This is more autism than adhd and it’s a huge value of autistic people to reflect a “normal” attitude as absurdity.

Your comment seems like a rational response to me.

Hey I don’t know your technical capability, but Steve Gibson pointed out the lowest knowledge way to get an isolated network just by buying two more cheap NAT routers. Your current router stays routing internet, but in LAN1 you plug in one of the new routers, let’s call it your home network, and LAN2 of your internet router plug in the other router and call it insecure. Plug in your WiFi access points into home and your devices. Plug in work laptop and other IoT to insecure. Home won’t be able to talk to insecure, and insecure can’t talk to home. This is all because of NAT. Just make sure the home network range is a different range to the insecure.

Otherwise it’s just a vlan on router and switches and access points with no firewall rules that allow INSECURE to HOME.

You might already know all this in which case never mind!

https://www.grc.com/nat/nat.htm

This sounds unbelievable, like the turning of a ship to avoid an iceberg. It’s an unbelievably light sentencing, showcasing the country’s lack of interest in protecting women’s rights while declaring the intent to do so in the ruling.

If my partner was attacked, lost her hearing and had to attend court multiple times to defend her rights to safety, and the perpetrator got 3 years? I’d be furious.

I know she’d be devastated. The times she felt unsafe already leave such a big impact, let alone a realised attack.

Anyway. I do hope it’s just a positive sign, that all it will take is a bit more time. I want to believe it’s positive. But it’s wild to compare what I’d like to believe as obvious human rights; to not be attacked to the point of disability from an unprovoked human, then believe in the justice system in arrears to punish and (theoretically) prevent.

Anyway, long rant. Processing it because I probably believed Korea was better than that. Not all the humans, just at least the culture and law.

Thank you sir

It’s solving a real problem in a niche case. Someone called it gimmicky, but it’s actually just a good tool currently produced by an unknown quantity. Hopefully it’ll be sorted or someone else takes up the reigns and creates an alternative that works perfectly for all my different isos.

For the average home punter maybe even up to home lab enthusiast, probably not saving much time. For me it’s on my keyring and I use it to reload proxmox hosts, Nutanix hosts, individual Ubuntu vms running ROS Noetic and not to mention reimaging for test devices. Probably a thrice weekly thing.

So yeah, cumulatively it’s saving me a lot of time and just in trivialising a process.

If this was a spanner I’d just go Sidchrome or kingchrome instead of my Stanley. But it’s a bit niche so I don’t know what else allows for such simple multi iso boot. Always open to options.

I think you probably don’t realise you hate standards and certifications. No IT person wants yet another system generating more calls and complexity. but here is iso, or a cyber insurance policy, or NIST, or acsc asking minimums with checklists and a cyber review answering them with controls.

Crazy that there’s so little understanding about why it’s there, that you just think it’s the “IT guy” wanting those.

Bleeping computer was blocking my vpn but that also sounds common. Not only is there heaps of controls through conditional access policies where you can use device compliance policies and mass download defender for office 365 rules to detect these things, Microsoft also allow a bunch of ways to circumvent that through publishing enterprise apps and leave it to you not to lose your keys. I use one such app a lot called pnp powershell so my powershell can access basically everything and do anything so I can script largely migrations and audits of those migrations into sharepoint. While I do remove that app at the end of my projects, most people just move on.

Of course pure speculation. It’s just not even hard to either footgun yourself, and fortinet have been known to be shooting themselves in the foot, even assuming they tried to put controls in, in the first place.

I’ll read the actual article when I get home to see how impacted I will be though. As a customer, seller and with certifications. Not to mention, maybe there’s something for me to learn about the whole thing anyway.

I deploy so many of these things. I don’t even know what to say.

Fortinet as a security company is like asking a sieve to hold water.

The amount of cvss 10 scores show they’ve got the high score.

If they protect their own network with Fortigate devices no matter the utp atp whatever, they’ve probably been breached for a while.

Hard not to be cynical.

Yeah as a sysadmin I’d also like to ensure casual readers note that windows 11 22h2 is EOL in Ends in 4 weeks (08 Oct 2024).

https://endoflife.date/windows

Please don’t run windows without security patches. Every month there’s about 4 active exploited zero day security vulnerabilities finally getting their patch. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/microsoft/microsoft-september-2024-patch-tuesday-fixes-4-zero-days-79-flaws/

Each month past end of security patch releases just grows your exposure. On Windows and Linux alike.

