Shared posts

27 Aug 21:18

We Are Still Unable to Secure LLMs from Malicious Inputs

by Bruce Schneier

Nice indirect prompt injection attack:

Bargury’s attack starts with a poisoned document, which is shared to a potential victim’s Google Drive. (Bargury says a victim could have also uploaded a compromised file to their own account.) It looks like an official document on company meeting policies. But inside the document, Bargury hid a 300-word malicious prompt that contains instructions for ChatGPT. The prompt is written in white text in a size-one font, something that a human is unlikely to see but a machine will still read.

In a proof of concept video of the attack, Bargury shows the victim asking ChatGPT to “summarize my last meeting with Sam,” referencing a set of notes with OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. (The examples in the attack are fictitious.) Instead, the hidden prompt tells the LLM that there was a “mistake” and the document doesn’t actually need to be summarized. The prompt says the person is actually a “developer racing against a deadline” and they need the AI to search Google Drive for API keys and attach them to the end of a URL that is provided in the prompt.

That URL is actually a command in the Markdown language to connect to an external server and pull in the image that is stored there. But as per the prompt’s instructions, the URL now also contains the API keys the AI has found in the Google Drive account.

This kind of thing should make everybody stop and really think before deploying any AI agents. We simply don’t know to defend against these attacks. We have zero agentic AI systems that are secure against these attacks. Any AI that is working in an adversarial environment—and by this I mean that it may encounter untrusted training data or input—is vulnerable to prompt injection. It’s an existential problem that, near as I can tell, most people developing these technologies are just pretending isn’t there.

18 Apr 10:23

Lifecoaching werkt! Stabilisatie en ontwikkeling bij jongeren met multiproblematiek

Lifecoaches begeleiden jongeren met meervoudige problematiek, die zelf de weg naar hulp niet vinden of geen hulpvraag kunnen formuleren. Leeuwarden Oost vroeg Purpose te onderzoeken wat de effecten en maatschappelijke kosten en baten zijn van de hulp van de lifecoaches.
07 Apr 22:53

DIRNSA Fired

by Bruce Schneier

In “Secrets and Lies” (2000), I wrote:

It is poor civic hygiene to install technologies that could someday facilitate a police state.

It’s something a bunch of us were saying at the time, in reference to the vast NSA’s surveillance capabilities.

I have been thinking of that quote a lot as I read news stories of President Trump firing the Director of the National Security Agency. General Timothy Haugh.

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote:

We don’t know what pressure the Trump administration is using to make intelligence services fall into line, but it isn’t crazy to worry that the NSA might again start monitoring domestic communications.

The NSA already spies on Americans in a variety of ways. But that’s always been a sideline to its main mission: spying on the rest of the world. Once Trump replaces Haugh with a loyalist, the NSA’s vast surveillance apparatus can be refocused domestically.

Giving that agency all those powers in the 1990s, in the 2000s after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, and in the 2010s was always a mistake. I fear that we are about to learn how big a mistake it was.

Here’s PGP creator Phil Zimmerman in 1996, spelling it out even more clearly:

The Clinton Administration seems to be attempting to deploy and entrench a communications infrastructure that would deny the citizenry the ability to protect its privacy. This is unsettling because in a democracy, it is possible for bad people to occasionally get elected—sometimes very bad people. Normally, a well-functioning democracy has ways to remove these people from power. But the wrong technology infrastructure could allow such a future government to watch every move anyone makes to oppose it. It could very well be the last government we ever elect.

When making public policy decisions about new technologies for the government, I think one should ask oneself which technologies would best strengthen the hand of a police state. Then, do not allow the government to deploy those technologies. This is simply a matter of good civic hygiene.

03 Apr 13:21

Web 3.0 Requires Data Integrity

by Bruce Schneier

If you’ve ever taken a computer security class, you’ve probably learned about the three legs of computer security—confidentiality, integrity, and availability—known as the CIA triad. When we talk about a system being secure, that’s what we’re referring to. All are important, but to different degrees in different contexts. In a world populated by artificial intelligence (AI) systems and artificial intelligent agents, integrity will be paramount.

What is data integrity? It’s ensuring that no one can modify data—that’s the security angle—but it’s much more than that. It encompasses accuracy, completeness, and quality of data—all over both time and space. It’s preventing accidental data loss; the “undo” button is a primitive integrity measure. It’s also making sure that data is accurate when it’s collected—that it comes from a trustworthy source, that nothing important is missing, and that it doesn’t change as it moves from format to format. The ability to restart your computer is another integrity measure.

The CIA triad has evolved with the Internet. The first iteration of the Web—Web 1.0 of the 1990s and early 2000s—prioritized availability. This era saw organizations and individuals rush to digitize their content, creating what has become an unprecedented repository of human knowledge. Organizations worldwide established their digital presence, leading to massive digitization projects where quantity took precedence over quality. The emphasis on making information available overshadowed other concerns.

As Web technologies matured, the focus shifted to protecting the vast amounts of data flowing through online systems. This is Web 2.0: the Internet of today. Interactive features and user-generated content transformed the Web from a read-only medium to a participatory platform. The increase in personal data, and the emergence of interactive platforms for e-commerce, social media, and online everything demanded both data protection and user privacy. Confidentiality became paramount.

We stand at the threshold of a new Web paradigm: Web 3.0. This is a distributed, decentralized, intelligent Web. Peer-to-peer social-networking systems promise to break the tech monopolies’ control on how we interact with each other. Tim Berners-Lee’s open W3C protocol, Solid, represents a fundamental shift in how we think about data ownership and control. A future filled with AI agents requires verifiable, trustworthy personal data and computation. In this world, data integrity takes center stage.

For example, the 5G communications revolution isn’t just about faster access to videos; it’s about Internet-connected things talking to other Internet-connected things without our intervention. Without data integrity, for example, there’s no real-time car-to-car communications about road movements and conditions. There’s no drone swarm coordination, smart power grid, or reliable mesh networking. And there’s no way to securely empower AI agents.

