Yellow Flag 😷 @WPalant@infosec.exchange

I’ve looked through the available info and everything adds up. Yes, it seems that activists managed to archive at least 30TB of #Parler data. It’s now safe to use the past tense when speaking about Parler. Even ignoring the technical difficulties, there is no coming back from that.

Hi #Twitter, this “browser” is the current Thunderbird release, a mail and RSS client. Its capabilities are no different from Firefox 78. How about you detect Gecko rather than detecting Firefox?

Better yet, do feature detection instead of UA sniffing: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Browser_detection_using_the_user_agent

Wonderful how #Exim team fully recognizes that the use_shell option is a massive security footgun. So they warn users. In a separate document, not linked from the option’s documentation. Never mind not explaining which characters are ok, so users are bound to get it wrong.

In case you were wondering when we will notice the effects of #Mozilla layoffs…

I decided to run #Hugo from a #Docker container locally as well, so that I am guaranteed to have it set up in exactly the same way as on the server. I even aliased hugo into "docker run" and it works pretty much the same (delay isn’t noticeable).

As I’m upgrading to Ubuntu 20.10, I’m left wondering how bugs like this one make it into the final release. Probably because everybody upgrading to the beta thought: “Oh, they’ll certainly update that before the release”?

“And so the Honey extension also has [obfuscated JavaScript] VIM code that will run in the context of the extension’s background page. It seems that the purpose of this code is extracting user identifiers from various advertising cookies.” #Honey

“This time, there is no point decoding the base64-encoded data: the result will be binary garbage. As it turns out, the data here has been encrypted using AES, with the start of the string serving as the key.” #Honey

“Are you saying document.querySelector()? No, guess again. Is anybody saying jQuery? Yes, of course it is using jQuery for extension code as well! And that means that every selector could be potentially booby-trapped.” #Honey

“Why did they even bother with this complicated approach? Beats me. I can only imagine that they had trouble with shops using CSP in a way that prohibited execution of arbitrary scripts. So they decided to run the scripts outside the browser where CSP couldn’t stop them.” #Honey

“So is this some outdated functionality that is no longer in use and that nobody bothered removing yet? Very likely. Yet it could jump to life any time to collect more detailed information about your browsing habits.” #Honey #privacy

“So that’s where this Honey privacy statement is clearly wrong: while the data collected doesn’t contain your email address, Honey makes sure to associate it with your account among other things. And the account is tied to your email address.” #Honey #privacy

That’s a weird one – the below is an exact copy of Firefox’ about:neterror page, but it’s apparently being served by #Cloudflare (?) as a 404 page. It’s even using browser’s own scripts and styles which is rather dangerous since these could change. I fail to see the point…

Saw this gem in my logs, some bot masquerading as Googlebot but being really stupid about the referrer header, even leaving the anchor in the URL. The IP range indeed belongs to Google – Google Cloud Platform in fact. I guess I found my email scraper…

Update: today #Giggle’s @salltweets@twitter.com published a new statement. It’s a good first step, though for my taste it’s a bit thin on reflection of her own role in this mess. What’s still missing however is some statement on the privacy issues. Will these be fixed as well eventually?

The bad news: @salltweets@twitter.com threatens to sue the researchers unless they let her approve the publication first. They kindly decline, as they should. And she shares that communication publicly as well, somehow assuming that it puts her in a better light?

Somehow, the email communication still happened, the right person received the report and confirmed it. So a bit later today @salltweets@twitter.com started sharing the image below – without retracting any of her claims, somehow assuming that this reinforces her points.

So today she proceeded by once again attacking the researchers and criticizing journalists who were asking her about the security vulnerability, restating that it didn't exist.

And she claims that @DI_Security@twitter.com researchers publicly called her a transphobe. Not sure what this is about, I could only find a tweet by @daeken@twitter.com who appears to have no relation to the researchers. Judging by the way @salltweets@twitter.com responded she thinks otherwise.

She says that they should have emailed technical department directly – yet from a brief look I cannot find the corresponding email address anywhere. From experience, emailing technical support about vulnerabilities is a bad idea. So Twitter is a valid way to approach a company.