Coming in Windows 11 24h2 is live patch, Microsoft’s catch up to Linux (a decade late).

I just asked google that exact question and it said “The current world population is 8,171,661,997”

Are you a teacher?

Hmm, so, policy in our office is a clean desk. Before you jump to conclusions, it’s because our secured area and office occasionally has people come through that should absolutely not see what information we have on our desks. This requirement is a compliance issue for our continued contracts and certifications.

Our work from home policy hasn’t addressed this issue, but it sounds like it’s a clear gap. Your neighbour coming around for a cup of tea absolutely should not be able to see any work related information.

My assumption is that someone has considered this kind of aspect and had a check to confirm that they’ve done diligence by asking you to reveal your working space. A space the companies sensitive information would be visible. Actually you too should maybe not be looking at your wife’s screen nor materials on her work desk. Depending on the situation.

Either way, policy comes first so perhaps her employment agreement or employee handbook would reveal more.

I ended up reading it on bleeping computer since the linked site looks like an auto tldr bot saved 50% of the words. The important 50% was discarded.

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/18-year-old-security-flaw-in-firefox-and-chrome-exploited-in-attacks/

I checked too, it’s not a valid public DNS record, so then the question is, does Oktas internal DNS resolve this. Even if it does, how does okta even sit in this? Are they the identity provider for Twitter? Surely even if it’s identity, it’s got nothing to do with content moderation? So many questions.

A software shouldn’t use passwords for tls, just like before you use submit your bank password your network connection to the site has been validated and encrypted by the public key your client is using to talk to the bank server, and the bank private key to decrypt it.

The rest of the hygiene is still up for grabs for sure, IT security is built on layers. Even if one is broken it shouldn’t lead to a failure overall. If it does, go add more layers.

To answer about something like a WiFi pineapple: those man in the middle attacks are thwarted by TLS. The moment an invalid certificate is offered, since the man in the middle should and can not know the private key (something that isn’t used as whimsically as a password, and is validated by a trusted root authority).

If an attacker has a private key, your systems already have failed. You should immediately revoke it. You publish your revokation. Invalidating it. But even that would be egregious. You’ve already let someone into the vault, they already have the crown jewels. The POS system doesn’t even need to be accessed.

So no matter what, the WiFi is irrelevant in a setup.

Being suspicious because of it though, I could understand. It’s not a smoking gun, but you’d maybe look deeper out if suspicion.

Note I’m not security operations, I’m solutions and systems administrations. A Sec Ops would probably agree more with you than I do.

I consider things from a Swiss cheese model, and rely on 4+ layers of protection against most understood threat vendors. A failure of any one is minor non-compliance in my mind, a deep priority 3. Into the queue, but there’s no rush. And given a public WiFi is basically the same as a compromised WiFi, or a 5g carrier network, a POS solution should be built with strengths to handle that by default. And then security layered on top (mfa, conditional access policies, PKI/TLS, Mdm, endpoint health policies, TPM and validation++++)

Seems like you should submit a change request with your fixes?

Transport layer security should mean this shouldn’t matter. A good POS shouldn’t rely on a secure network, the security should already be built in cyptographically at the network session layer. Anything else would still have the same risk vector, just a lower chance of happening.

In fact many POS systems happily just take a 4g/5g sim card because it doesn’t matter what network they’re on.

I knew a Datacenter that had hundreds of ps3s for rendering fluid simulation and other such things that at the time were absolutely cutting edge tech. I believe F1 and some early 3d pixar stuff was rendered on those farms. But like all things, technology marched on. fpgpas and cuda have taken that space.

Cell definitely was heavily used by specialist/nichr industry though.

I wonder if I can find you some link to explain it better than the rumours I heard from staff that used to work in those datacentres.

Hmm hard to find commercial applications, probably individuals might have blogged otherwise here’s what I’m talking about: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3_cluster

Ah you’re thinking I’m reading your other comments to other people.

BTW HIPAA is for providers for their patients information handling. Once it’s in the person’s hands, it’s no longer under HIPPA and it no longer applies. If you decide to put your private medical information on a commercial advertisement board on a highway, and it’s not breaking laws to do with acceptable adcertisement (eg gore or smut) you’ll be able to do that to.

Basically theres no expectation for a individual person to adhere to HIPPA for their own personal information storage and it doesn’t apply.

My assumption with your lawyer comment, is this was a insurance or otherwise medical malpractice lawyer who might collect this information for their client cases, since without having client/patient requirements, HIPPA is irrelevant.