3 ms·
Was the performance issue pure luck? Or was it a subtle bit of sabotage by someone inside the attacking group worried about the implications of the capability?
by webmaven 3y ago
Was the performance issue pure luck? Or was it a subtle bit of sabotage by someone inside the attacking group worried about the implications of the capability?
If it had been successfully and secretly deployed, this is the sort of thing that could make your leaders much more comfortable with starting a "limited war".
There are shades of "Setec Astronomy" here.
- papascrubs 3y agoPlot twist: It was a psyop to increase the scrutiny around OSS components. Kidding. Mostly... But given the amount of scrutiny folks are going to start putting into some supply chains... Probably cheaper to execute than most company's annual security awareness budgets cost.
- neodymiumphish 3y agoConsidering how difficult it might be (and identifiable) to attempt direct exploitation of this without being sure your target is vulnerable, it’s plausible the performance issue allowed for an identifiable delay in attempts. This might be useful in determining whether to attempt the exploit, with an auto-skip if it received a response in less than N milliseconds.