d18g

12 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by d18g 4y ago

   Got it why I was downvoted. But honestly don't get why parent is the most voted comment on this thread. Maybe I am just super dumb ...
2. 2.▲
   by d18g 4y ago

   you can assume in good faith that this is barely used feature generally but also most implementations are not really vulnerable so they might have checked but couldn't find anything actually wrong, so there might have been a tremendous
3. 3.▲
   by d18g 4y ago

   I would not assume so as these are firmware implementations and as such would not use the simulator directly edit: also look at the link you can see clearly that Intel is not effected but AMD is unknown ...
4. 4.▲
   by d18g 4y ago

   Not all implementations are actually vulnerable as there are dependencies on implementation details.
5. 5.▲
   by d18g 4y ago

   Disclaimer: A security researcher working on IME. Following is my own opinion. Used to have really strong uninformed opinions on many things, as often found in young techy-nerd person. It is terrifying how intelligent people are so prone to
6. 6.▲
   by d18g 5y ago

   Learning the syntax of a language is far from understanding the sementics.
7. 7.▲
   by d18g 5y ago

   PEP: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0656/
8. 8.▲
   by d18g 7y ago

   >The other issue is that it does not use Windows ca store for certificates By default. But can be configured to use the cert store [0]. > Apparently the content type is wrong in downloaded file so ff will not associate an applicatio