Skip to content

Signal – an ethical replacement for WhatsApp

Technology
96 64 0
  • 299 Stimmen
    17 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    P
    Unfortunately, pouring sugar into a gas tank will do just about zero damage to an engine. It might clog up the fuel filter, or maybe the pump, but the engine would be fine. Bleach on the other hand….
  • 375 Stimmen
    51 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    L
    I believe that's what a write down generally reflects: The asset is now worth less than its previous book value. Resale value isn't the most accurate way to look at it, but it generally works for explaining it: If I bought a tool for 100€, I'd book it as 100€ worth of tools. If I wanted to sell it again after using it for a while, I'd get less than those 100€ back for it, so I'd write down that difference as a loss. With buying / depreciating / selling companies instead of tools, things become more complex, but the basic idea still holds: If the whole of the company's value goes down, you write down the difference too. So unless these guys bought it for five times its value, they'll have paid less for it than they originally got.
  • The weaponization of Waymo

    Technology technology
    26
    1
    148 Stimmen
    26 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    F
    Not a warzone. A protest. A protest where over twice as many reporters have been assaulted and/or shot than waymo cars have burned.
  • 21 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    B
    We have to do this ourselves in the government for every decommissioned server/appliance/end user device. We have to fill out paperwork for every single storage drive we destroy, and we can only destroy them using approved destruction tools (e.g. specific degaussers, drive shredders/crushers, etc). Appliances can be kind of a pain, though. It can be tricky sometimes finding all the writable memory in things like switches and routers. But, nothing is worse than storage arrays... destroying hundreds of drives is incredibly tedious.
  • 2 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    quarterswede@lemmy.worldQ
    I give it 5 years before this is on our phones.
  • 1 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    L
    I think the principle could be applied to scan outside of the machine. It is making requests to 127.0.0.1:{port} - effectively using your computer as a "server" in a sort of reverse-SSRF attack. There's no reason it can't make requests to 10.10.10.1:{port} as well. Of course you'd need to guess the netmask of the network address range first, but this isn't that hard. In fact, if you consider that at least as far as the desktop site goes, most people will be browsing the web behind a standard consumer router left on defaults where it will be the first device in the DHCP range (e.g. 192.168.0.1 or 10.10.10.1), which tends to have a web UI on the LAN interface (port 8080, 80 or 443), then you'd only realistically need to scan a few addresses to determine the network address range. If you want to keep noise even lower, using just 192.168.0.1:80 and 192.168.1.1:80 I'd wager would cover 99% of consumer routers. From there you could assume that it's a /24 netmask and scan IPs to your heart's content. You could do top 10 most common ports type scans and go in-depth on anything you get a result on. I haven't tested this, but I don't see why it wouldn't work, when I was testing 13ft.io - a self-hosted 12ft.io paywall remover, an SSRF flaw like this absolutely let you perform any network request to any LAN address in range.
  • 66 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    10 Aufrufe
    F
    HE is amazing. their BGP looking glass tool is also one of my favorite troubleshooting tools for backbone issues. 10/10 ISP
  • 0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    andromxda@lemmy.dbzer0.comA
    The enshittification continues, but it doesn't affect me at all. Piracy is the way to go nowadays that all streaming services suck. !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com