infosex.exchange <3

You are probably looking for the infosec.exchange Mastodon instance

This host is mostly for my random stuff, and in little part acts like a well-intentioned placeholder for the typosquatted domain.

Discoverability and Archiving

Currently I'm using this host for saving the items from my own feeds to the Wayback Machine and provide in-links for search engines. I hate that I have to do this, but the non-sense ideology of Mastodon pretty much ruined the search feature for Fediverse as a whole, and this wasn't changed by the fact that they owned their mistake and implemented search eventually.

Yes, I (or anyone else) could do similar things with other peoples published feeds, regardless of the tantrum. No, you can't defederate this, because the process doesn't rely on an instance.

Gluttony Section for Search Engines

Die Hard 4 is underrated. Fight me!
this post | permalink
In 10 mins: The master key #38c3

https://streaming.media.ccc.de/38c3/zigzag

#HDCP
this post | permalink
Proprietary silicon ICs and dubious marketing claims? Let's fight those with a microscope! #38c3

https://streaming.media.ccc.de/38c3/relive/492

Didn't expect this one to have a #synthdiy angle! 🤩
this post | permalink
I would complain about #38c3 streaming issues but the very existence of the service is so impressive I'll just thank the Angels now: thank you!
this post | permalink
To little surprise it seems that multiple #antivirus vendors have been ignoring COM hijacking as a self-defense bypass and LPE vector since at least 2018, when I first published about this technique (see my prev post).

At #38c3 guys from Neodyme demonstrated some more elegant exploits than my initial PoCs, nice work! My German is rusty but I think I'd have some comments about proposed solutions :)

ReLive will be available here:

https://streaming.media.ccc.de/38c3/relive/815
this post | permalink
In 10mins: Der Schlüssel zur COMpromittierung: Local Privilege Escalation Schwachstellen in AV/EDRs #38c3

https://events.ccc.de/congress/2024/hub/event/der-schlssel-zur-compromittierung-local-privilege-escalation-schwachstellen-in-av-edrs/

This looks remarkably similar to my previous research on #antivirus privescs:

https://blog.silentsignal.eu/2018/01/08/bare-knuckled-antivirus-breaking/
https://blog.silentsignal.eu/2019/06/24/self-defenseless-exploring-kasperskys-local-attack-surface/

Can't wait to see what these guys found!
this post | permalink
Circle Drone of Doom progress
this post | permalink
In 10 minutes: What the PHUZZ?! Finding 0-days in Web Applications with Coverage-guided #Fuzzing

https://streaming.media.ccc.de/38c3/zigzag/hls

#38c3
this post | permalink
@laund Yes, that. Also note that the assignment alone would fail at compile time because it's refutable, but in the `if` "context" it magically works. If you think about it this way, `if let` is a special, distinct expression that uses the syntax of two related, but different expressions (`if` and `let`, sry if I use "expression" wrong here). I find this confusing too.
this post | permalink
@laund Thanks for the explanation, that actually made things clearer!

However, my original question is exactly about the lack of syntactic sugar that would make the syntax arguably less elegant for the sake of making it more readable.

Your example with `for` is a great one because it shows that similar "backwards" constructs are already present in many languages (incl. Rust). On the other hand I'd argue that the `in` keyword makes a significant difference here for readability. Similarly reading assignments by themselves makes perfect sense until they are written in a different context.
this post | permalink
Next Page