In particular, AI systems require robust integrity controls because of how they process data. This means technical controls to ensure data is accurate, that its meaning is preserved as it is processed, that it produces reliable results, and that humans can reliably alter it when it’s wrong. Just as a scientific instrument must be calibrated to measure reality accurately, AI systems need integrity controls that preserve the connection between their data and ground truth.

This goes beyond preventing data tampering. It means building systems that maintain verifiable chains of trust between their inputs, processing, and outputs, so humans can understand and validate what the AI is doing. AI systems need clean, consistent, and verifiable control processes to learn and make decisions effectively. Without this foundation of verifiable truth, AI systems risk becoming a series of opaque boxes.

Recent history provides many sobering examples of integrity failures that naturally undermine public trust in AI systems. Machine-learning (ML) models trained without thought on expansive datasets have produced predictably biased results in hiring systems. Autonomous vehicles with incorrect data have made incorrect—and fatal—decisions. Medical diagnosis systems have given flawed recommendations without being able to explain themselves. A lack of integrity controls undermines AI systems and harms people who depend on them.

They also highlight how AI integrity failures can manifest at multiple levels of system operation. At the training level, data may be subtly corrupted or biased even before model development begins. At the model level, mathematical foundations and training processes can introduce new integrity issues even with clean data. During execution, environmental changes and runtime modifications can corrupt previously valid models. And at the output level, the challenge of verifying AI-generated content and tracking it through system chains creates new integrity concerns. Each level compounds the challenges of the ones before it, ultimately manifesting in human costs, such as reinforced biases and diminished agency.

Think of it like protecting a house. You don’t just lock a door; you also use safe concrete foundations, sturdy framing, a durable roof, secure double-pane windows, and maybe motion-sensor cameras. Similarly, we need digital security at every layer to ensure the whole system can be trusted.

This layered approach to understanding security becomes increasingly critical as AI systems grow in complexity and autonomy, particularly with large language models (LLMs) and deep-learning systems making high-stakes decisions. We need to verify the integrity of each layer when building and deploying digital systems that impact human lives and societal outcomes.

At the foundation level, bits are stored in computer hardware. This represents the most basic encoding of our data, model weights, and computational instructions. The next layer up is the file system architecture: the way those binary sequences are organized into structured files and directories that a computer can efficiently access and process. In AI systems, this includes how we store and organize training data, model checkpoints, and hyperparameter configurations.

On top of that are the application layers—the programs and frameworks, such as PyTorch and TensorFlow, that allow us to train models, process data, and generate outputs. This layer handles the complex mathematics of neural networks, gradient descent, and other ML operations.

Finally, at the user-interface level, we have visualization and interaction systems—what humans actually see and engage with. For AI systems, this could be everything from confidence scores and prediction probabilities to generated text and images or autonomous robot movements.

Why does this layered perspective matter? Vulnerabilities and integrity issues can manifest at any level, so understanding these layers helps security experts and AI researchers perform comprehensive threat modeling. This enables the implementation of defense-in-depth strategies—from cryptographic verification of training data to robust model architectures to interpretable outputs. This multi-layered security approach becomes especially crucial as AI systems take on more autonomous decision-making roles in critical domains such as healthcare, finance, and public safety. We must ensure integrity and reliability at every level of the stack.

The risks of deploying AI without proper integrity control measures are severe and often underappreciated. When AI systems operate without sufficient security measures to handle corrupted or manipulated data, they can produce subtly flawed outputs that appear valid on the surface. The failures can cascade through interconnected systems, amplifying errors and biases. Without proper integrity controls, an AI system might train on polluted data, make decisions based on misleading assumptions, or have outputs altered without detection. The results of this can range from degraded performance to catastrophic failures.

We see four areas where integrity is paramount in this Web 3.0 world. The first is granular access, which allows users and organizations to maintain precise control over who can access and modify what information and for what purposes. The second is authentication—much more nuanced than the simple “Who are you?” authentication mechanisms of today—which ensures that data access is properly verified and authorized at every step. The third is transparent data ownership, which allows data owners to know when and how their data is used and creates an auditable trail of data providence. Finally, the fourth is access standardization: common interfaces and protocols that enable consistent data access while maintaining security.

Luckily, we’re not starting from scratch. There are open W3C protocols that address some of this: decentralized identifiers for verifiable digital identity, the verifiable credentials data model for expressing digital credentials, ActivityPub for decentralized social networking (that’s what Mastodon uses), Solid for distributed data storage and retrieval, and WebAuthn for strong authentication standards. By providing standardized ways to verify data provenance and maintain data integrity throughout its lifecycle, Web 3.0 creates the trusted environment that AI systems require to operate reliably. This architectural leap for integrity control in the hands of users helps ensure that data remains trustworthy from generation and collection through processing and storage.

Integrity is essential to trust, on both technical and human levels. Looking forward, integrity controls will fundamentally shape AI development by moving from optional features to core architectural requirements, much as SSL certificates evolved from a banking luxury to a baseline expectation for any Web service.

Web 3.0 protocols can build integrity controls into their foundation, creating a more reliable infrastructure for AI systems. Today, we take availability for granted; anything less than 100% uptime for critical websites is intolerable. In the future, we will need the same assurances for integrity. Success will require following practical guidelines for maintaining data integrity throughout the AI lifecycle—from data collection through model training and finally to deployment, use, and evolution. These guidelines will address not just technical controls but also governance structures and human oversight, similar to how privacy policies evolved from legal boilerplate into comprehensive frameworks for data stewardship. Common standards and protocols, developed through industry collaboration and regulatory frameworks, will ensure consistent integrity controls across different AI systems and applications.

Just as the HTTPS protocol created a foundation for trusted e-commerce, it’s time for new integrity-focused standards to enable the trusted AI services of tomorrow.

This essay was written with Davi Ottenheimer, and originally appeared in Communications of the ACM.

