Magicstatic
Link to researcher writeup: https://www.paradigm.xyz/2021/08/two-rights-might-make-a-wro...
Security researcher receives $1M bug bounty for saving company from $350M bug
And he will be just as happy (if not happier) as any of us reading this article.
>If your client sincerely fears that this depiction is too realistic to be perceived as parody, Krazam’s video should be the least of its reputational concerns.
Followed by screenshots from the video showing the DocuSign "Docustage" and Meme Center (Sponsored by GE). At the end of the video itself, the Coachella participant is banned from the event because their "vibes are not compliant with the Coachella policy".
Glad EFF stepped in here to protect small creators such as this one.
EFF's reply to cease-&-desist letter – “Virtual Coachella” parody video
The reality is that phone number lookup services are available all over the web which provide even more information (first+last name, address, zip code, social media profile links, etc etc etc) for free (https://www.bestfreephonelookup.com/phone-number/ as an example) - these services get their info from data aggregators and usually - your carrier! I don't see how Facebook exposing (in _limited_, very specific circumstances) the first name of a persons phone number being a security issue.
All the people in this thread screaming GDPR violation don't understand that if someone decides to stop using Facebook and delete their account, this method to lookup someone will not work. Sidenote: If you're really paranoid about having your phone number expose your real name when you're using any type of service online, just sign up for a Google Voice (voice.google.com) account and link it to your cell phone - I use this whenever I sign up for anything online and it saves me a ton of spam and scam calls.
EDIT: Facebook removed the ability to use the in-app search box in Facebook to find people based on just a phone number, this has been removed for at least 2 years.
City of Tucson, AZ invites remote workers with over $7,500 in benefits
- This isn’t even necessarily a hack. At best, this is a mild inconvenience to the user accounts that you are locking out, on what appears to be a legacy system, due to a quasi-brute force.
- You are “hacking” this company, without their permission, because you want “payback” that Amazon didn’t hire you for what you perceive to be a racially opinionated interviewer. Despite whether this theory (yes, it is purely speculation) is true or not, I would imagine this is HR 101 and a company as large as Amazon would go to great lengths to ensure that this is not the case.
- Your sense of entitlement goes even further, despite having illegally “hacked” a company, after all of this you expect a payment from them?
If anything, this post reaffirms that they made the right decision in not hiring you for the role you were being considered for, and guarantees that you won’t have an opportunity to interview again.
Gmail conversation between Steve Chen and an early YouTube user (2005)
Ethical hacker makes $120k USD in one week hacking EOS smart contracts
Abusing Internal API to Achieve IDOR in New Relic
This is incredible.
HackerOne passes $18M in bounties paid out to hackers
Google Widevine DRM 2017 Architecture Overview [pdf]
(SFW) Penetrating Pornhub – Hacking PornHub for $$$ and Tshirts
Bypassing Apple's iOS 10 Parental Restrictions – Twice
How does one politely decline a handshake due to religious reasons?
Not in the market to domain squat... gotta put them to use somehow.