Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | fh67's commentslogin

Can you share how the discovery worked?

This looks nice, maybe make free more prominent on the site.


I'm thinking of installing a blank bento for users as a pwa (using browser install site as app), script the author name etc and then make the file read only so they are forced to save as, for users to use as a standalone powerpoint tool.

Maybe you can implement this into the project, a blank default read only (except author details) that installs as a pwa.


I thought about make it a PWA, but I'm still on the fence about hosting in general. Will probably have to host in order to deal with enterprise use-cases, but I just want to make something simple and cool for now. Thanks for the feedback, will explore a bit about what people will want in a hosted solution and how it can keep these principles I think makes it special.


Yeah but until you find that the new cloud provider won't approve your compute quota or doesn't have enough capacity in the region or you hit fraud flags for stagnant account spinning up lots of compute.


Most users have it unlocked by TPM only as that is the default Microsoft configuration - you then reboot into windows recovery, yes if windows recovery is disabled or if bitlocker requires a startup pin then this is mitigated.


"No, TPM+PIN does not help, the issue is still exploitable regardless, I asked myself this question, can it still work in a TPM+PIN environment ? Yes it does, I'm just not publishing the PoC, I think what's out there is already bad enough."

https://deadeclipse666.blogspot.com/2026/05/were-doing-silen...


Interesting. If TPM+PIN does not help, then what stands between Bitlocker and TPM unsealing the key?


Point taken, but I would call this an authentication bypass (i.e. you can become administrator without any credentials) instead of a BitLocker bypass. It looks like at most, having BitLocker turned on is a requirement to trigger the bug/backdoor.

In any case I'd be very curious to read a response to these findings from someone at Microsoft.


Uh no, a Google search would tell you it's simply the contract to have sim card booths at arrival and departures at the airport https://www.themarker.com/technation/2017-09-12/ty-article/0...


Mossad fronts don't tell you they're Mossad fronts.


This looks really great, I'm not sure how easy it would be but oauth for consumer outlook, Gmail and yahoo would be a great addition.


For now, you can connect to these email providers with IMAP using app passwords. But oauth connection is a planned feature because Outlook seems to have disabled password connection for IMAP.


It it actually using starlink or the old swarm.space system that supported 'off the shelf' antenna


Swarm used pretty big antennas (due to a much lower wavelength) on the ground segment. It was pretty impractical. And that frequency, starlink sats are not capable of it.

Swarm's network was very incomplete, there were hours of no coverage at all. I think that they just bought it to remove a potential competitor.


Yeah but one rug pull, shame on you...


Rug pull? Guess who designed this direct to cell sats?

The founder of SWARM.


Yes but presumably people designed things to work with swarm. I almost did...


Good question, I imagine its using m2m 4g if its "off the shelf"


Anything similar for opnsense (besides their own service) or pfsense?


With some effort it should be possible to integrate PfSense/Opnsense in OpenWISP. I hope in the future we'll be able to do it.


Maybe just go with ansible or similar: https://github.com/ansibleguy/collection_opnsense


Updating a fleet of embedded devices like routers (which can come online and go offline at any time) will generally be much easier using a pull-based update model. But if you’ve got control over the build and update lifecycle, a push-based approach like ansible might be appropriate.


Maybe I am missing somehing, but I would assume that base network infrastructure like routers, firewalls and switches have a higher uptime, availability and reliability than ordinary servers.


The problem with push is that the service sitting at the center needs to figure out which devices will need to be re-pushed later on. You can end up with a lot of state that needs action just to get things back to normal.

So if you can convince devices to pull at boot time and then regularly thereafter, you know that the three states they can be in are down, good, or soon to be good. Now you only need to take action when things are down.

Never analyze distribution of software and config based on the perfect state; minimize the amount of work you need to do for the exceptions.


Unattended upgrades fail and sit there requiring manual intervention (due to lack of transactional updates and/or multiple flash slots (root partitions and bootloader configuration)).

Pull style configuration requires the device to hold credentials in order to authorize access to download the new policy set.

It's possible to add an /etc/init.d that runs sysupgrade on boot, install Python and Ansible, configure and confirm remote logging, and then run `ansible-pull`.

ansible-openwrt eliminates the need to have Python on a device: https://github.com/gekmihesg/ansible-openwrt

But then log collection; unless all of the nodes have correctly configured log forwarding at each stage of firmware upgrade, pull-style configuration management will lose logs that push-style configuration management can easily centrally log.


Pull based updates would work on OpenWRT devices if they had enough storage, transactional updates and/or multiple flash slots, and scheduled maintenance windows.

OpenWRT wiki > Sysupgrade: https://openwrt.org/docs/techref/sysupgrade



Or build the router image declaratively with Nix.

https://nixos.wiki/wiki/OpenWRT


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: