Before the #vulnpocalypse, there will be the #vulnslopalypse.

As someone who has dealt with vulnerability reports in all shapes, forms and levels of veracity for at least a decade, I posit that's where we will hurt the most, for the longest time, and without reaching symmetry.

For the old farts: remember the burpsuite #bugbounty submissions? That, but at unprecedented scale, and these you can't easily filter out.

#vulnpocalypse #Mythos #infosec #vulnerability #vulnslopocalypse

RE: https://swecyb.com/@orlysec/116415553692235201

I say we take off and nuke the entire Citrix stack from orbit.

It's the only way to be sure.

Nee. “leeftijdscontrole” gaat niet werken.

Het is ook een directe schending van Artikel 24 van het EU-Handvest van de Grondrechten:

En het is “Ausweis, bitte!” voor ons allemaal bij elke online handeling.

—

No. “Age verification” is not going to work.

It is also a direct violation of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights:

And it is “Ausweis, bitte!” for us all with every online interaction.

https://nos.nl/artikel/2610613-twijfel-bij-deskundigen-of-online-leeftijdscontrole-wel-gaat-werken

#AgeVerification #Leeftijdsverificatie #Leeftijdscontrole #EU #Europe #EuropeanUnion

(edit) See answer below: https://det.social/@bricks/116376833404542346

Wondering about something.

If you turn off notifications on your iPhone for an app, does that stop the notifications from going to the notification center db on the iPhone?

Or does it only stop the notifications from being passed on by the notification center after they are stored there?

The first makes sense, but I don’t know enough about the inner workings of iPhones.

Why do I ask, you ask?

https://www.404media.co/fbi-extracts-suspects-deleted-signal-messages-saved-in-iphone-notification-database-2/

#Apple #Signal #FBI #fascism #DFIR

I would rrrrrreaally want Europe to immediately start reverse engineering—and subsequently start improving on—the sodium-ion batteries coming out of China.

Benefit for all over intellectual property, or some justified tit-for-tat, whatever you want to call it.

This is the technology we’ve been waiting for to switch from gas and coal to wind and solar, without the rare minerals etc. currently required.

And it delivers better performing and less combustible EVs. Also a nice benefit.

https://web.archive.org/web/20260327065033/https://www.catl.com/en/news/6720.html

While I'm sitting here structuring and summarizing other people's text, I'm becoming aware of what I'm doing. It is not (only 😉 ) about my need and love for order, it is about getting the feel, the concepts, terminology, ideas and direction of the text and its author(s).

It adds to and structures the knowledge I have going forward, so I can combine it with the rest of my knowledge and experience. This way, I'm working their work into my work.

I've never done it differently. I should (and will, pinky promise!) do it more.

I cannot imagine why I'd let a computer summarize and structure for me. It would literally add nothing for me.

This does mean that if I can't find the time or awareness to process the content, I have to accept I don't currently have the time or awareness, and move on.

RE: https://infosec.exchange/@cert_eu/116339705504931582

This is how it is done.

I was slumbering in the bathtub when I suddenly had this jolt of curiosity.

So I went to archive.org and looked it up.

I’ve been on social media since April 2009. First twitter, now (mostly) here.

That is a solid 17 years of connecting with others and sharing my thoughts and feelings through a keyboard and a screen.

And I forgot the most important part of being so online with this type of social media: just seeing every other person sharing in what they are thinking and feeling, while reeling through whatever and wherever they are. For which deepfelt thanks.

And yet maybe, possibly, despite or because, it is time, especially seeing both where the world is going, but also simply where I’m at, for taking another approach.

To reconsider how I spend my time and to what I give my attention.

No drastic changes for now. After 17 years of almost daily… whatever this is, I need to chew on it.

So for now, I’m just sitting with this.

I really advise everyone working with or discussing AI, to read the parts where a company’s Corporate Communications isn’t in control, but lawyers who know a disaster when they see one.

To quote #Microsoft:

#GenAI, “[…] including #OpenAI GPT-4, o-series, GPT-3, Codex, and Computer Use models” are:

“Not suitable for open-ended, unconstrained content generation. Scenarios where users can generate content on any topic are more likely to produce offensive or harmful text. The same is true of longer generations.

Not suitable for scenarios where up-to-date, factually accurate information is crucial unless you have human reviewers or are using the models to search your own documents and have verified suitability for your scenario. The service doesn't have information about events that occur after its training date, likely has missing knowledge about some topics, and may not always produce factually accurate information.”

You should also:

“Avoid scenarios where use or misuse of the system could result in significant physical or psychological injury to an individual. For example, scenarios that diagnose patients or prescribe medications have the potential to cause significant harm. Incorporating meaningful human review and oversight into the scenario can help reduce the risk of harmful outcomes.

Avoid scenarios where use or misuse of the system could have a consequential impact on life opportunities or legal status. Examples include scenarios where the AI system could affect an individual's legal status, legal rights, or their access to credit, education, employment, healthcare, housing, insurance, social welfare benefits, services, opportunities, or the terms on which they're provided. Incorporating meaningful human review and oversight into the scenario can help reduce the risk of harmful outcomes.

Avoid high stakes scenarios that could lead to harm. The models hosted by Azure OpenAI service reflect certain societal views, biases, and other undesirable content present in the training data or the examples provided in the prompt. As a result, we caution against using the models in high-stakes scenarios where unfair, unreliable, or offensive behavior might be extremely costly or lead to harm. Incorporating meaningful human review and oversight into the scenario can help reduce the risk of harmful outcomes.

Carefully consider use cases in high stakes domains or industry: Examples include but are not limited to healthcare, medicine, finance, or legal.

Carefully consider well-scoped chatbot scenarios. Limiting the use of the service in chatbots to a narrow domain reduces the risk of generating unintended or undesirable responses.

Carefully consider all generative use cases. Content generation scenarios may be more likely to produce unintended outputs and these scenarios require careful consideration and mitigations.”

And naturally, you should always take into account:

“Legal and regulatory considerations:

Organizations need to evaluate potential specific legal and regulatory obligations when using any Foundry Tools and solutions, which may not be appropriate for use in every industry or scenario. Additionally, Foundry Tools or solutions are not designed for and may not be used in ways prohibited in applicable terms of service and relevant codes of conduct.“

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/foundry/responsible-ai/openai/transparency-note