semenko

8 ms·

31.
by semenko 11y ago
Back when Apps for Work was "Google Apps for Your Domain", non-business/vanity use was part of the marketing. I use (paid) Google Apps for personal & family stuff - and this seems like a pretty arbitrary restriction on Pl
32.
by semenko 11y ago
Yet another service not available to Google Apps users. :/ "You can only set up a family group with a personal Google Account, not a Google for Work or Google for Education account"
33.
by semenko 11y ago
Whoops, yep -- definitely wasn't that clear. As pointed out below, the policy is linked to: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/external/sepolicy/...
34.
by semenko 11y ago
The isolation seems mostly defined by this SELinux policy: https://github.com/android/platform_system_core/blob/lollipo... service media /system/bin/mediaserver class main us
35.
by semenko 11y ago
No, it shouldn't. WPA2's 4-way handshake allows client/supplicant & access point to prove they both know the PMK without directly disclosing it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11i-2004#The_Fou
36.
by semenko 11y ago
Oh hey, any chance you could explain this bit of the /usr/bin/google-chrome script I've always wondered about? (Sadly, the bug is RVG.) # Sanitize std{in,out,err} because they'll be shared with untrusted child
37.
by semenko 11y ago
Agreed -- see this never-ending Chrome bug: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=177351
38.
by semenko 11y ago
Yeah, if you really want to do this, you can use chrome.permissions with "optional_permissions" set in your manifest requesting all urls -- then call permissions.request() on invocation to add a specific host. See: https:/&#
39.
by semenko 11y ago
That granularity exists -- it's called activeTab: https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/activeTab (Though it might not be possible to modify the referer with activeTab alone :/)
40.
by semenko 11y ago
The first thing that came to mind was @agl's discussion of TLS's overhead with Gmail: https://www.imperialviolet.org/2010/06/25/overclocking-ssl.h... It's a bit hard for me to reconcile "&
41.
Google launches Android for Work sandboxed enterprise environment(googleforwork.blogspot.com)
5 points by semenko 12y ago|0 comments
42.
by semenko 12y ago
Chrome does do pinning, but ignores pins when the cert parent is a privately installed cert (because this is a "feature" used by many enterprises). """ Chrome does not perform pin validation when the certificate cha
43.
by semenko 12y ago
Details via: https://securelist.com/blog/research/67962/the-penquin-turla... Notably, the C&C domain has been sinkholed by Kaspersky. This has been linked to the complex "Turla" industrial espio
44.
by semenko 12y ago
They buried the lede a bit -- since I doubt organized attackers are after the personal information of postal service employees: "It is also possible that the Chinese were after other types of data, analysts said. For instance, the U.S.
45.
by semenko 12y ago
For Google domains, this is handled by an internal Chrome extension called "cryptotoken". See, e.g. https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/master/... For all other domains, there&
46.
by semenko 12y ago
No one has mentioned the coolest feature of U2F/Fido auth: TLS Channel IDs. Via an internal Chrome extension ("cryptotoken"), authentication state & the handshake can be bound to a specific TLS session -- preventing cooki
47.
by semenko 12y ago
Yeah, it looks like more reasonably priced U2F/FIDO tokens are coming soon, probably to the Play Store. Behind the scenes, the auth layer in Chrome is handled by a sneaky extension. There's a huge listing of product IDs in the m
48.
by semenko 12y ago
Ah, it looks like their FAQ also says this is supported: Can I use the same Security Key with multiple Google Accounts? Yes. You can register the same Security Key with multiple Google Accounts. https://support.google.
49.
by semenko 12y ago
The next release of ChromeOS will include nearby/proximity unlock features integrated with Android L, which they're calling "Easy Unlock". There are a few somewhat-spammy blog summaries, e.g. http://www.omgchr
50.
by semenko 12y ago
EDIT: Looks like this is now working! Looks like there is a tiny UI bug -- make sure your account is correctly selected on the Security Token page if you have multiple accounts signed in. #userError Ouch, looks like a serious downside is th
51.
by semenko 12y ago
Seems a little unlikely, given Ksplice's patents (now Oracle's patents) covering the area. From an older post @ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2791756 The first is "Method of finding a safe time to modi
52.
by semenko 12y ago
Cool! I wrote a similar extension for Chrome that simply enforces a user-adjustable maximum cookie lifetime (e.g. 21 days instead of 10+ years...). This seems to provide a good balance for login cookies that you don't necessarily want
53.
by semenko 13y ago
ErrataSec, at least (their IPs are implicated in the logs) says this is a false-positive generated by the minimalist SSL implementation in masscan: http://blog.erratasec.com/2014/04/no-we-werent-scanning-for-...
54.
by semenko 13y ago
Surprised no one's used this opportunity to talk about Google's gnubby / FIDO / U2F plans. Non-phishable two-factor auth token: http://fidoalliance.org/ See presentation: https://docs.google.c
55.
by semenko 13y ago
They get an A from Qualys (yay?): https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=bing.com … but no PFS :/
56.
by semenko 13y ago
The PCB they show ( https://s3.amazonaws.com/ksr/assets/000/935/465/b197830112a2... ) … has the model number (S2122B) of the SmartQ Z3 watch, too. http://forum.xda-developers.com/showt
57.
by semenko 13y ago
IIRC, Twitter is also concerned about this, and recently proposed a hash-based validation for externally included resources (though I can't seem to find their proposal right now …).
58.
by semenko 13y ago
The co-author of the study (Ridker) and the Brigham have already issued a Press Release disputing the reporter's spin. Ridker portrays the calculator issues as minor, and offers strong support for statins in risk reduction (which is wh
59.
by semenko 13y ago
(That's his name.)
60.
by semenko 13y ago
Nothing says reassuring quite like "supports WiFi" but also "WEP only" http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf8/P080009c.pdf [pg. 101, section 5-21]

More ›