3 ms·

It's not really. Supposed a nefarious group wants to get ahold of an executives phone who always flies out of LAX or goes to a certain mall and uses a public ch

It's not really. Supposed a nefarious group wants to get ahold of an executives phone who always flies out of LAX or goes to a certain mall and uses a public charger. It would be smart to zero day one of those and if a few extra people are exploited, maybe some bonus bank info.

bbarn 4y ago
This is typical hacker movie nonsense. In real life, if they want something from said executive they just kidnap him, threaten violence, and he gives them what they want instantly. Or just knock him out cold from behind, take his shit, and crack into it themselves.
- slig 4y ago
  After Stuxnet, I wouldn't discard that possibility.
  - xeromal 4y ago
    Exactly what I was thinking of when I wrote this. They left USBs on the ground hoping the right person would pick it up.
    - yencabulator 4y ago
      It's worth noting that Stuxnet was very careful not to even reveal its capabilities if it happened to infect a non-target host. It was still a very targeted attack, and not "everyone had their bank accounts hacked" risk. (It still infected untargeted PCs, and might have caused them to misbehave, but not intentionally. Stuxnet was designed for stealth, not for mass exploitation. You the average PC owner has very little to fear from such targeted attacks, you're not worth the 0days.)
- johncessna 4y ago
  I think it depends on what your goals are. If you want something that executive has and want to deal with the messiness of multiple other crimes, then sure, that'll work. If you're just passively collecting data and hoping to land 'a' executive or someone else in business with access to power and/or money, or can be used to pivot to someone else, I think it'd be an effective tool.
- comte7092 4y ago
  There is way more risk involved in kidnapping someone, not to mention the fact that you’ve just given away the fact that you’re surveilling them.
- computerfriend 4y ago
  There are pros and cons to both approaches.

bbarn 4y ago

This is typical hacker movie nonsense. In real life, if they want something from said executive they just kidnap him, threaten violence, and he gives them what they want instantly. Or just knock him out cold from behind, take his shit, and crack into it themselves.

slig 4y ago
After Stuxnet, I wouldn't discard that possibility.
- xeromal 4y ago
  Exactly what I was thinking of when I wrote this. They left USBs on the ground hoping the right person would pick it up.
  - yencabulator 4y ago
    It's worth noting that Stuxnet was very careful not to even reveal its capabilities if it happened to infect a non-target host. It was still a very targeted attack, and not "everyone had their bank accounts hacked" risk. (It still infected untargeted PCs, and might have caused them to misbehave, but not intentionally. Stuxnet was designed for stealth, not for mass exploitation. You the average PC owner has very little to fear from such targeted attacks, you're not worth the 0days.)
johncessna 4y ago
I think it depends on what your goals are. If you want something that executive has and want to deal with the messiness of multiple other crimes, then sure, that'll work. If you're just passively collecting data and hoping to land 'a' executive or someone else in business with access to power and/or money, or can be used to pivot to someone else, I think it'd be an effective tool.
comte7092 4y ago
There is way more risk involved in kidnapping someone, not to mention the fact that you’ve just given away the fact that you’re surveilling them.
computerfriend 4y ago
There are pros and cons to both approaches.