01 Apr 12:52

Ente wants to take on Google Photos with its privacy-first photo storage service

by Ivan Mehta
Despite Google’s intentions for its default image viewing and editing app for Android, the Photos app has, over the years, become one of the most popular photo backup services around. In fact, it was one of the most attractive offerings for years until it stopped offering unlimited storage in 2020. That change in the tech […]
29 Mar 22:05

'An Open Letter To Meta: Support True Messaging Interoperability With XMPP'

by EditorDavid
Maxim Bange

XMPP, dMSN, Mercury; another life time ♥

In 1999 Slashdot reader Jeremie announced "a new project I recently started to create a complete open-source platform for Instant Messaging with transparent communication to other IM systems (ICQ, AIM, etc)." It was the first release of the eXtensible Messaging and Presence Protocol, and by 2008 Slashdot was asking if XMPP was "the next big thing." Facebook even supported it for third-party chat clients until 2015. And here in 2025, the chair of the nonprofit XMPP Standards Foundation is long-time Slashdot reader ralphm, who is now issuing this call to action at XMPP.org: The European Digital Markets Act (DMA) is designed to break down walled gardens and enforce messaging interoperability. As a designated gatekeeper, Meta—controlling WhatsApp and Messenger—must comply. However, its current proposal falls short, risking further entrenchment of its dominance rather than fostering genuine competition. [..] A Call to Action The XMPP Standards Foundation urges Meta to adopt XMPP for messaging interoperability. It is ready to collaborate, continue to evolve the protocol to meet modern needs, and ensure true compliance with the DMA. Let's build an open, competitive messaging ecosystem—one that benefits both users and service providers. It's time for real interoperability. Let's make it happen.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

27 Mar 00:05

Google Will Develop the Android OS Fully In Private

by BeauHD
Maxim Bange

R.I.P. Android? Perhaps the promise of what was once called 'Android' was already far gone?

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Android Authority: No matter the manufacturer, every Android phone has one thing in common: its software base. Manufacturers can heavily customize the look and feel of the Android OS they ship on their Android devices, but under the hood, the core system functionality is derived from the same open-source foundation: the Android Open Source Project. After over 16 years, Google is making big changes to how it develops the open source version of Android in an effort to streamline its development. [...] Beginning next week, all Android development will occur within Google's internal branches, and the source code for changes will only be released when Google publishes a new branch containing those changes. As this is already the practice for most Android component changes, Google is simply consolidating its development efforts into a single branch. This change will have minimal impact on regular users. While it streamlines Android OS development for Google, potentially affecting the speed of new version development and bug reduction, the overall effect will likely be imperceptible. Therefore, don't expect this change to accelerate OS updates for your phone. This change will also have minimal impact on most developers. App developers are unaffected, as it pertains only to platform development. Platform developers, including those who build custom ROMs, will largely also see little change, since they typically base their work on specific tags or release branches, not the main AOSP branch. Similarly, companies that release forked AOSP products rarely use the main AOSP branch due to its inherent instability. External developers who enjoy reading or contributing to AOSP will likely be dismayed by this news, as it reduces their insight into Google's development efforts. Without a GMS license, contributing to Android OS development becomes more challenging, as the available code will consistently lag behind by weeks or months. This news will also make it more challenging for some developers to keep up with new Android platform changes, as they'll no longer be able to track changes in AOSP. For reporters, this change means less access to potentially revealing information, as AOSP patches often provide insights into Google's development plans. [...] Google will share more details about this change when it announces it later this week. If you're interested in learning more, be sure to keep an eye out for the announcement and new documentation on source.android.com. Android Authority's Mishaal Rahman says Google is "committed to publishing Android's source code, so this change doesn't mean that Android is becoming closed-source." "What will change is the frequency of public source code releases for specific Android components," says Rahman. "Some components like the build system, update engine, Bluetooth stack, Virtualization framework, and SELinux configuration are currently AOSP-first, meaning they're developed fully in public. Most Android components like the core OS framework are primarily developed internally, although some features, such as the unlocked-only storage area API, are still developed within AOSP."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

24 Mar 11:06

How a Japanese entrepreneur built Ethiopia’s fastest-growing EV maker

by Damilare Dosunmu
In energy-starved Ethiopia, where electricity reaches less than half of the population, a local startup’s unconventional bet on battery-powered motorcycles has hit the spot. In less than a year of...
23 Mar 13:29

'Wired' Drops Paywalls for Articles Based on Public Records Requests, Urges Other Sites to Follow

by EditorDavid
Wired's web site "is going to stop paywalling articles that are primarily based on public records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act," their global editorial director announced this week: They're called public records for a reason, after all. And access to public documents is more important than ever at this moment, with government websites and records disappearing... [S]ome may argue that, from a business standpoint, not charging for stories primarily relying on public records automatically means fewer subscriptions and therefore less revenue. We disagree. Sure, the FOIA process is time- and labor-intensive. Reporters face stonewalling, baseless denials, lengthy appeals processes, and countless other obstacles and delays. Investigative reports based on public records are among the most expensive stories to produce and share with the public... But while some readers might not subscribe to outlets that give away some of their best journalism for free, it's just as possible that readers will recognize this sacrifice and reward these outlets with more traffic and subscriptions in the long run... We hope others will follow Wired's lead (and shoutout to outlets like 404 Media that also make their FOIA-based reporting available for free). We also hope those who stand to benefit from these outlets' leadership (that's you, reader) will do their part and subscribe if you can afford it. They're not asking for an arm and a leg... The Fourth Estate needs to step up and invest in serving the public during these unprecedented times. And the public needs to return the favor and support quality journalism, so that hopefully one day we can do away with those annoying paywalls altogether.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

18 Mar 12:51

Is Security Human Factors Research Skewed Towards Western Ideas and Habits?

by Bruce Schneier

Really interesting research: “How WEIRD is Usable Privacy and Security Research?” by Ayako A. Hasegawa Daisuke Inoue, and Mitsuaki Akiyama:

Abstract: In human factor fields such as human-computer interaction (HCI) and psychology, researchers have been concerned that participants mostly come from WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic) countries. This WEIRD skew may hinder understanding of diverse populations and their cultural differences. The usable privacy and security (UPS) field has inherited many research methodologies from research on human factor fields. We conducted a literature review to understand the extent to which participant samples in UPS papers were from WEIRD countries and the characteristics of the methodologies and research topics in each user study recruiting Western or non-Western participants. We found that the skew toward WEIRD countries in UPS is greater than that in HCI. Geographic and linguistic barriers in the study methods and recruitment methods may cause researchers to conduct user studies locally. In addition, many papers did not report participant demographics, which could hinder the replication of the reported studies, leading to low reproducibility. To improve geographic diversity, we provide the suggestions including facilitate replication studies, address geographic and linguistic issues of study/recruitment methods, and facilitate research on the topics for non-WEIRD populations.

