Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | subscribed's comments login

What. Even larping is not confusing. Are you claiming that actors in the film/ play actually are confused and they think they REALLY ARE the characters they play?

No, but actors don't decide what their characters do.

Also I don't claim larping is "confusing" to any extent, just that it would be relatively more confusing than DnD for people with a bad grasp on reality.


Anti-rollback is a security feature. I'm sorry you find yourself limited by Google - coming from the GrapheneOS user this is the only reasonable secure hardware platform of all the Android landscape.

I hope rooting will be easier for all the interested.


They are very visible to machines. Code linters would scream (and the alternating spaces and tabs would likely break generated Python code).

In rural areas you're always better off with gps+lte+LoRA tracker anyways.

Sure, weekends and holidays will do.

Maybe something else instead. e/os famously leaves the bootloader gaping open after the installation (looks like relocking is only supported on Fairphones), is very late to release anything (their most recent ROM is still based on AOSP 14!), inc.securty updates.

Doesn't sound like a serious project.


what else?

i'd rather have secure, stable and slow. i don't know about locking the bootloader (do you have a reference to that? i'd like to read up on it). but i don't care that their rom is always the most recent one.

what matters is that e/OS is the only rom i am aware of that combines usability with security. graphene OS doesn't count because it is only available on pixel phones and therefore very limited in applicability. others i don't know.


You can download several of his novels from his own website.

Yeah, for free.

And indeed, his style is like this. It's really hard to put the book down.


I think the Blindsight is the best sci-fi book for me. Absolutely gripping and novel.

And what I found particularly interesting, the afterword is about as interesting and engaging as the book.

It's such a gem of a book.


I agree. I read it twice, enjoyed it, and don't know why some people found it hard.

It never touched the sides.

PBS Space Time vibes

Never saw it!

But disabling updates on the system connected to the Internet is a terrible idea.

How do you update that afterwards?


I have yet to see concrete evidence that disabling Windows update and windows defender would elevate risk of having the system compromised in any meaningful way.

I installed Windows 10 2016 ltsc on a VM at the end of last year out of curiosity to test that. Disabled wupdate and defender before letting it access the internet so that it was basically 8 years behind on any updates. I tried browsing all kinds of sketchy sites with Firefox and chrome, clicking ads etc. but wasn't able to get the system infected.

I would guess that keeping your browser updated is more important.


Correct! The browser is now the key vector because it's the most promiscuous and lascivious-for-code-and-data software on most devices.

Browser-zero days are why I factored out a way to distribute "web RPA agent creation" on any device, with no download - into its own product layer for browser-isolation. It's a legitimate defense layer but main barriers to adoption are operating friction, even tho it makes the task of hackers who want to compromise your network with browser 0-days much harder.

Because of that the RBI aspect is not as popular as ways its being used where you need a really locked down browser, with policies for preventing upload/download, even copy and paste, etc - for DLP (data loss prevention), for regulated enterprises.

Even so I think the potential applications of this tech layer are just starting.


Just the other day I went to a website to flash a new firmware on a zigbee dongle. Straight from a chrome tab. wild!

Then it hit me: the only thing keeping a rogue website from sweeping your entire life is a browser's permissions popup.


Crazy right? On the whole I think it’s great and wonderful that the web platform has grown into the gorgeous monster that it is. I mean what better than a unified technology to serve us all the worlds information from any device in a basically sandboxed environment. I’m even all for the beautiful way The platform has developed rapidly added capabilities on how the language JavaScript HTMLNCSS has evolved. I think all that is wonderful. And I really enjoyed the ride.

But all of that growth and integration comes with these vulnerabilities, and so the cyber and DLP control aspect of web browsers is a very important one.

If this resonates with you, i invite you to check out my company’s project BrowserBox on GitHub


> I have yet to see concrete evidence that disabling Windows update and windows defender would elevate risk of having the system compromised in any meaningful way.

It’s much less likely than it was 20 years ago. A lot of attack vectors have already been fixed. But hypothetically a bug in the network stack could still leave an internet connected machine vulnerable.


Do not connect it directly - use a dedicated router device.

You benefit from the fact that most machines are patched. If a lot more people used 2016 builds and didn’t patch you’d see a lot more exploits.

