randomblock1

Joined 8 years ago

Karma

290

Submissions

Member since

Mar 2

View on Hacker News

Recent submissions

Comment · 1 day ago

On the Work environment selector, "in the cloud" says "available on any device and can access your computer". Which seems pretty clear to me. (not that the labeling makes the security issue any better)

Comment · 1 day ago

You do, though. The FAA/AST govern launches. I'm no rocket scientist but building a rocket and launching it is probably much harder than building a small data center.

Comment · 2 days ago

I thought most people used the explicit version:

  for (size_t i = count; i > 0; --i) {
      // use array[i - 1]
  }

You can also do something like:

  size_t index = i - 1;

to not have to use i-1. I believe the compiler optimizes that out anyway to be identical.

Comment · 4 days ago

Also see the existing Cursor Typescript SDK.

https://cursor.com/blog/typescript-sdk

Comment · 5 days ago

This is just reverse survivorship bias.

Comment · 5 days ago

Tailscale SSH is different than doing SSH with Tailscale

Comment · 5 days ago

There's a slider to reduce the liquidity

Comment · 5 days ago

Yeah given how CC is vibe coded, the feedback message always appearing is almost certainly just a weird implementation detail.

Comment · 6 days ago

https://github.com/nikopueringer/CorridorKey2.0/blob/master/...

Comment · 7 days ago

No, PHP always just tacks that on, even when only serving static files.

Comment · 7 days ago

Yes, it was actually using php2shell. Not a mediawiki vulnerability. It was the easier and less resilient variant of php2shell, but still a real POC. I'm confident that it could also do Wordpress if tasked to.

Comment · 7 days ago

You can still trigger DoS. And these can be chained with other vulnerabilites. The expectation of a PHP server executing PHP code also could have been implied.

Comment · 8 days ago

Inert files are unrealistic, normally you use PHP server to execute PHP code, which this website doesn't appear to do (only static files). And suppose you want to accept >1mb file uploads, that limit would get in your way. So it's not a good representation of a PHP application, but for other uses it's reasonable.

Comment · 8 days ago

Yep. It had to add a Dockerfile to build MediaWiki using vulnerable versions but it's that, a compose file, and a Python file. To be clear it still has a lot of the limitations of the other POCs, but it does work.

Comment · 8 days ago

The site is not vulnerable to PHP2Shell because it doesn't actually run any PHP code. It just serves static files. The static file handler does not call code that PHP2Shell exploits. Every request leads back to the same static page.

> (AI) "A static handler (nginx’s static path, or php_cli_server_begin_send_static) just sends bytes; it never enters the PHP request lifecycle, so php_request_startup() never runs and the Zend executor/session/multipart parser the chain needs is never initialized."

The author is trying to prove their point that PHP2Shell is hard to exploit. But it's unrealistic because PHP servers usually run PHP code at some point.

I had an LLM recreate this Tweet and yes, it can make an exploit without reward hacking. It took 5 minutes. https://x.com/dguido/status/2113129153293897925

so basically the OP is doing a little trolling