- cross-posted to:
- technology@beehaw.org
- cross-posted to:
- technology@beehaw.org
You must log in or # to comment.
The only way to fix this is to have us upload our IDs online constantly, perhaps to prove we are adults.
It is the only way we can we safe.
But, just think about the children! ~While everyone plastered their children allover social media and they are easily identified with AI~
Woaha. Why didn’t anyone think of this before you?
I bought a domain, configured the webserver in the next 5m.
As soon as it started taking requests (on a domain that i haven’t even announced yet) it got flooded by bots.
Yeah I worked for company with publicly exposed server, the logs were amazing.
Just bots scanning default ports trying default username and password for services like Microsoft SQL server.
It’s such a waste of energy really
That’s been happening since forever, though. I helped manage proxy servers for my first job in the mid 00’s, and those server logs were mostly automated port scans and failed login attempts, even on the newly commissioned servers.
If your browser is based on chromium, you’re employing an army of bots yourself that gets enabled each time you enter any domain.
Registering SSL is a centralized process with root CAs logging new ones as they come in. Cert transparency logs are a thing, and Google is very involved: https://certificate.transparency.dev/
Once a bad actor hooks up to that, they just get a realtime stream of places to start port scanning and running WHOIS queries for people who didn’t get WHOIS protection. If you used letsencrypt your domains you registered certs for got sent there and anyone who wanted to know about it knew about it before you could tell anyone.
You can use something like crt.sh to look up domains
Annnd this is why a refuse to verify with IDs online and use services like Plaid. And the web of T&C’s from multiple 3rd party services like this will mean all of them get shielded from blame.
Did you read the article? They were renting a car. A car rental place isn’t going to let you just not show your ID.
So how they did it once upon a time was you showed them your license, they punched the # into the system that would check it. The person at the desk would confirm it was you from the picture. No need to scan the actual ID card, which is where this problem comes from.
Yeah, it was from renting cars, but they are digital copies of your ID, so any online service is just as “at-risk”, if not more.
it wasn’t just Hertz. it was the ID verification service they used.
The IRS made me since I used a different service to file my takes this year. It was a pain in the ass. Apparently my existing id.me login wasn’t enough, they wanted a video call or a scan of my face. There was no other option. It was a pain.
they tried that with me. I just told em to fuck off.
if you make it impossible to identify myself through standard means, you don’t get my tax dollars. 🤷 fuck em.
I would have, but they owed me money, so I needed to get my money.
My elderly father recently fell for a Facebook imposter that pretended to be a family member and asked if their friend could contact him. The friend asked him to take a photo of his driver’s license and text it to them, fortunately he doesn’t know how. I’ve been wondering ever since what can they do if they had it? It doesn’t have his social security number on it. His credit has since been locked and banks notified
I’ve been wondering ever since what can they do if they had it?
Ask for pictures of all his other paperwork so they can finish onboarding him at his new job.
This is yet another reason why virtual ID cards are superior: In the event that the card data is compromised, the old virtual ID can be revoked and a new virtual ID can be issued. Virtual ID cards can also have a much shorter duration, because the cost of rotating it is minimal. For example, California’s virtual driver licenses rotate each 30 days.
We honestly should be using virtual vouchers for everything. The question then becomes “whats one level up from the voucher i can steal” and we’re very frustratingly (for my mental exercise) back at square 1
Wait until non Americans hear that our national social security ID number is only 4/9 digits worth of “random” numbers. (Fun fact, the entire number was procedurally generated based on where you were born and in what order at the hospital for generations until they changed it recently)
The numbers aren’t random. They are sequential. The early digits are assigned geographically, but the rest are in sequence. If you know a valid social security number, adding or subtracting 1 will be another valid social security number, most likely someone born in the same hospital on the same day.
They did change it somewhat recently, but they don’t re-assign the numbers when making that change, so most of the numbers are completely insecure.
Yeah, we know. We just can’t believe that you actually use it for anything important.
That stupid ass number is used as one of the identifying factors when financing anything. Yes, a house is bought and mortgaged with that number next to 2 other forms of ID lmao.
Just rented a car. Fuck.
Yeah, there’s like 150 million IDs and licenses. I guess the company that handles like every major businesses ID verification has online security designed by Grom. Should arrest the top 15 people hands down.
I’m literally picking one up in an hour 😬
I have had to rent cars since 2015. My license has probably been seen by 5000 breach sites by now.
At this rate, a new ID type will have to be used. I dont have a clue what, but a new one…
Welcome to Rent-a-car. Please sign into your vehicle with Facebook, Google or AppleID.
Most of this seems very serious and concerning, but…
Nexus also claimed to provide scans of marijuana dispensary cards
What could anyone possibly do with that? It costs like $50 to get one in California, not sure about other states.
The data gets sold in blocks usually. Could be for identity theft, or SIM swap attacks or any number of things. A lot of things online want an ID scan now, so this is a huge benefit to scammers.
