2 ms·
I'm surprised Schneier says "I am unconvinced". We know (I think?) attackers can apparently easily introduce MitM skimmers to credit card swipers (I _think_ th
by jrochkind1 4y ago
I'm surprised Schneier says "I am unconvinced".
We know (I think?) attackers can apparently easily introduce MitM skimmers to credit card swipers (I _think_ that's how my CC number keeps getting stolen?), possibly even without cooperation of the proprietor? Why not a little invisible injector on a charging port, that seems if anything easier.
Or is the skepticism around something else, I guess? Motivation? Lack of consistency over time of attack vectors around software injection via USB making it hard to commodify the attack? Like, there are only temporary zero days now and then which get patched, so this isn't a "cheap" thing to deploy on a wide scale?
[edit no idea why i'm getting downvoted on this, perhaps I didn't write it right but I'm legit just curious to hear people's takes on this, what reasons he might have been thinking of to not worry about this...]
- jjulius 4y ago>I'm surprised Schneier says "I am unconvinced". And immediately after he says he's unconvinced this is a concern, he states that he does, in fact, carry a tool with him that would protect him in these circumstances.
- ghaff 4y agoIn general, you can be unconvinced that various things are actually a meaningful real-world danger, but you choose to mitigate against them anyway if you can do so easily.
- yencabulator 4y agoI think it's very unlikely my car will catch on fire, but I carry a fire extinguisher.
- krisoft 4y agoHe also mentions that he only uses said tool with "charging stations I find suspicious". Which is very curious, because I would assume an attacker who is willing to risk burning such an attack would make sure their charging station is looking the least suspicious and most ordinary. I'm not sure if "find suspicious" is a good heuristic here. Although of course we don't know what he bases his suspicion on.