|
|
hadn't seen that one before.... seriously accurate. 
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
I had some fun with a bit of Microsoft nonsense the other day. I have a rather large hosts file - it's over 600KB. I read something about various devices phoning home to them with every URL visited so I put that address into my hosts file and mapped it to 127.0.0.1. I think it was urs.microsoft.com. Adding that single line to the file triggered the AV program at work and it was deemed to be malicious. At home it triggered a medium level warning when I did a virus scan. I removed that line and it accepted the file with no warnings or notification of any kind.
Apparently Microsoft deems it to be an act of malice to block one of their sites and I think that is nonsense.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
I need to start a website with advertising....
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe you could try setting up a PiHole Pi-hole – Network-wide Ad Blocking, and add the offending address to the blacklist? Or just add the redirect to the hosts file on the system hosting PiHole (PiHole reads the local hosts file and adds entries to it's DNS database)?
There's instructions on how to install PiHole inside a docker instance, if you want to go that route.
Plus, if you can modify your DHCP server to point to the PiHole for DNS, than every system on your local net gets the ad-blocking goodness. Only downside (?) I've encountered is that PiHole does block google ad services, too, so you can't click on any "sponsored" google link, or the "Shopping" links when doing a google search. Which is occasionally annoying. You can find instructions on how to allow ad services through the PiHole, but I think doing so will allow a number of, possibly unwanted, other ad services through as well
"A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants"
Chuckles the clown
|
|
|
|
|
One type of fishing attack (at one point in time) was to modify your hosts file such that www.realwebsitehere.com redirected to localhost, where the malware had setup a webserver mimicking the real website. Great way to capture logins.
Try 0.0.0.0 instead of 127.0.0.1
|
|
|
|
|
I frequently use the tools in Microsoft's OWN sysinternals toolset for performing various operations on my network, and every time I usually have to hit the notification that pops up and "allow" the program before defender squirrels it away to it's vault of the damned never to be seen again.
However!!! sysinternals is a walk in the park compared to "NirSoft"
NirSoft (https://www.nirsoft.net/) make some absolutely amazing tools, tools that should be in every I.T. engineers bag of tricks when dealing with those folks that forget their passwords and/or routinely screw things up on their windows system, windows defender treats just about every single program in the tool set as malicious.
Not only that, but once over it would list all the offending programs in one go, until folks started clicking on "Allow all", so it now lists every one singly and in such rapid succession that you just do not get time to click on the alert, hoist to admin, select "allow" and save, before that entry is "automatically processed" and your moved on to the next alert.
It appears also that "Allowing" a file now only stays in place for a limited length of time, so after a while the allowance is lifted and you start the dance all over again.
In order for Windows to not destroy my tools collection, I've now started keeping it all on a Linux based SMB share where EVERYTHING is set to read only. Defender goes absolutely nut's when I open that folder now.
|
|
|
|
|
Thirtysome years ago I designed and built cryptographic modules for EFT processing. Early days...
In those days there were two main algorithms for PIN verification.
The IBM Derived PIN system used data from the mag stripe (some of the account number and other fields) to crunch up with DES and other things to generate the expected PIN, which was verified by direct comparison (at a processing system, since the terminal did not have the relevant DES keys etc).
The (more popular) VISA method took the PIN and some stripe data, crunched them up and came out with a 4 digit value which was compared with the PVV (PIN verification value) from the stripe (or issuer's database).
This can be viewed as an elaborate hash function (4 digit PIN -> 4 digit PVV)
I investigated its properties as a hash, and (re-)discovered some interesting statistics.
Obviously a 1:1 mapping could be fairly easily brute-forced, so information is "destroyed" to make it a one-way operation.
As a consequence, looking at the PVV space:
1/e (almost 37%) of PVVs are unreachable - no corresponding PINs
1/e have one PIN mapped to them
1/2e (over 18%) of PVVs have TWO PINs that map to them
1/6e (6%+) of PVVS have THREE PINs that map
1/24e (1.5%+) have FOUR ... and so on
So, (back in PIN space) there is a very real chance that your card has more than one PIN that would work. (Good luck finding the other(s)!)
That fact blew the mind of more than a few bean-counters and auditors....
With regard to OG's thread below, we had requests from card issuing institutions to NOT generate "simple" PINs.
In the end I think we discarded PINs with 4 consecutive digits or more than two repeats.
(A little repetition is good - my favoured PINs have two characteristics:
They can be keyed by laying my hand over the PIN pad and merely flexing fingers.
They include a repeat so even keen watchers wind up missing something.)
Some time later, customer selected PINs (and PIN change terminals) hit the streets...
Ah, nostalgia (ain't what it used to be)!
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 1,095 5/6*
⬛⬛🟨⬛🟨
⬛🟨🟨⬛🟨
🟨🟨⬛🟨⬛
🟩🟩⬛🟩⬛
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 1,095 6/6
⬜⬜⬜⬜🟨
🟨⬜⬜🟨⬜
⬜🟩🟨🟩⬜
⬜🟩⬜🟩🟩
🟩🟩⬜🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 1,095 3/6
⬜⬜⬜⬜🟨
🟩🟨🟨⬜⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 1,095 3/6*
⬜🟨🟨⬜🟨
⬜🟩⬜🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
🟩🟨⬜⬜🟨
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity. - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 1,095 4/6*
⬜⬜⬜⬜🟨
⬜⬜🟨🟩⬜
🟩⬜⬜🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
Happiness will never come to those who fail to appreciate what they already have. -Anon
And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music. -Frederick Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 1,095 3/6
⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩
⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
Ok, I have had my coffee, so you can all come out now!
|
|
|
|
|
American here for context
In the light of recent revelations of MS cooperating with the CCP and the PLA and the fact that the DoD and the Feds (I know that's redundant) moved all their crap to the cloud - all of it classified - none of it protected by the OS, I give you this...
