What's the legal statute that you are referencing when making this statement about criminal culpability?
Truly asking.
Are you asking if there is a law that says being part of a crime makes you culpable? If you find someone's house unlocked, and then you call someone and give them a chance to rob that house and keep it secret from the home owner... if you get caught doing that, you are part of the breaking and entering.
If you hack into someone's system, and then sell or give away that info to a third party allowing them utilize that information, you are part of the crime.
Just like if someone finds your wallet on the ground, takes your credit cards and sells them to a third party. Sure, they aren't the ones actively or physically impersonating you, but they are part of the identity theft.
-
Ethical hacking is when you do research or use the hacking to protect those at risk. Criminal hacking is when you use hacking to sell (or give away) the hacking to give someone else (or youself) the chance to breach a system.
I feel like you guys are trying to say that you'd be okay with someone researching your systems, figuring out how to breach them, then selling that information to a third party so that they can't steal your data.
It's like being okay with hiring a hit man because it's not really you pulling the trigger.
-
-
Google tries to allay Fitbit-deal privacy fears
Google has completed its acquisition of Fitbit and tried to reassure users it will protect their privacy.
The search giant bought the health-tracking company for $2.1bn (£1.5bn) in November 2019 but faced questions from regulators. Following a four-month European Commission investigation, it agreed not to use health and location data from Fitbit devices for advertising. The deal was then approved by authorities in December. In a blog, Google said the acquisition "has always been about devices, not data". "We've been clear since the beginning that we will protect Fitbit users' privacy," it added, promising the commitments given to the commission, which it must keep for 10 years, would be implemented globally. -
-
@mlnews said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Google tries to allay Fitbit-deal privacy fears
Google has completed its acquisition of Fitbit and tried to reassure users it will protect their privacy.
The search giant bought the health-tracking company for $2.1bn (£1.5bn) in November 2019 but faced questions from regulators. Following a four-month European Commission investigation, it agreed not to use health and location data from Fitbit devices for advertising. The deal was then approved by authorities in December. In a blog, Google said the acquisition "has always been about devices, not data". "We've been clear since the beginning that we will protect Fitbit users' privacy," it added, promising the commitments given to the commission, which it must keep for 10 years, would be implemented globally.Bahahaha. Google + protect privacy = Annihilation. This is like matter and antimatter in the same space.
-
-
WhatsApp extends 'confusing' update deadline
WhatsApp has extended the deadline by which its two billion users must either accept its updated terms and conditions or stop using the service.
The original cut-off date was 8 February, but users now have until 15 May to take action. The firm was criticised for sending the notification, which seemed to suggest changes to the data it would share with its parent company Facebook. It said there had been "confusion" about its message. Since the announcement and notifications went out across its platform, millions of people around the world have downloaded alternative encrypted messaging apps such as Signal and Telegram. In a blogpost, WhatsApp said personal messages had always been encrypted and would remain private. It added that its practice of sharing some user data with Facebook was not new, and was not going to be expanded. "The update includes new options people will have to message a business on WhatsApp, and provides further transparency about how we collect and use data," it said.