I still have to see the online service or site asking for my ID. Maybe because I’m mostly off of the bullshit-net for the most part. But the moment any service I use asks for ID, it’s getting cancelled and blocked in my house at the network level. I’m expecting my digital life to be dramatically downsized moving forward.
Car rentals, well, not many options there when traveling, since I absolutely refuse to use ride-share apps like Uber and such.
Legal weed in CA now dawg. No dispensary card needed
Less taxes in most places if you have a med card. Financially sensible if you buy a certain amount per year.
But then there’s a record of you being a cannabis user, which could lead to your second amendment rights being curtailed.
There is a record, but there’s no central database unless you get an MMIC card which is different than what probably 99.9% of people do (but also larger tax benenfits)
Huh, I just assumed they got rid of them when legalization happened. TIL
Under 21 still requires a medical card
My first thought was “so this is how they got my fake from back in the day to scan”
Nineteen Brazilian Nationals Charged in Nationwide Conspiracy to Open Fraudulent Driver Accounts at Leading Rideshare and Delivery Service Companies
Where can I find this nexus?
Fortunately, Nexus went dark within hours of the KrebsOnSecurity scoop,
I don’t understand what is the point to upload all these IDs to dark web. Everything is traceable! Every transaction ect. If it would not be traceable many would just get another ID for identification on web or similar- like Sim card, because government is tracking everything, so they could track "Indiana Jones " and not me. Later just get another Sim with other iD. So, that data is available, I don’t think it’s possible to buy it without being connected to it.
I recommend listening to the podcast Darknet Diaries. It’s about sketchy things online, and very often has real accounts from real criminals talking about what they did and how they got caught.
Very often, people only get caught because 1) they get huge and greedy enough that many governments are actively trying to hunt them down, 2) they make a stupid mistake that tracks back to them personally.
There is no “the government can trace everything!” In reality, it’s more like “if someone does something egregious, a few people will spend months or years trying to find them. And maybe they’ll catch a lucky break.” Hacker OpSec is typically more than enough to frustrate the FBI for years. If they even care to look for attackers. The FBI can’t just show up in Romania and arrest people, either, so it takes international government cooperation. Which is slooooooow to move.
Do you think a Bulgarian cares if the US authorities tracks a transaction?
ever wonder how those food delivery app drivers seem to maybe be from another country and it’s questionable of whether or not they are working legally? there are a lot of fake driver accounts that use real drivers licenses and spoofed SSNs to create them.
Nineteen brazillian? Wow, that’s a lot.
Definitely more than a billion lol.
they did create thousands of fake accounts though and advertised heavily in Brasil, offering housing and vehicles to work using these accounts while securing huge referral bonuses from creating so many accounts once they hit a certain amount of deliveries.
I had roommates involved in that in the bay area at the time, they were making anywhere between 15-50k per month off of the referral bonuses doordash was offering at the time.
But don’t forget guys, uploading your government IDs to any old fucking website to prove your age is very safe and protects children. There’s no way this could go wrong and everyone in the supply chain is very trustworthy
The QR/one time code way makes a lot more sense and avoids this issue
No. Fuck off
They’re already doing the verification and it’s not going away. I definitely prefer a better way to do it
That “it’s not going away” attitude is the fucking problem…
We should fucking fight it, either by good or by bad, because that defeatism is what they want, they want us to think that TINA, then, little by little, force ourselves to do things that at first would seem unacceptable to us.
Yeah, it’s evil. We have to fight back
But in this case there’s already a lot worse system in place. Why not get a better system while also fighting the verification thing?
No, get rid of the bad system and be done with it. No compromise. This isn’t something that needs to exist at all.
I sincerely wish you luck in your endeavor, but I’m not very optimistic about it so in the meanwhile, better system would be better
Aren’t you tired begging for crumbs?
I want a ten course dinner with hookers and blow. Nothing less will do.
I mean I’d rather get crumbs than nothing? lol
Just seems pragmatic to me
The better system is no system
Wouldn’t that be the best system? This system is a lot better but better just means better than the other thing
You’re part of the problem.
For wanting a better system? lol
you are not fighting the verification thing, you are applauding it
I’m pretty indifferent to there being age gates. I hate the shitty implementation though, I’d never sent my id to random sites
That…doesn’t work. Just because you saw one dumb YouTuber say something doesn’t make it true.
I’m not sure if there’s some popular video you’re talking about but I’m talking about the EU ID proposal. Haven’t seen any videos about it
Have the app you use to verify scan it so it can sanitize it
Fuck all that noise.
How about we just don’t suck the dicks of authoritarian wannabe dipshits that have proven they can’t secure any information properly and can’t run any institution properly?
I don’t know exactly what you mean, I just think for age gating there’s ways that are a lot better
Like parents actually parenting and activating the built in restrictions for their children’s devices?
The whole credit card system worked until pron websites gave you stuff for free. The average kid couldn’t acquire a credit card without being caught.
