GCHQ's Boiling Frogs paper on software development

Re:GCHQ's Boiling Frogs paper on software development by linuxlizard on Monday May 16, 2016 @09:17AM (#11706035)

(In case folks don't know, PNG better for text because JPG's compression introduces "ringing" artifacts around sharp edges, such as the black/white transition of text.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ringing_artifacts

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:GCHQ's Boiling Frogs paper on software development by xrorre on Monday May 16, 2016 @10:22AM (#11706421)

JPGs are also a lot safer as PDFs can ping remote resources using carefully hidden beacon images.

Although that said, I sometimes use this to see who opened my files. I once left hundreds of these on a very popular cloud hosting provider (not naming names), and somebody working there was stupid to open the PDF on a machine connected to the internet, thereby proving abuse by employees and proving any random stranger can access 'your' files in the so called 'cloud'.

Look up 'honeydocs'. Some interesting articles about this technique

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:GCHQ's Boiling Frogs paper on software development by DarkLinkXXXX on Monday May 16, 2016 @11:20AM (#11706859)

Is that effective for non-adobe pdf viewers? What about the ones that disable javascript?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:GCHQ's Boiling Frogs paper on software development by nexar on Tuesday May 17, 2016 @10:51AM (#11714109)

Look into canarytokens. Plenty of file types that do not rely on JavaScript nor macros etc

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:GCHQ's Boiling Frogs paper on software development by MichaelGG on Monday May 16, 2016 @01:48PM (#11708077)

Maybe it was an indexer that for whatever reason runs the full PDF handling code?

[ Parent | on HN ]