The moral may be that human factors and usability needs to be localized.

27 Feb 22:55

Four classic Command & Conquer titles are now open source

by Alice Jovanée

In an uncharacteristically charitable move, EA has just made the source code for four of its legacy Command & Conquer titles freely available to the public under the GPL license. This includes the restored original source code for both Command & Conquer and Red Alert, as well as the SAGE-powered Command & Conquer: Renegade and Command & Conquer: Generals. While fan projects like OpenRA and OpenSAGE have produced their own approximations of the code that powered these titles, having free versions of the original code to work with is a huge benefit to video game preservation and future developers.

A screenshot from Command & Conquer: Generals

Recovering and restoring the source code for these titles was made possible through the combined efforts of EA technical director Brian Barnes, Respawn producer Jim Vessella, and Luke Feenan, a long-standing member of the C&C community who was involved in the development of the Command & Conquer Remastered Collection in 2020 and bringing the C&C Ultimate Collection to Steam last March.

In addition to the source code for its legacy titles, EA is bringing Steam Workshop support to its more contemporary Command & Conquer titles, complete with a modding support pack. This collection of assets contains the source XML, Schema, Script, Shader, and map files for all of the C&C titles that use the SAGE engine:

  • C&C Renegade
  • C&C Generals & Zero Hour
  • C&C 3 Tiberium Wars and Kane’s Wrath
  • C&C Red Alert 3 & Uprising
  • C&C 4 Tiberian Twilight

These modding tools will let users make new maps and assets along with more fundamental changes to these older titles, such as potentially adding support for higher refresh rates or ultrawide resolutions. Features that currently need to be shoehorned in with tools like Sage Meta.

Finally, to cap off this announcement, EA released a 35-minute video containing alpha gameplay and previously unused archival footage from Command & Conquer: Generals and Renegade (below).

A still from alpha gameplay footage for Command & Conquer: Renegade

While I’m not holding my breath for a new Command & Conquer title to appear any time soon, hopefully, making these assets and tools available will inspire the development of some new RTS titles in the grand tradition of the classics.

16 Jan 14:15

Sexually dimorphic dopaminergic circuits determine sex preference

by Anqi Wei, Anran Zhao, Chaowen Zheng, Nan Dong, Xu Cheng, Xueting Duan, Shuaijie Zhong, Xiaoying Liu, Jie Jian, Yuhao Qin, Yuxin Yang, Yuhao Gu, Bianbian Wang, Niki Gooya, Jingxiao Huo, Jingyu Yao, Weiwei Li, Kai Huang, Haiyao Liu, Fenghan Mao, Ruolin Wang, Mingjie Shao, Botao Wang, Yichi Zhang, Yang Chen, Qian Song, Rong Huang, Qiumin Qu, Chunxiang Zhang, Xinjiang Kang, Huadong Xu, Changhe Wang
Maxim Bange

"[..]
Our study thus introduces a neural mechanism for understanding how social decisions can be convergently determined by the balance between innate requirements and external survival threats."
(proven for mice in certain conditions so far, very interesting)

Science, Volume 387, Issue 6730, January 2025.
15 Jan 23:01

Eerste overwinning in collectieve actie tegen Google

De rechtbank Amsterdam heeft de Stichting Bescherming Privacybelangen (SBP) ontvankelijk verklaard in de collectieve rechtszaak tegen Google over grootschalige privacyschendingen. Dat betekent dat de stichting, gesteund door de Consumentenbond, de belangen van Nederlandse Google-gebruikers mag behartigen. Alle bezwaren daartegen van Google zijn afgewezen. Dit is een belangrijke eerste stap in de collectieve actie tegen Google.

11 Jan 14:28

Wikipedia Searches Reveal Differing Styles of Curiosity

by BeauHD
Wikipedia's massive dataset helped researchers identify three styles of curiosity -- "busybody," "hunter," and "dancer" -- based on how users navigate its pages (see: wiki rabbit hole). These curiosity styles reflect broader social trends and highlight curiosity's role in connecting information rather than merely acquiring it. Scientific American reports: In this lexicon, a busybody traces a zigzagging route through many often distantly related topics. A hunter, in contrast, searches with sustained focus, moving among a relatively small number of closely related articles. A dancer links together highly disparate topics to try to synthesize new ideas. "Curiosity actually works by connecting pieces of information, not just acquiring them," says University of Pennsylvania network scientist Dani Bassett, cosenior author on a recent study of these curiosity types in Science Advances. "It's not as if we go through the world and pick up a piece of information and put it in our pockets like a stone. Instead we gather information and connect it to stuff that we already know." The team tracked more than 482,000 people using Wikipedia's mobile app in 50 countries or territories and 14 languages. The researchers charted these users' paths using "knowledge networks" of connected information, which depict how closely one search topic (a node in the network) is related to another. Beyond just mapping the connections, they linked curiosity styles to location-based indicators of well-being, inequality, and other measures. In countries with higher education levels and greater gender equality, people browsed more like busybodies. In countries with lower scores on these variables, people browsed like hunters. Bassett hypothesizes that "in countries that have more structures of oppression or patriarchal forces, there may be a constraining of knowledge production that pushes people more toward this hyperfocus." The researchers also analyzed topics of interest, ranging from physics to visual arts, for busybodies compared with hunters (graphic). Dancer patterns, more recently confirmed, were excluded. Editor note: This article was published on December 24, 2024, based on a study published in October, 2024.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

