Skip to content

Signal – an ethical replacement for WhatsApp

Technology
125 80 0
  • 108 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    W
    ...the ruling stopped short of ordering the government to recover past messages that may already have been lost. How would somebody be meant to comply with an order to recover a message that has been deleted? Or is that the point? Can't comply and you're in contempt of court.
  • Strategies to Enhance the Efficiency of Livestock Conveyor Systems

    Technology technology
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Welcome to the web we lost

    Technology technology
    22
    1
    182 Stimmen
    22 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    C
    Is it though? Its always far easier to be loud and obnoxious than do something constructive, even with the internet and LLMs, in fact those things are amplifiers which if anything make the attention imbalance even more drastic and unrepresentative of actual human behaviour. In the time it takes me to write this comment some troll can write a dozen hateful ones, or a bot can write a thousand. Doesn't mean humans are shitty in a 1000/1 ratio, just means shitty people can now be a thousand times louder.
  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Cloudflare built an oauth provider with Claude

    Technology technology
    23
    1
    34 Stimmen
    23 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    A
    I have to say that you just have to sayed something up
  • 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
    4 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    N
    that's probably not true. I imagine it was someone trying to harm the guy. a hilarious prank
  • 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.