toasterblender

4 ms·

1.
by toasterblender 3y ago
The same that it works in any other industry. By hiring those with proven track records, the best of the best. The goal is obviously not to hire 100% of the potential 0-day hunters, but by launching a concentrated poaching effort, to make a
2.
by toasterblender 3y ago
> What was the sandbox escape on Android? Even if you had code execution inside the Chrome process on Android, that shouldn't be enough to enable persistence, so clearly there's another vulnerability. This is such a crucial po
3.
by toasterblender 3y ago
If the number of skilled 0-day hunters who will work for a paycheck is > 0, then yours is a moot point, since a poaching program would still make an impact even if there are some people who work for spyware companies who would not work f
4.
by toasterblender 3y ago
> Poach them to do what? Poach them to discover 0-days in their software, as I said.
5.
by toasterblender 3y ago
Project Zero is amazing, but they 1) seem like a very small team, and 2) their mandate is far too broad (essentially to search for 0-days in anything, versus a specific system). What I am talking about is more like Apple having a dedicated
6.
by toasterblender 3y ago
> But while they could try and poach them today, tomorrow there will be a whole load of new people working for those companies, and it'll just be a never-ending cycle. The number of people who successfully find 0-click 0-days for iO
7.
by toasterblender 3y ago
Poaching founders is an entirely different kettle of fish than just poaching line employees.
8.
by toasterblender 3y ago
Here is what I do not understand: Spyware firms and 0-day vendors both have staff dedicating to finding 0-days. Why do Google and Apple not simply poach these staff? I am sure Google and Apple can offer very competitive salaries, so why do
9.
International Travel Digital Security: How to Keep Data Safe(theintercept.com)
3 points by toasterblender 3y ago|1 comments
10.
by toasterblender 3y ago
This reminds me of when Signal messenger locked users out of their chats until they set a device PIN several years(?) ago. The fact that people may have been in the middle of important conversations was apparently not a concern.
11.
by toasterblender 3y ago
'Privacy' is in the title of the article, not 'privacy policies'. Reducing 'privacy' to just privacy policies is overly reductive, let alone speculative that that's what the author did. Regardless, assumin
12.
by toasterblender 3y ago
The problem with generic advice like this is that it is invariably opinionated and unexplained. For example, what makes Firefox, Safari, and Brave ethical browsers but Edge and Chrome not? Firefox development has undergone plenty of unethic
13.
by toasterblender 3y ago
Thank you for putting the time in the title.
14.
by toasterblender 3y ago
> I‘m only buying quality stuff and stick to it as long a possible. Most of my cloth are years old. > I’m buying a new iPhone if the one i have doesn’t get any updates anymore There have been many cases of Apple deploying planned obso