10 Jan 01:00

Nvidia CEO: Quantum Computers Won't Be Very Useful for Another 20 Years

by BeauHD
Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang said quantum computers won't be very useful for another 20 years, causing stocks in this emerging sector to plunge more than 40% for a total market value loss of over $8 billion. "If you kind of said 15 years for very useful quantum computers, that'd probably be on the early side. If you said 30, is probably on the late side. But if you picked 20, I think a whole bunch of us would believe it," Huang said during a Q&A with analysts. PCMag reports: The field of quantum computing hasn't gotten nearly as much hype as generative AI and the tech giants promoting it in the past few years. Right now, part of the reason quantum computers aren't currently that helpful is because of their error rates. Nord Quantique CEO Julien Lemyre previously told PCMag that quantum error correction is the future of the field, and his firm is working on a solution. The errors that qubits, the basic unit of information in a quantum machine, currently make result in quantum computers being largely unhelpful. It's an essential hurdle to overcomeâ"but we don't currently know if or when quantum errors will be eliminated. Chris Erven, CEO and co-founder of Kets Quantum, believes quantum computers will eventually pose a significant threat to cybersecurity. "China is making some of the largest investments in quantum computing, pumping in billions of dollars into research and development in the hope of being the first to create a large-scale, cryptographically relevant machine," Erven tells PCMag in a statement. "Although they may be a few years away from being fully operational, we know a quantum computer will be capable of breaking all traditional cyber defenses we currently use. So they, and others, are actively harvesting now, to decrypt later." "The 15 to 20-year timeline seems very realistic," said Ivana Delevska, investment chief of Spear Invest, which holds Rigetti and IonQ shares in an actively managed ETF. "That is roughly what it took Nvidia to develop accelerated computing."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

27 Nov 11:05

'Enshittification' Is Officially the Biggest Word of the Year

by BeauHD
The Macquarie Dictionary, the national dictionary of Australia, has picked "enshittification" as its word of the year. Gizmodo reports: The Australians define the word as "the gradual deterioration of a service or product brought about by a reduction in the quality of service provided, especially of an online platform, and as a consequence of profit-seeking." We've all felt this. Google search is filled with garbage. The internet is clogged with SEO-farming websites that clog up results. Facebook is an endless stream of AI-generated slop. Zoom wants you to test out its new AI features while you're trying to go into a meeting. Twitter has become X, and its owner thinks sharing links is a waste of time. Last night I reinstalled Windows 11 on a desktop machine and got pissed as it was finalized and Microsoft kept trying to get me to install OneDrive, Office 360, Call of Duty Black Ops 6, and a bunch of other shit I didn't want. Writer and activist Cory Doctorow coined the term enshittification in 2022, and recently offered potential solutions to the age-old phenomenon in an interview with The Register. "We need to have prohibition and regulation that prohibits the capital markets from funding predatory pricing," he explained. "It's very hard to enter the market when people are selling things below cost. We need to prohibit predatory acquisitions. Look at Facebook: buying Instagram, and Mark Zuckerberg sending an email saying we're buying Instagram because people don't like Facebook and they're moving to Instagram, and we just don't want them to have anywhere else to go."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

29 Oct 18:26

Linus Torvalds Dismisses AI Industry as '90% Marketing'

by msmash
Linux creator Linus Torvalds has blasted the AI industry as "90% marketing and 10% reality" even as he acknowledged AI's transformative potential. Speaking to TFiR, Torvalds said he would "basically ignore" AI until the hype subsides, predicting meaningful applications would emerge in five years. The Finnish software pioneer singled out ChatGPT and graphic design as current practical use cases. His criticism follows Baidu CEO's recent warning of an impending AI bubble burst, claiming only 1% of companies would survive the fallout. "I think AI is really interesting, and I think it is going to change the world. And, at the same time, I hate the hype cycle so much that I really don't want to go there," Torvalds said.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

15 Oct 18:01

Perfectl Malware

by Bruce Schneier

Perfectl in an impressive piece of malware:

The malware has been circulating since at least 2021. It gets installed by exploiting more than 20,000 common misconfigurations, a capability that may make millions of machines connected to the Internet potential targets, researchers from Aqua Security said. It can also exploit CVE-2023-33246, a vulnerability with a severity rating of 10 out of 10 that was patched last year in Apache RocketMQ, a messaging and streaming platform that’s found on many Linux machines.

The researchers are calling the malware Perfctl, the name of a malicious component that surreptitiously mines cryptocurrency. The unknown developers of the malware gave the process a name that combines the perf Linux monitoring tool and ctl, an abbreviation commonly used with command line tools. A signature characteristic of Perfctl is its use of process and file names that are identical or similar to those commonly found in Linux environments. The naming convention is one of the many ways the malware attempts to escape notice of infected users.

Perfctl further cloaks itself using a host of other tricks. One is that it installs many of its components as rootkits, a special class of malware that hides its presence from the operating system and administrative tools. Other stealth mechanisms include:

  • Stopping activities that are easy to detect when a new user logs in
  • Using a Unix socket over TOR for external communications
  • Deleting its installation binary after execution and running as a background service thereafter
  • Manipulating the Linux process pcap_loop through a technique known as hooking to prevent admin tools from recording the malicious traffic
  • Suppressing mesg errors to avoid any visible warnings during execution.

The malware is designed to ensure persistence, meaning the ability to remain on the infected machine after reboots or attempts to delete core components. Two such techniques are (1) modifying the ~/.profile script, which sets up the environment during user login so the malware loads ahead of legitimate workloads expected to run on the server and (2) copying itself from memory to multiple disk locations. The hooking of pcap_loop can also provide persistence by allowing malicious activities to continue even after primary payloads are detected and removed.

Besides using the machine resources to mine cryptocurrency, Perfctl also turns the machine into a profit-making proxy that paying customers use to relay their Internet traffic. Aqua Security researchers have also observed the malware serving as a backdoor to install other families of malware.

Something this complex and impressive implies that a government is behind this. North Korea is the government we know that hacks cryptocurrency in order to fund its operations. But this feels too complex for that. I have no idea how to attribute this.

