Skip to content

Signal – an ethical replacement for WhatsApp

Technology
124 80 0
  • Is AI Apocalypse Inevitable? - Tristan Harris

    Technology technology
    11
    1
    120 Stimmen
    11 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    V
    Define AGI, because recently the definition is shifting down to match LLM. In fact we can say we achieved AGI now because we have machine that answers questions. The problem will be when the number of questions will start shrinking not because of number of problems but number of people that understand those problems. That is what is happening now. Don't believe me, read the statistics about age and workforce. Now put it into urgent need to something to replace those people. After that think what will happen when all those attempts fail.
  • One-Click RCE in ASUS's Preinstalled Driver Software

    Technology technology
    9
    29 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    M
    Yeah, Lemmy has a VERY large Linux user base, which means Windows discussions tend to get mocked or dismissed. But the reality is that Windows is still the dominant OS for the vast majority of users, by leaps and bounds. Linux runs the world’s infrastructure, but Windows is what the average user boots up every day. “This exploit only works on the average user’s OS. And it only works if the user clicks the “yes” button to escalate permissions, which they have been conditioned to always do without question. Obviously this isn’t an exploit to worry about.”
  • 258 Stimmen
    46 Beiträge
    18 Aufrufe
    stzyxh@feddit.orgS
    yea i also were there at a few thousand I think and the content has changed a lot since then.
  • 137 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    treadful@lemmy.zipT
    https://archive.is/oTR8Q
  • 186 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    N
    Part of the reason for my use of "might".
  • 146 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    10 Aufrufe
    D
    Self hosted Sunshine and Moonlight is the way to go.
  • 1 Stimmen
    14 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    T
    ...is this some sort of joke my Nordic brain can't understand? I need to go hug a councilman.
  • 1 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    7 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.