HN user

throwaway7356

214 karma
Posts0
Comments103
View on HN
No posts found.

It'll still connect to IPv6 addresses and bypass any firewalls.

Also users might become part (victim?) of a police investigation because of illegal actions that seem to originate from their local residential connection.

So still good to take down such backdoors. Would be nice to go after the botnet operators as well...

Apps are not infected with NetNut. This is just Google abusing their monopoly position to hurt its competitors.

If apps ship with stealth backdoors to sell access to the user's internal residential network, that's malware. I doubt any users want app providers to sell access to their private file server and anything else on their local network.

It doesn't seem like monopoly abuse to exclude such malware from application stores, just like key loggers or apps intercepting other apps network traffic without the user being aware of it (say the banking app's network traffic and password entry).

The fix was prepared statements

You don't need prepared statements. The fix is parameter binding: submitting parameters separate from the SQL statement itself, separating code from (user) data.

The analogous mitigation for agents is to have fixed behaviors they can perform, such as “read repo 1” “read repo 2”, etc., and the user input is used as data to select which of these fixed behaviors to execute.

No, that only deals with some special issues. It also doesn't separate code and (user) data, so it's not the same issue.

Having only limited actions is akin to using more restrictive database permissions. That also makes SQL injection no longer relevant: only SQL statements can be executed that the user is allowed to run either way.

nor do they provide the brain an interpretation of what they perceive

What it gets from the body is raw physical measurements

No, sensory organs like eyes do a lot of processing ("interpreation"). They certainly don't send "raw physical measurements" to the brain.

yet with enough developer elbow grease they can do all the same things an LLM can do, with much higher reliability

Where can I access such a Lisp expert system?

If I cannot because they don't exist: then they cannot do the same things an LLM can do. And of course one can assert anything and everything about what a non-existing thing could do.

The terms of service are between Anthropic and one of their subscribers. So Anthropic can maybe cancel their contract.

This doesn't affect what copyright law allows or does not allow.

Also I think Anthropic very much suppports gathering data by whatever means possible. That should work both ways.

In practice the only place it shows up is if you are using "ssh -X". That uses the security extension by default. Which is why there is also a "ssh -Y" that disables it for applications that it breaks.

Unless your distro changes the default to make "ssh -X" and "ssh -Y" behave the same which popular distributions do.

But granting full rights to distro-provided programs like vim or xeyes is perfectly sane.

You mean run everything distro-provided as root?

There are reasons systems don't do that any more. Even distro-provided services are often setup in a way to no run with full rights. Can you imaging reasons why this is done?

What was neglected is doing the same on user level, which should be done for pretty much the same reasons.

Maybe include some election guides for poor, misguided Americans that would hurt themselves by not voting for God President Donald Trump I as well?

It's protecting people from themselves, so basically like the safeguards already included in the models.

Ok, but what about those shady sites that resell Windows education keys?

Yes, they are fine? They might no longer include full first party support by Microsoft for not being "new". Same as buying a used car (also comes with the "shady sites" for a far longer time).

Though this not making any difference by Microsoft not doing any support either way to make more money is a business decision by Microsoft.

China aren't offering a cheaper solution. They are subsidizing an existing one

So basically like US companies subsidizing offerings with selling user data, ads for crypto scams, manipulation for elections, making people addicted to gambling and so on?

Seems fair and an improvement as you can choose between that and not. Unlike say offerings from Meta where the data selling and efforts to further gambling addiction is always included.

Yes, many developers give nothing about even basic security.

That's why we still have every basic security issue like hardcoded passwords, SQL or other injections, XSRF and so on repeated on an endless loop. Even if they are trivial to avoid.

CORS is threat model used for when you can't trust your self.

No. But many lack basic understanding of web technologies or facts like that a browser can be used to access more than a single site. This leads to not understanding what problems cross-site requests can cause and thus the impossibility of understanding what CORS is for.

i feel like there should be a way to trust a PR ID verification or in-person verification at FOSDEM/DEFCON/Chaos Communication Congress,UNI's, for example.

They probably could do that as part of the hiring process.

Why? You want to send a mob to harass me like people you defend did with the rsync author?

I'm not interested in that. So I'll ignore your demands. Find yourself a different target.

Some of those recent bugs were caused by unnecessary vibe-coded changes.

If you think that fixing security issues is "unnecessary changes", maybe.

Though maybe security is not "in-scope" for you?

That is not really in-scope for the project though.

Why do you decide what is in scope for the rsync project and what not?

Apparently the maintainer disagrees and also wants to fix existing security issues.