07 Oct 21:18

Why Trump’s tariffs would hit poor and middle-class Americans hardest

by Chris Matthews
A new report estimates middle-class families would pay an extra $3,370 per year for imported goods.
03 Oct 20:39

Mystery creator of Bitcoin identified, new HBO documentary claims

by Izabella Kaminska

LONDON — A new HBO documentary claims to have cracked the true identity of the pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto. 

If its findings are widely accepted, the disclosure could send shockwaves through world financial markets and even the U.S. presidential election, given the way Republican candidate and former President Donald Trump has cultivated the support of Bitcoin enthusiasts.

The documentary is the latest work of Emmy-nominated Cullen Hoback, who drew critical acclaim for his series “Q: Into the Storm” that exposed the authors of the QAnon conspiracy theory. The big reveal is set to air next Wednesday at 2 a.m. CET (Tuesday at 9 p.m. EST).

Bitcoin has become the financial phenomenon of the internet age. Since its creation in 2009, the censorship-resistant cryptocurrency, which exists on a decentralized ledger called the blockchain, has become a store of value for those convinced that traditional money is being systematically debased; a vehicle of speculation for those who feel excluded from regular financial markets; and, critically, a popular means of payment for illegal products and services, such as narcotics, cyber-fraud and contract killings.

Supported by vocal advocates like Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, it has grown into a trillion-dollar asset class, acquiring such scale that even central banks have had to address it as a potential challenger to their own systems.

As such, the exposure of Satoshi as its alleged creator threatens to raise some huge questions, not least his potential complicity in crimes that have featured Bitcoin use. It could also establish him as one of the world’s richest people: Satoshi himself is estimated to control about 1.1 million Bitcoin, but it’s unclear if he still has access to the cryptographic keys to the fortune. If he did, this would put his net worth at $66 billion at current valuations.

Intriguingly, as the date for the airing of the documentary has drawn near, a number of high-value wallets from the “Satoshi era” have become active for the first time since 2009.

According to Bitcoin Magazine, around 250 bitcoins — worth approximately $15 million at Thursday’s bitcoin rate of $60,754 to the dollar — were drained from wallets in the past two weeks. While the coins are not officially linked to wallets used by Satoshi Nakamoto, they have been dormant since the earliest days of Bitcoin, when the cryptocurrency was worth almost nothing. The wallets’ creators would certainly have been Satoshi’s earliest collaborators.

Satoshi Nakamoto’s true identity remains one of the biggest mysteries of recent years. After publishing the Bitcoin white paper on Oct. 31, 2008, someone operating under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto — working mostly through message boards and email — helped the challenger system to achieve prominence by rallying support from a group of oddball cryptography and coding experts, loosely known as the cypherpunks.

In 2010, that same person disappeared from the scene, never to be heard of again. His last public communication was related to the whistleblower site Wikileaks. The message read: “WikiLeaks has kicked the hornet’s nest, and the swarm is headed towards us … I make this appeal to WikiLeaks not to try to use Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a small beta community in its infancy. You would not stand to get more than pocket change, and the heat you would bring would likely destroy us at this stage.”

In the years since, many have tried to crack the Satoshi riddle and failed — the first high-profile attempt being that of journalist Leah McGrath Goodman in 2014. She identified Japanese-American Dorian Nakamoto as a suspect, but he denied the assertion, while others in the community remained unconvinced by her reporting.

In 2016, Australian cryptographer Craig Steven Wright stepped forward to claim the title, having been reluctantly doxxed as Satoshi in documents leaked to the press the year before. | Daniel Leal/AFP via Getty Images

In 2016, Australian cryptographer Craig Steven Wright stepped forward to claim the title, having been reluctantly doxxed as Satoshi in documents leaked to the press the year before. Despite being endorsed by some high-profile early community members, his campaign to convince the world he was the creator of Bitcoin was torpedoed at the last minute when he inexplicably failed to provide his promised proof. His aggressive pursuit of anyone who questioned him with lawsuits also added doubt to the claims.

Subsequent trials completed Wright’s undoing. In March this year a British High Court judge ruled that Wright was not Satoshi Nakamoto. The self-declared savant — who had been bankrolled in his cases by gambling tycoon Calvin Ayre — is now facing perjury charges.

The unusual suspects

Among those most commonly suspected to be Satoshi are the late software engineer Hal Finney, systems engineer Dorian Nakamoto, computer scientist Nick Szabo and Hashcash inventor Adam Back.

But many in the Bitcoin community reject attempts to identify Satoshi, arguing the importance of his right to privacy. They argue that without associated proof — critically, the transfer of coins from a known Satoshi wallet — all claims are merely speculative.

“For years, there’s been endless speculation about the true identity of Satoshi Nakamoto, both in print and in media,” said Peter McCormack, a Bitcoin podcaster who had been sued for questioning Craig Wright’s claims. “Yet, until someone signs the private keys linked to Satoshi’s addresses, all of this remains mere conjecture.

“Satoshi gave the world a profound gift in Bitcoin,” he continued, “but deliberately chose to remain anonymous — a decision that must be respected. Efforts to unmask them are not just irresponsible but potentially dangerous.”

27 Sep 16:33

NIST Recommends Some Common-Sense Password Rules

by Bruce Schneier

NIST’s second draft of its “SP 800-63-4“—its digital identify guidelines—finally contains some really good rules about passwords:

The following requirements apply to passwords:

  1. lVerifiers and CSPs SHALL require passwords to be a minimum of eight characters in length and SHOULD require passwords to be a minimum of 15 characters in length.
  2. Verifiers and CSPs SHOULD permit a maximum password length of at least 64 characters.
  3. Verifiers and CSPs SHOULD accept all printing ASCII [RFC20] characters and the space character in passwords.
  4. Verifiers and CSPs SHOULD accept Unicode [ISO/ISC 10646] characters in passwords. Each Unicode code point SHALL be counted as a signgle character when evaluating password length.
  5. Verifiers and CSPs SHALL NOT impose other composition rules (e.g., requiring mixtures of different character types) for passwords.
  6. Verifiers and CSPs SHALL NOT require users to change passwords periodically. However, verifiers SHALL force a change if there is evidence of compromise of the authenticator.
  7. Verifiers and CSPs SHALL NOT permit the subscriber to store a hint that is accessible to an unauthenticated claimant.
  8. Verifiers and CSPs SHALL NOT prompt subscribers to use knowledge-based authentication (KBA) (e.g., “What was the name of your first pet?”) or security questions when choosing passwords.
  9. Verifiers SHALL verify the entire submitted password (i.e., not truncate it).

