Recent submissions

Comment · 12 years ago
+1 to this. During the presentation they scan the entire internet for open VNC ports that do not require authentication. There were many found (thousands?), the most surprising being a mainframe that looked like it controlled a railway interchange. I was the guy who gave them the iPhone backdoor port ;-)
Comment · 12 years ago
Comment · 12 years ago
GPUs love hashing things, do you think ArrayFire would make that easy to do? I would LOVE to use the library to create an opensource GPU cracking program. Hashcat is amazing but is closed source. I am giddy with excitement at the prospect. Thanks!
Comment · 12 years ago
Comment · 12 years ago
Comment · 12 years ago
Comment · 12 years ago
When I saw 1 trillion guesses per second I immediately wondered what algorithm was being referenced. My single GTX 780 hash performance varies wildly by algorithm. A few numbers:

  NTLM - 1.2 billion/sec
  MD5(Wordpress)- 600 million/sec
  bcrypt - 1,000/sec
1 trillion hashes/sec on a key stretching algorithm like bcrypt would be pretty horrific and might require quantum computing, while the same performance on MD5 might be achieved with <50k in hardware (very rough estimates).

I've heard rumors of storage technology that can store thousands of petabytes in a home appliance form factor. With that can kind of storage it would make sense to just start making salted rainbow tables. Even without fabled hardware, the Bluffdale NSA facility might have the capacity for it. I haven't even done napkin-based calculations yet to see if this is possible, so if anyone has some idea please speak up :-)

edit: formatting

Comment · 12 years ago
That statement was made tongue in cheek, mostly to illustrate that 1) police are only protecting and and serving themselves when seizing our stuff and 2) removing the incentive would help reduce the problem (along with other points made by you and AnthonyMouse).
Comment · 12 years ago
Good point. This has me thinking more about the root of the problem. It seems like the justification they use most of the time is related to drugs. Perhaps asset forfeiture is a another example of how the war on drugs undermines our civil liberties, and yet not even John Oliver has framed it that way.
Comment · 12 years ago
Comment · 12 years ago
That is true. Those first two recommendations are good bang for your buck (for the newbies), I guess I forgot I have a technical audience here :-)

Now that I'm thinking about it transparent bridge mode might do the trick as well.

Comment · 12 years ago
They gave the exploit a "1337 compromise" award, so it is almost as bad as it gets.

While you still have the Q1000, be sure that you have the remote interface disabled and use the NoScript browser plugin. Those two items will mitigate a lot of the risk.

I replaced my Actiontec Q1000 with a used Zyxel Q1000Z I got for $30. I haven't had time to assess the Q1000Z yet, but it does not have any known 0-day vulnerabilities.

Comment · 12 years ago
I demonstrated the Actiontec Q1000 exploit on Track 0. As a security professional I am very interested in responsible disclosure, and had already reported the vulnerability to Century Link 6+ months before Defcon (slight correction to the article, the ISP is not Verizon). I first read about the SOHOplessly broken contest on HN the week before Defcon and figured I'd apply since I already had a 0-day in my back pocket.

As the article says the manufacturer has acknowledged the vulnerability, but I have not heard from them for quite a while. I've begun to wonder how much time has to pass without a fix before it would be irresponsible of me not to fully disclose the vulnerability. Lately I've been thinking that full disclosure may be the only responsible way to disclose a vulnerability. But I am still conflicted.

Comment · 12 years ago
> So how do we get as comfortable looking at recent mistakes as we are looking at the ones in the distant past? We probably can't - there's too much baggage.

Self Determination Theory (SDT, http://www.selfdeterminationtheory.org/) has a few ideas on how to answer this question. SDT provides some tools to deconstruct the concept of self esteem.

Traditional self perception is mainly concerned with a healthy self esteem. Under this paradigm it is only natural for people to regularly evaluate themselves by looking at past success/failures and by comparing themselves to others.

SDT provides an alternative to the traditional "self as an object" approach with a "self as a process" approach. While someone operating under the "self as an object" approach may ask themselves "Am I a good person? Am I worthy?", under SDT other questions like "Am I making good choices?" are much more important. This allows a person to view their own actions more objectively. Past mistakes are more readily available to be acknowledged and used to inform the future since they do not implicate an individual's self worth.

The book Mindset (http://www.amazon.com/Mindset-How-Fulfil-Your-Potential-eboo...) by Carol Dweck draws on a lot of SDT foundational concepts. The premise of the book explores and contrasts two mindsets: the static mindset and the growth mindset. If someone with the static mindset gets easy A's in school they take it to mean that they are smart. If someone with the growth mindsets get's easy A's it feels like a waste of time because it's not challenging. The author also discusses the benefits of praising a child's effort rather than just telling them how smart they are. It's a huge topic and I'm barely scratching the surface, but I think I've shown the top of this particular rabbit hole.

I still struggle with leveraging my failures constructively, but I have found learning about these concepts has enriched my life and helped me discover a hacker's mindset.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton