Read a little. Learn a lot. • Tightly-written news, views and stuff • Follow us on TwitterBe a Facebook FanTumble us!

10 Jun 2010 23:41

tags

Tech: One of the neckbeards behind Goatse Security speaks up

  • It’s pretty egregious that AT&T would have it for such a device that probably has known exploit candidates (attack code) on, say, the Russian (underground) markets.
  • Escher “Weev” Auernheimer of Goatse Security • Talking about how his group uncovered a major flaw with AT&T’s security mechanism, which led to Gawker posting about the results. Why did they go to Gawker and not AT&T? “We did want not engage directly with AT&T in case they tried to serve us (an injunction) or something,” he said. How did they do it? It was a simple brute-force attack that required no hacking. And people offended about the group’s hilarious name? “If someone is offended to where they can’t deal with us … then they’re a douche bag and we don’t want to be employed by them anyway.” A fun read. source

09 Jun 2010 22:13

tags

Tech: More on the leaked 3G iPad leak thang: Gawker’s out for blood

  • Gawker’s upset with Apple. They want Apple to feel the pain. Problem is, they’re looking for blood that’s coming out of a different body. The gaffe is clearly AT&T’s, not Apple’s, fault. While it’s great that they exposed it, the portrayal is all wrong. Ryan Tate of Valleywag writes: “Although the security vulnerability was confined to AT&T servers, Apple bears responsibility for ensuring the privacy of its users, who must provide the company with their email addresses to activate their iPads.” We know they’re upset about the raid and the WWDC snub, but doesn’t it seem like they’re fishing with a statement like that? Personally, we have to admit to getting a kick out of the word “Goatse” running in a New York Times article. Best part of the whole story. source