Hooray.

News article.Shashdot thread.

27 Sep 09:16

Banken leveren privacy klanten over aan techreus Google

Banken moeten garant staan voor de bescherming van persoonsgegevens van klanten die met hun mobiel betalen. De Consumentenbond roept de banken daartoe op, nu ook ING is overstapt op Google Pay. ‘Consumenten worden overgeleverd aan datagraaier Google.’

25 Sep 21:52

New Windows Malware Locks Computer in Kiosk Mode

by Bruce Schneier

Clever:

A malware campaign uses the unusual method of locking users in their browser’s kiosk mode to annoy them into entering their Google credentials, which are then stolen by information-stealing malware.

Specifically, the malware “locks” the user’s browser on Google’s login page with no obvious way to close the window, as the malware also blocks the “ESC” and “F11” keyboard keys. The goal is to frustrate the user enough that they enter and save their Google credentials in the browser to “unlock” the computer.

Once credentials are saved, the StealC information-stealing malware steals them from the credential store and sends them back to the attacker.

I’m sure this works often enough to be a useful ploy.

04 Sep 21:52

Admins Wonder If the Cloud Was Such a Good Idea After All

by msmash
After an initial euphoric rush to the cloud, admins are questioning the value and promise of the tech giant's services. The Register: According to a report published by UK cloud outfit Civo, more than a third of organizations surveyed reckoned that their move to the cloud had failed to live up to promises of cost-effectiveness. Over half reported a rise in their cloud bill. Although the survey, unsurprisingly, paints Civo in a flattering light, some of its figures may make uncomfortable reading for customers sold on the promises from hyperscalers. Like-for-like comparisons for a simple three-node cluster with 200 GB of persistent storage and a 5 TB data transfer showed prices going from $1,278.58 in 2022 to $1,458.68 in 2024 on Microsoft Azure. For Google, the price went from $1,107.61 to $1,250.35. According to Civo's figures, the cost at AWS increased from $1,142.46 to $1,234.59. "The Kubernetes prices were taken from the hyperscalers' very own pricing calculators," a Civo spokesperson told The Register. In the IT world, there is an expectation that bang for buck increases as time goes by, but in this example, prices are rising faster than the rate of inflation, and what customers receive for their money remains unchanged.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

30 Aug 13:10

AnandTech Shuts Down After 27-Year Run

by msmash
AnandTech, a pioneering technology news website, is shutting down after 27 years on August 30, 2024. Founded in 1997 by Anand Lal Shimpi, the site earned a reputation for its in-depth hardware reviews and technical analysis. In a final post on the site, AnandTech Editor-in-Chief Ryan Smith cited changing market dynamics for written tech journalism as the primary reason for closure. The site's 21,500 articles will remain accessible indefinitely, hosted by publisher Future PLC. AnandTech's forums will continue operating under Future's management.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

22 Aug 12:59

Has Nintendo just figured out how to shut down a live game in a good way?

by Oli Welsh

Another live-service game bites the dust. Nintendo has announced that it will end service for its free-to-play mobile game Animal Crossing: Pocket Camp on Nov. 28, after which the app, which has been running since 2017, will no longer function. It’s the latest casualty of Nintendo’s slow retreat from its ambitions to become a mobile gaming powerhouse.

But, for once, an “end is nigh” announcement isn’t the whole story. Fans of the cute life sim who’ve spent the past seven years tending to their campsites — and game historians worried about the future preservation of online games — can rest easy: Pocket Camp, and players’ save data, will live on in a new form.

Nintendo has said it will release a new, paid, offline version of the game that players will be able to transfer their save data to and play far into the future.

In an accompanying FAQ, Nintendo explained that the paid version of Pocket Camp will have the same “basic gameplay and controls” as the current game, but allow players to use all the included features for a one-time purchase fee. It will have no in-app purchases and won’t support the Pocket Camp Club subscription service or the Leaf Tickets microtransaction currency. It will work offline, but won’t have Pocket Camp’s online features, such as gifts and visiting other players’ campsites. Game saves will be transferred between the versions of the game by linking them via Nintendo Accounts.

Nintendo didn’t reveal how much the paid app will cost, but as long as the price is reasonable, it seems likely many Pocket Camp players will take advantage of the opportunity to keep playing, or just preserve their game saves. Perhaps the paid app might attract some new players who’d previously been turned off by Pocket Camp’s freemium model.

While many players expressed disappointment at the shutdown, many left appreciative replies under the post from the game’s official X account. “Most mobile games will come to an end eventually, this is just the best case scenario for such an event,” said one. “When Dragalia Lost was shut down and I lost EVERYTHING……..I was devastated. This deserves genuine respect because they don’t need to be doing this,” posted another.

Nintendo’s Pocket Camp shutdown strategy wouldn’t work for every online game; like other Animal Crossing titles, Pocket Camp has social features but is centered on solo gameplay, and players will still be able to enjoy their collections in an offline context. Still, it’s heartening to see a developer pull the plug on one of their games in a way that respects both their own creation and players’ investment in it. Hopefully others will take note.

21 Aug 19:52

Google can’t defend shady Chrome data hoarding as “browser agnostic,” court says

by Ashley Belanger
Google can’t defend shady Chrome data hoarding as “browser agnostic,” court says

Enlarge (credit: Thomas Trutschel / Contributor | Photothek)

Chrome users who declined to sync their Google accounts with their browsing data secured a big privacy win this week after previously losing a proposed class action claiming that Google secretly collected personal data without consent from over 100 million Chrome users who opted out of syncing.

On Tuesday, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the prior court's finding that Google had properly gained consent for the contested data collection.