So, I have deliberately covered my built in webcam. I login through a password or a pin. The login process or whatever it is has thrown an exception condition. I cannot login. The mouse has gone stupid. The laptop is hung.
The inmates are in charge of the asylum.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
Did you let your Matrix subscription lapse?
Reality what a concept.
If you can't find time to do it right the first time, how are you going to find time to do it again?
PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.4.0 (Many new features) JaxCoder.com
Latest Article: EventAggregator
|
|
|
|
|
shut up old guy 
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, just uncover your webcam, submit a new blood sample, and schedule your subcutaneous tracking capsule injection. You will be right as rain in no time!
|
|
|
|
|
the part that I found hilarious was the exception condition.
I read all of the time the holy grail for developers is to get a job in the big 5. F*** if I know the term now, it comes up now and again. I'm just one of those grunt developers that face palms when they do not handle an obvious situation - and honestly I'm not sure covering the webcam caused it. But don't you think that the login screen should be crash proof?
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
David O'Neil wrote: submit a new blood sample
I've always said, if they want a DNA sample, they can come right over and bl*w me.
|
|
|
|
|
I was going to make the Subject
"It is your computer BUT we will tell you how you can use it"
This is a Hardware Question if it should not be in the Lounge
Please inform me where to post
Config
W7 64 bit Pro
Firefox browser DuckGo search engine
Chrome Block all Cookies
I have a VB app that stores data in SQLite DB the name of the YouTube site and a link to open the site with a list of all the videos.
A number of things are failing
1 The site will not load content if I use "Open Link in New Window"
2 The site will not load content if I use "Open Link in New Tab"
This varies no consistent behavior political ads show Liberty Mutual ad blocked ? ?
3 In Firefox I turned OFF "Block Popup Windows" it was on OFF no change
As of now the ads do not show but I am presented with a skip button to close the ad
that did not show
If I login to Google then Google and Firefox seem to play nice
except "Open Link in New Window"
Any suggestions on how to make Google and Firefox play nice?
Any settings I should change in either ?
I did try just using "Block 3rd Party Cookies" ONLY no change
|
|
|
|
|
I know that Google Chrome now blocks all 3rd party cookies. As for the other browsers, they may also block 3rd party cookies, but I honestly don't know. It's something I'd have to check.
When it comes to blocking all cookies, I think it would inevitably interfere with the function of most web pages. Instead of blocking all cookies, require the browser to prompt you whenever a page sets a cookie. This way, you can allow cookies for the websites you trust, and disallow all other sites by default.
Take a look at Google's/YouTube's cross-origin-resource-sharing policy. That could shed some light on things. Google may require you to set some sort of HTTP request header in certain cases.
If the problem that you are experiencing occurs in the same way across all browsers, I get the feeling that it would be a CORS issue.
You may also want to try disabling all browser extensions to see if that has any effect. I recently encountered a bug on my site. It turns out that a specific plugin was causing the error. I disabled the plugin, and the problem is fixed.
|
|
|
|
|
Steve thanks for the information in the reply
I have no "prompt when a page sets a cookie"
I did change the Chrome to Block third party cookies"
Google's making changes on a daily bases while they are testing this new feature
So results are variable based on what I have tried
One test is I made Google the default browser in Firefox mixed results
still can not use "Open Link in New Window"
Lot of info about Google's/YouTube's cross-origin-resource-sharing policy
won't bother you with my testing how to leverage this feature
End of the day it boils down to
"It is our computer BUT we decide how you use it"
I started playing with the internet when you were sent a CD to logon
with dial up connections
YES companies have contributed major improvements
but too much monetization on the backs of the user's
|
|
|
|
|
Choroid wrote: Steve thanks for the information in the reply
No prob
Choroid wrote: Google's making changes on a daily bases while they are testing this new feature
I like how Google works. They're bold when it comes to experimenting with such a myriad of things. Choroid wrote: CD
What's CD? Does that stand for something?Choroid wrote: Lot of info about Google's/YouTube's cross-origin-resource-sharing policy
I bet there is. Reading the Terms of Service on YouTube alone would take a month. I don't want to know anything about their CORS policy. It scares me.
One thing I learned about Google is that by default, they disallow google.com from being placed within an iFrame located on a different origin. That makes sense.
Upon inspecting the iFrame, you will see a message sent by Google in response to the iFrame's HTTP request headers. The message says something along the lines of: This page can't be loaded. No request header value for "Some-Google-Header-X" was sent in the HTTP GET request. I forget the name of that header, but I bet if you found out how to get a valid code for that header, it just might work.
Make a simple HTML page and write an iFrame element within the body. Set the iFrame's "src" attribute to "https://google.com". Open the HTML page in a browser. The iFrame will fail to load. Hit Ctrl + Shift + I (in Chrome) to view the devtools/console panel. Take a look at the response header for the iFrame. It should specify the name of the header required in order for Google.com to load within the iFrame. Do a Google search using that header's name and you just might find something to address the problem. That would be my next try.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
