prvit

52 ms·

571.
by prvit 4y ago
I think we can agree that cryptocurrencies are a real thing that exist. This article is about the usual options/forex/cryptocurrency brokerage scam, where a fake brokerage takes your money to trade on their fake trading platform.
572.
by prvit 4y ago
It does not. Article has nothing whatsoever to do with worldcoin.
573.
by prvit 4y ago
100k USDT is a small amount of money for anyone trading professionally.
574.
by prvit 4y ago
This is a minor caveat. Whats the problem with just selling your USDT on the market if you have less than 100k?
575.
by prvit 4y ago
Check out isopure protein drinks for a lower calorie alternative. 0 carbs, lactose free. http://www.theisopurecompany.com/en-au/product/isopurezeroca... They aftertaste is a little weird, but still much easier to
576.
by prvit 4y ago
>Where can you redeem tether for $1? If the answer is “nowhere” it’s a depeg by definition. Tether.to, although they will charge you a 0.1% fee unless you negotiate a better deal with them. >If you can trivially redeem tether for $1 w
577.
by prvit 4y ago
>Fairly few entities can do this What do you mean? You just have to complete the fairly simple KYC process and you can start redeeming. Perhaps you mean that fairly few entities have bothered to do this?
578.
by prvit 4y ago
There's no guarantee that Tether will continue to do this in the future, but as of today you can in fact redeem your USDT for USD on tether.to
579.
by prvit 4y ago
Day traders can redeem tether on tether.to, as long as they aren't US based.
580.
by prvit 4y ago
> And you think that having the same amount of air taxies in the air that. SUVs on the street would still make the SUVs look bad? Yes of course, per passenger mile SUVs are far more likely to drive into a building than an air taxi is to
581.
by prvit 4y ago
Why focus on houses? SUVs drive into ground level shops and restaurants every single day. Places which tend to exists at ground level for accessibility reasons, and contain much more people than your average house. https://www.fo
582.
by prvit 4y ago
> Once people start attacking it by eg buying them for $0.97 and exchanging for $1 thrn it might be over for tether. Or, alternatively, Tether is printing money every time someone posts a sell order for USDT at less than $1. At 0.97 that
583.
by prvit 4y ago
No, it’s not. At least not for any meaningful definition of “depeg”.
584.
by prvit 4y ago
> Yes it is. A SUV rarly crashes into a building and when it does, it's often possible that humans die. This is something that happens on a daily basis. https://www.fox2detroit.com/news/driver-crashes-through-ga
585.
by prvit 4y ago
>but one hitting my apartment at ordinary NYC residential street speeds Why ordinary speeds? Someone driving into a building is likely to be going significantly faster, perhaps because they confused the brake pedal and accelerator. Thing
586.
by prvit 4y ago
Why? You’d expect there to be far more people at the street level than on top floors. And in any case, even if such accidents would be worse, they’d also be vast less common. It’s more difficult to fuck things up in the air, and the level o
587.
by prvit 4y ago
> airspace pollution Bit of a fake concern, no? >potential small airplane crashing down in a city Is that really much worse than a SUV driving into a building?
588.
by prvit 4y ago
Darknet markets, where all the $$$ on Tor is.
589.
by prvit 4y ago
Actually, it’s Hillary Clinton DDoSing Tor to cover up recently released evidence linking her and the DNC to a child-trafficking organisation that worked with Jeffrey Epstein. On a more serious note, Tor DDoS attacks are always DNM related.
590.
by prvit 4y ago
It’s DNM related drama, as always.
591.
by prvit 4y ago
No, this is widely accepted terminology. What you're trying to argue here is total nonsense.
592.
by prvit 4y ago
This is not being distributed by social engineering. Yes, this particular malware is boring. However, exploits are only tangentially related to malware. Malware by itself can be interesting and worth discussing. > for symbionte to take h
593.
by prvit 4y ago
This is a downright stupid criticism, malware can be interesting in itself without discussing the delivery mechanisms.
594.
by prvit 4y ago
Sure, but that’s at best a minor implementation detail. Doesn’t meaningfully increase the difficulty of detection.
595.
by prvit 4y ago
LD_PRELOAD rootkits are super common, you’re doing it wrong if you’re using dynamically linked binaries to look for malware on Linux.
596.
by prvit 4y ago
What exactly do you mean? The usual detection methods are essentially unpatchable while using this technique.
597.
by prvit 4y ago
I linked a ton of git repos in another comment here, some of them have very readable code. LD_PRELOAD rootkits are super easy to understand. Phrack has tons of relevant content, Blackhatacademy has some ( https://nets.ec/LD_P
598.
by prvit 4y ago
Oh no, first LD_PRELOAD kits for Linux date back to the 90s.
599.
by prvit 4y ago
What reason do you have to believe that besides the targets? Feature-wise this isn't significantly more advanced than public LD_PRELOAD kits like Umbreon, developed by literal children. A basic BPF filter isn't fancy or difficult
600.
by prvit 4y ago
>Analysis of a New, Nearly-Impossible-to-Detect Linux Threat Yeah, that's a straight up lie. LD_PRELOAD kits are by definition very easy to detect.

More ›