The appeals court said that the US district court had erred in ruling that Google's general privacy policies secured consent for the data collection. The district court failed to consider conflicts with Google's Chrome Privacy Notice (CPN), which said that users' "choice not to sync Chrome with their Google accounts meant that certain personal information would not be collected and used by Google," the appeals court ruled.

Read 24 remaining paragraphs | Comments

30 Jul 11:09

One Question Stopped a Deepfake Scam Attempt At Ferrari

by BeauHD
"Deepfake scams are becoming more prolific and their quality will only improve over time," writes longtime Slashdot reader smooth wombat. "However, one question can stop them dead in their tracks. Such was the case with Ferrari earlier this month when a suspicious executive saved the company from being the latest victim." From a report: It all began with a series of WhatsApp messages from someone posing as Ferrari's CEO [Benedetto Vigna]. The messages, seeking urgent help with a supposed classified acquisition, came from a different number but featured a profile picture of Vigna standing in front of the Ferrari emblem. As reported by Bloomberg, one of the messages read: "Hey, did you hear about the big acquisition we're planning? I could need your help." The scammer continued, "Be ready to sign the Non-Disclosure Agreement our lawyer will send you ASAP." The message concluded with a sense of urgency: "Italy's market regulator and Milan stock exchange have already been informed. Maintain utmost discretion." Following the text messages, the executive received a phone call featuring a convincing impersonation of Vigna's voice, complete with the CEO's signature southern Italian accent. The caller claimed to be using a different number due to the sensitive nature of the matter and then requested the executive execute an "unspecified currency hedge transaction." The oddball money request, coupled with some "slight mechanical intonations" during the call, raised red flags for the Ferrari executive. He retorted, "Sorry, Benedetto, but I need to verify your identity," and quizzed the CEO on a book he had recommended days earlier. Unsurprisingly, the impersonator flubbed the answer and ended the call in a hurry.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

13 Apr 18:29

Stichting ActivityClub

by Ton Zijlstra

Gisteren is de Stichting ActivityClub opgericht en ingeschreven. De stichting vormt het onderdak voor mastodon.nl. Maar het doel van de stichting is breder: “het duurzaam stimuleren, ontwikkelen en onderhouden van de organisatorische en technische aspecten van publieke (sociale) netwerken gebaseerd op onder andere het ActivityPub-protocol, zoals Mastodon, Pixelfed en PeerTube, in het Nederlands taalgebied

Als onderdak voor mastodon.nl kunnen donaties voor het onderhoud van mastodon.nl aan de stichting worden overgemaakt, in plaats zoals tot nu toe aan een privérekening. En voor plannen om ook andere ActivityPub toepassingen aan te bieden is nu ook plek.

Zodat er voor het publiek bruikbare sociale platformen zijn die ook op een publiek controleerbare manier worden onderhouden.

Samen met Eelco Maljaars (voorzitter) en Mike Dell (secretaris) vorm ik (penningmeester) het oprichtingsbestuur. De stichting is uiteraard non-profit, en bestuurders kunnen niet worden betaald.


machine translation into English
01 Mar 18:04

Nvidia is the ‘GPU cartel,’ says former AMD Radeon manager

by Digitaltrends

A hand holding the RTX 4090 GPU.Jacob Roach / Digital Trends

AMD’s former senior vice president and general manager of Radeon has come out with some strong words against Nvidia. Scott Herkelman called Nvidia “the GPU cartel” in response to a story from the Wall Street Journal in which Nvidia’s customers claim that it delays GPU shipments in retaliation for those customers shopping with other suppliers.

The accusation in question comes from Jonathan Ross, CEO of AI chip startup Groq, who said, “a lot of people that we meet with say that if Nvidia were to hear that we were meeting, they would disavow it. The problem is you have to pay Nvidia a year in advance, and you may get your hardware in a year, or it may take longer, and it’s, ‘Aw shucks, you’re buying from someone else, and I guess it’s going to take a little longer.’”

Recommended Videos

Herkelman responded to Tom’s Hardware’s coverage of the story on X (formerly Twitter), saying, “this happens more than you expect, Nvidia does this with DC customers, [manufacturers], [add-in board partners], press, and resellers.”

Related

  • Nvidia RTX 50-series graphics cards: news, release date, price, and more

  • How Intel could win the GPU war this year

  • Apparently, ants can eat your GPU now

This happens more than you expect, NVIDIA does this with DC customers, OEMs, AIBs, press, and resellers. They learned from GPP to not put it into writing. They just don't ship after a customer has ordered. They are the GPU cartel and they control all supply.

— Scott Herkelman (@sherkelman) February 27, 2024

This behavior calls back to the GeForce Partner Program (GPP), as pointed out by Herkelman. Nvidia has canceled the GPP following backlash over it allegedly requiring Nvidia’s partners to remove its gaming branding from all non-Nvidia GPUs. This isn’t the first time Herkelman has come out against the GPP. He released a statement in 2018 shortly after the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and European Union Commission began responding to complaints about the program.

“They learned from GPP to not put it into writing,” Herkelman continued. “They just don’t ship after a customer has ordered. They are the GPU cartel and they control all supply.”

Herkelman’s claim about restricting units from press is particularly interesting, as we know about a clear example of that happening in the past. In late 2020, Hardware Unboxed, a YouTube channel dedicated to PC hardware reviews and analysis, received an email that it would no longer receive review units from Nvidia. It stated: “Our Founders Edition boards and other Nvidia products are being allocated to media outlets that recognize the changing landscape of gaming and the features that are important to gamers and anyone buying a GPU today.”

Following pushback from larger YouTube channels like Linus Tech Tips and JayzTwoCents, Nvidia walked back its statement and issued an apology to Hardware Unboxed.

In Nvidia’s latest earnings called, CEO Jensen Huang said, “We allocate fairly. We do the best we can to allocate fairly, and to avoid allocating unnecessarily,” as reported by Fortune. We’ve reached out to Nvidia, and it declined to comment on the story.

The post Nvidia is the ‘GPU cartel,’ says former AMD Radeon manager appeared first on AIVAnet.