Re:Garak, LLM Vulnerability Scanner
by cess11 on Sunday November 17, 2024 @01:01PM
(#42165681)
Avast, Kaspersky and so on sell trojans that compete against other, free, as in gratis, trojans in userspace. They have next to no interest in security as such beyond that scope.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Can you show data about Avast being comparable to a trojan?
Disclosure, worked there 15 years ago.
https://www.theverge.com/2024/2/22/24080135/avast-security-p...
I think you can find more stuff like this through your own digging.
Not what I'd consider a trojan, but I agree that it's bad - so alright, point taken.
(In my dictionary, trojan allows remote control. Maybe I'm just old.)
In my dictionary, a trojan is any malicious software that is hidden inside useful software, no matter what it does.
Typically they do, the infrastructure is there with automatic updates and C&C-like abilities. The driver runs close to the kernel to be able to use hooks into files closing and so on, at least on MICROS~1 operating systems.
Did the Crowdstrike thing earlier this year reach you? They sell a corporate version of this kind of trojan, and did a fuckup in an update, suddenly making a lot of people realise that someone else has control over their computers.
I read the original comment as hyperbole. But can see why it was confusing.
Edit: that came out way more condescending than I intentended
I don't remember remote control being part of the Trojan Horse saga.
Re:Garak, LLM Vulnerability Scanner
by exploderate on Monday November 18, 2024 @05:24AM
(#42171202)
Sophos was the latest scandal. Though, it's unclear to me to which degree their antivirus tools helped to install the malware. Maybe it was just the target selection from telemetry data. Maybe they used it to deploy the "kernel implant"?
https://www.heise.de/en/opinion/Analysis-and-opinion-Sophos-...