I use stock Win7 SP1 with just a couple updates (recently TLS and SHA-512, but only 27 hotfixes in total) and the only way to break something is if I deliberately run unverified executables that were manually downloaded from untrusted sources. And since I don't do this - my machine is still running the same installation that I did on December 24th 2014.


> browsing all kinds of sketchy sites with Firefox and chrome

How did you install those - downloaded via another system? Because with that old system, you are missing ssl certificates (Firefox and Chrome bring their own).


Maybe, but with good old Windows PKI you’re bound to still have a working chain of trust with Mozilla/Google.

…either that or the machine cheated and updated root CAs in the background (which isn’t Windows Update-controlled anymore).


How do you know your system weren't infected in that experiment?

By reinstating the ownership of those files.

Since the rest of the world updates their PC's, malware authors rarely focus on exploiting older versions.

Both Chrome and Windows are now in that position.

Basically, unless you are of interest to state level attackers, in 2025 even unpatched Chrome/Windows wont get drive by exploited.


Path traversal attacks against IIS (or any web server) are still routine yet those were fixed back in the Win 2K days.

Your thought process is not correct.


That seems like pretty sketchy reasoning.

Like leaving your door unlocked, because you live in such a sketchy neighbourhood that everyone else always locks their doors.


It would make sense if the cost/danger for the thieves to check every door would be prohibitive. Unfortunately, with networked computers, checking the doors is usually both riskless and effectively free.

And turning off your old door checker, just because someone fixed the vulnerability in the latest version, is probably more hassle than it's worth.

More like, continue living in a sketchy neighbourhood because all the thieves go to the newer, more polished neighbourhoods anyway.

There are still active attacks against DOS and Win98. Automated driveby attacks, just looking to increase the size of a bot farm. There are still new exploits being released against rather old systems.

Now I'm curious, how do you attack DOS? I mean, it comes without networking support, and if you have local access, you're already privileged.

You attack the networking stacks for it, those are still actively developed (mTCP was last updated Jan 2025) as businesses use networked DOS for quite a few things. A DOS networking stack consists of a packet driver, a NIC driver, and a protocol library. All of those have attack surface. NIC drivers in particular often haven't really had updates since they were first released. Because for hardware manufacturers of the time the goal was on getting people to use the hardware, not on supporting them. There are newer DOS NIC drivers than you'd think too. Realtek last I checked still makes and supports an ISA NIC.

So you are not talking about attacking old code at all, but networking stacks that are indeed actively developed? That feels like a very different ball game from attacking Win98, even if the platform they are running on top of is old.

It's a complicated space. There are attacks on both maintained and unmaintained stacks. There are definitely attacks against windows 95/98 too because people have things like mills or other industrial automation that are powered by those OSes still connected to the internet. There is a lot of SCADA[1] too that fits that bill. It's easy to think "but why wasn't this replaced!" and the answer is almost always "cost or process certification". If the operator is lucky and has good networking folks all of this is in a very very well firewalled VLAN. But, never underestimate the amount of people that are not that savvy and just have it plugged into the internet.

For anyone saying these aren't targets, no they are probably already hacked. These are the things that keep the national security folks up at night knowing an adversary has them already backdoored and set up for take down. Moreover if they execute on that they would go for maximum damage first to either create chaos, or prevent the system from being repaired easily.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCADA#Security


Would suck if an exploit was present for years, sometimes decades. Would especially suck if people piled up old exploits and fell back on them as needed.

Imagine if this was all automated, even scripted, so even kiddies could do it, or others with almost zero security knowledge.

I'd really, really like to think most of us don't follow this terrible security practice based on a bad premise.


Actually riddle me this: what if you want to exploit exactly the type of person to disable updates? They are potentially more lucrative targets if nobody else targets them. Just a thought. It's sort of how "delete me" services profit off paranoia, they're a lucrative market because of the paranoia.

Everything was a zero-day at one point in time. The effort is indeed usually put in whilst it is the current version. But retying all old malware isn't effort; it is more or less the definition of script-kiddy (though state level attackers will do it too).

Those of us who actually do this stuff for a living still routinely see probes for Slammer, Zotob, Blaster and more from when we booted our computers by rubbing two sticks together.

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

Search: