bink

I disagree. Assuming the start of the timer is when they first encountered Binance systems they moved very quickly to make the transfers. It suggests to me either some or all of this was automated or they had prepared in advance with some inside knowledge of Binance architecture.

Did the deluge stop because you replied "STOP" or simply because the election period was over? If it took several months I'd assume it was the latter.

Mind sharing them with the rest of the class?

There are a lot of theoretical vulnerabilities in various encryption algorithms used by TLS/SSL/DNS. There are also older protocols that have known vulnerabilities but yet don't present a realistic threat to most types of services. I've worked for more than one company that had to decide whether disabling an algorithm and blocking 5-10% of your customers was worth the tradeoff. Having these debates with researchers is tedious.

That said, there are numerous options that should be enabled and several protocols that should be disabled. It just isn't worth the spam you get if you allow submissions for these type of issues.

The TLS/SSL and DNS carveouts are pretty normal. There are a million security options for those services and enabling them all would often mean denying access to anyone running a browser/client more than a few weeks old. Documenting them all would be a PITA so most policies simply prohibit them entirely.

Testing against customers is also a common prohibition for obvious reasons.

I think there's "bad" in the sense that it didn't accomplish the goal of selling a product (maybe not the case here) and "bad" in the sense that it made many readers cringe or was seen as stupid/tacky. I'm seeing more of the latter in these ads.

It's just a jump to the left...

Boy would I love to see the incident report for these types of incidents. It seems to happen once or twice a year for some airline and yet things never seem to get better.

I work in the field and I just cannot believe anyone would pay that much for a Word Press exploit. People pay money for iOS or Android because there is valuable information stored on devices running those operating systems. There's absolutely nothing of value on any Word Press site. The only possible reason I can think of is for a watering hole attack, but that would require a second exploit that would be worth far more (and they aren't).

Still has a paywall for me.

Not exactly. My doctor wanted to start me on a medicine that would make me more likely to develop shingles so he asked me to get the vaccine series before he'd prescribe the medicine. I guess there's no such thing as a prescription for a vaccine, so I just went to my local pharmacy. I made the mistake of writing on the form that I had no health issues. The pharmacist came out and said because I wasn't 50 and had no health issues they weren't allowed to administer the vaccine. Even after I explained my condition and the doctor's request they still refused. They wouldn't even let me fill out a new form. I had to go to a different pharmacy which conveniently didn't ask about my current health status.

It's stupid too, because the question I answered "wrong" wasn't clear. It basically sounded like they were asking me if I currently had a cold or covid.

I appealed a warning I was given for quoting a Simpsons episode (promoting violence, Reddit-wide and not from a sub) and was my appeal was granted.

Responding to bug bounty reports is a thankless job. Especially these days it's a flood of AI spam, language barriers, "pay me first", incomplete reports, huge egos, and people who think every find should be treated as a critical vulnerability. The people who handle these reports often do so after-hours or on holidays. In smaller companies they're also often the ones who manage the triage, patching, testing, and security release process. In larger companies they have to find owners for every line of code and convince those code owners of the severity (often knowing that neither or them will be rewarded for doing the work).

All it takes is one wrong person to be assigned as a report comes in, a person who doesn't understand the real value of a bounty program, or one person having a bad day to completely ruin a company's reputation. It seems like that might have happened here (of course MS has done this before so who knows if it'll matter in the end).

Microsoft needs to be completely transparent and to do so immediately. They should, with the reporters permission, release all communications. They can exclude technical details if patches aren't available yet. Doing anything less is going to prevent a lot of people from using their bounty program in the future and we'll all be worse off for it. They almost certainly made a mistake and they need to own up to it.

Krebs was fired in 2020, not 2025.