md_

72 ms·

691.
by md_ 10y ago
To expand on this (correct answer) very slightly, what you say (libertymcateer) is true but misses the other vector: A malicious script that runs as user X can typically (on desktop OSes) inject code into any other process running as user X
692.
by md_ 10y ago
Sorry. I went to bed. I'll frame the basic argument for Chrome and then show how it expands to other systems. Chrome: ======= Someone who can access chrome://settings/password is presumed to have physical access to your
693.
by md_ 10y ago
> And it's kinda an unspoken goal of mine to, ya know, not end up on a CIA watch list. First rule of not being on the watch list is not to admit you don't want to be on the watch list. What, do you have something to hide? Huh?
694.
by md_ 10y ago
Sure, I guess. As I noted elsewhere in this thread, in general your risk is that the cost of exploitation is low (e.g. Android 4.x) or your value of exploitation is high (e.g. San Bernardino shooter). Open vs closed source is a distinction
695.
by md_ 10y ago
Yep. Same. And I would probably have posted a longer and less confrontational explanation of why you're (mostly) wrong if I weren't tired after a long day of work. ;) The whole "why not encrypt local resources" thing is
696.
by md_ 10y ago
:) Cheers.
697.
by md_ 10y ago
I don't think that confers any ability to bypass the sandbox. Again, not an Android expert, so happy to be shown I'm wrong.
698.
by md_ 10y ago
True. But Play Services is effectively a part of the OS (from Google's perspective). As you say, in both cases (iOS and Play Services) it's a commercial closed-source bundle. shrug I don't personally spend time worrying abo
699.
by md_ 10y ago
So your threat model is "malware which has access to memory containing plaintext but is written by idiots"? 0_o
700.
by md_ 10y ago
Let's be all Socratic here: Given a desktop OS like Windows that implements FDE like Bitlocker and runs a browser like Chrome, can you describe a hypothetical threat in which Chrome encrypting localstorage would prevent exploitation?
701.
by md_ 10y ago
Huh? What permissions are you referring to that the Gmail app has? Also, if I remember right (and I'm not an Android expert, so grain of salt here), Android OS itself enforces sandboxing based on app signing keys; even the Play app can
702.
by md_ 10y ago
EOP = Elevation Of Privilege. e.g. a local->root exploit. To expand, this would be some vulnerability which allows a non-privileged local app (like Gmail) to execute code at a higher security level. The focus on Google apps specifically
703.
by md_ 10y ago
The Android security model doesn't work that way. Non-system applications can't access the kernel, minus a local EOP or something like that. Is that your concern? And if so, why are you concerned specifically about Google apps? An
704.
by md_ 10y ago
> Given Google's stance of not encrypting local storage in any way that I am aware of, this is fundamentally unsurprising. I have long been saying that Android is insecure and that storing passwords in Chrome is dangerous. ChromeOS
705.
by md_ 10y ago
Wait, what? If you are running something based off of AOSP, you're running code that was touched by Google employees. Is your fear that Google is installing backdoors to help the CIA? If so, why are you afraid of that?
706.
by md_ 10y ago
Don't take this the wrong way, but as a non-lawyer, I try to heavily caveat any statement I make about the law. Would you consider heavily caveating statements you make about information security? A lot of what you say here is basicall
707.
by md_ 10y ago
The browser runs in user space. Desktop OSes don't offer any sort of partitioning here. So there's very little reason to have any app-level encryption on a desktop OS.
708.
by md_ 10y ago
What are the options for someone who wants a fully trusted supply chain? Is there a modern smartphone made with provably secure hardware (and which I can verify is actually running that hardware and not some behave-alike SOC)? From my somew
709.
by md_ 10y ago
Which weighs more, a pound of Bitcoin or a pound of gold?
710.
by md_ 10y ago
Wait, what? Did you just say software companies intentionally embed vulnerabilities in software?
711.
by md_ 10y ago
But the point isn't that they dumbed it down. It's that the crux of their argument is basically, "You should be able to track the stolen emails." Which is fundamentally not true. Easy example: 1. Download emails via IMAP
712.
by md_ 10y ago
Also, reading the names of the signers, they're all long-retired and/or formerly senior, i.e., people who probably don't know how this whole Internet thing works. There's no actual technical claim here, other than, &quot
713.
by md_ 10y ago
There's a lotta stupid in this post that anyone who has taken a Networking 101 course could identify. 'Emails being passed across the World Wide Web are broken down into smaller segments called packets...To accomplish this, all th
714.
by md_ 10y ago
I believe the JAR is crap work and doesn't contain any real evidence Russia was behind this. I also believe Russia was behind this. I'm also inclined to believe that mmaunder's blog post is a bit of posturing, but this is kin
715.
by md_ 10y ago
I agree it can be career-destroying. And in the cases where the public makes a decision that is counterfactual--when they believe a smear that is not true--that obviously is a miscarriage of informal justice, as it were. Where we disagree,
716.
by md_ 10y ago
So you believe that all email communication from all elected officials and candidates should be made public? What about non-email communication? Face-to-face conversations should all be public? Does this extend to classified briefings? Sh
717.
by md_ 10y ago
Er, the parent was replying to a poster who implied he did not believe "point 7." >Frankly, I find the suggestion that telling voters more about their candidate constitutes 'interference' to be repugnant Really? By th
718.
by md_ 10y ago
There's a bit of a thin-skinned-ness to editing your own post to complain about downvoting. (I get downvoted sometimes. Honestly, who the fuck cares?) To answer the substantive point you make, I think the hyperbole of "lynch mob&q
719.
by md_ 10y ago
Thanks. So in terms of actual "programming," it's just a visual programming environment, right? Do you have any examples of anything "complex" being written with this?
720.
by md_ 10y ago
No, I have not. And I will aggressively defend my ignorance! I'm reasonably well-versed in, like, computers and stuff. So if I can't understand the idea with screenshots and examples, it doesn't invalidate the concept, but it

More ›