maldeh
Joined 13 years ago
Joined 13 years ago
Edit: I stand corrected. Per the Buzzfeed article, their spokesperson seems to be spinning this as an unexpected hit. So it wasn't a mistake, they were genuinely convinced it was a good idea?
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/kelseyweekman/grubhub-f...
But agreed, it's not necessarily functionally different from any other crypto-mining malware hidden in public repos, save for the focus on runtime. Presumably Lambda provides a standardized enough runtime for reliable execution.
> Security Standards. Okta's ISMP includes adherance to and regular testing of the key controls, systems and procedures of its ISMP to validate that they are properly implemented and effective in addressing the threats and risks identified. Such testing includes:
> a) Internal risk assessments;
> b) ISO 27001, 27002, 27017 and 27018 certifications;
> c) NIST guidance; and
> d) SOC2 Type II (or successor standard) audits annually performed by accredited third-party auditors ("Audit Report").
I don't think storing AWS keys within Slack would comply to any of these standards?
A Stand Alone Complex?
- Andy Warhol
With regards to data collection for ads, personalized recommendations and such, are there any major concerns that don't also extend to ex:- visiting a website with a tracking cookie on?
(Don't get me wrong, I'm very wary of this product after Sidewalk [0] which I don't trust from a security perspective wherein as a bug could allow _third parties_ to snoop on me, but I'm just missing what people are talking about w.r.t. surveillance by Amazon itself)
[0] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/06/understanding-amazon-s...
> Already have an account? No you don't.
> Try to log in below if you think you do anyway.
In practice we may find a monoculture within a hidden layer of the stack than we're optimizing for, such as an OS kernel method, TLS library or chipset which coincidentally has captured the entire market. When a clever enough exploit on a common resource is found, then the problem transforms to one of coordinating patching for the same, wherein a broad ecosystem of higher level components (like Android or PCs) becomes nearly impossible to thoroughly cover. As such malware authors may potentially still get away with writing a single version of their software so long as they target low-level enough. With sufficient fragmentation they don't even need to invent their own exploits, just use publicly known CVEs that they can brute-force against older devices.
(Not saying you're wrong, your recommendation may still be better in the long-run. We're after all weighing the risk level of black swan events, such as a zero-day on a low level of the stack, or a high level of the stack on a high-volume vendor)
I wouldn't hold my breath, every inch of this article is evidently AI-generated - you can tell not only from the meandering narrative but also from the "Not because X, but Y", the short punchy sentences to reiterate the same point, the really strange cherry-picked examples for head-to-head comparisons, and the sincere concern over simplified generalisms.
> Yeah, ok. This is what they should lead with. It's an important message.
Is it? Your optimism in hoping to find some point to all this restores some of my faith in humanity, but I think it's misplaced here. The entire premise of the article is bizarre - why should it be surprising or bad that historical figures from 1000s of years ago, regardless of their historical importance, don't have proportionate representation in contemporary discourse?