It’s probably more effective done at the other end. It’s not like you can make parents parent
You actually can, it’s called regulations, policies and enforcement. Don’t vaccinate your crotch fruit? Cool, they can’t go to public school, and you just won a visit from child welfare
It’s not like we don’t have regulations, policies and (some) enforcement. But there’s still dogshit parents. And for this kind of thing, how would you even enforce it?
That’s the issue. We don’t need nanny’s to age gate us on the internet. All it does is create a very short path to removing anonymity on the internet
Don’t mind some age gating tbh. It would have to be pretty convenient and anonymous though.
How do you imagine it will be anonymous? Or convenient, for that matter.
Well the implementation is going to be that you prove your age to the id app that only saves the info that you’re over 18. Then the id app just tells that info to the website (or app or whatever I guess). So the site doesn’t know who is trying to prove their age or even what their age is, just that they’re over 18.
It would be nice to have that sort of quick and easy app for verifying your personal information too. I don’t think we have one where I live. We always use a bank for that and that’s more hassle than I’d like
Easy. You set the age in the os (or age range) per system account.
Apps can then request this and allow/ deny based on it. Requires admin / sudo to update age range.
No need for 3rd parties, id or anything else.
If parents are concerned about it they can implement it easily. If not, they can ignore it.
So lets just take kids off the internet. Sounds pretty great to me.
Man, that would be fun. Probably healthier for them too haha
Age gating is bad itself.
Should supermarkets just sell alcohol to 10 year olds?
I think there are plenty of places where age gating makes sense as a concept, it really is mainly the data security that’s an issue. The other is that it should be somewhat circumventable, which I think mainly requires it not being tied to identity (so much like you could get someone older to buy you alcohol you could get someone else to verify your age).
What I think is bad is age gating social media instead of doing something about how harmful it is because clearly adults are not immune and all that does is make it harder for children to get important information.
Yes, alcoholism is a huge problem is 10 year olds. We better focus on that instead of literal pedophiles on Roblox.
I’m not talking about that… I agree that you can’t sell alcohol, or cigars, or anything like tat, to children.
But there’s a difference between that and online content.
I didn’t said age gating was bad in alll contexts, but that age gating information, media and content is bad.
Eh I don’t mind. Not all stuff is for kids.
Yeah, that’s why you monitor what the kids you’re responsible for are doing on the internet. It’s trivial to setup parental controls on a network.
You should do that regardless tbh
Hell naw, that’s an arbitrary take. There’s no “child things” or “adult things”, nor “male things” or “female things”, just things, and the “male”/“female”/“child”/“adult” is an arbitary tag we put on them.
And even if there are some things that aren’t so good for the child to see, the only correct way to address that is educating them, guiding them, listening to them and, over all, treating them as humans, the “we need to block this to children” is totally adultist.
And even if there are some things that aren’t so good for the child to see
That’s what people mean by “not all stuff is for kids”
Maybe, but that doesn’t matter since automated age verification doesn’t work. Kids always figure out ways to bypass it, and it snares unlucky adults all the time.
We have carding, same issue with that but imo it’s alright
I think no ASL covers it for the Internet. Going against the most basic rule is kind of ridiculous.
If it’s going to be implemented imo it’s better to do with a privacy respecting centralized fashion than sending your id pics all over the place
You can’t violate and protect privacy at the same time.
You can protect the identity and all other info of the person than if they’re over 18 or not. I think that’s a lot better than the other ways sites are now using.
Unless you think it of just as bad because a site knowing if you’re 18+ is a violation of privacy, so might as well give them everything haha
Also it doesn’t help that, for example, at U-Haul, employees just use their personal phone to scan a QR code and take pictures of your ID.
this idea that employees can expect you own and use a personal smartphone as part of the job irks the heck out of me.
I read that if you use a personal device for anything work related in the US, it means your entire personal device (everything on it) can be considered discovery in a lawsuit against that company. Big risk to take.
most companies want you to put on this software than can wipe your device. its nuts.
My local hospital apparently requires their employees to use a “secure” app on their personal phone to transmit data on the patients.
Seems like irresponsible handling of PHI (by the administration, not the staff) to me.
Work in IT, alongside info security. Nah.
A secured app environment on a phone is plenty well secure for medical data. It is preferred strongly over a web based solution. Having a personal device running a company profile of security compliance monitoring and conditional access is as good as a company device provided by the hospital. They would do literally the same thing.
I think you’re making a lot of assumptions on how the setup is. It could be fine IF they configured everything correctly and are enforcing things on the work profile. Or, it could be terrible IF they just said “install this app, that’s it”.
Having a company provided device with poor guardrails would at least mean it’s not a device that the staff would do their personal stuff on, installing random apps. Having a company provided device with strong guardrails and fully locked down for this purpose would avoid most of the risk of an undiscovered vulnerability being abused. However well the work profile stuff is now separated in mobile OSs today, there can always be day 0s, and people will install any random apps on their phones or fall for plain social engineering.
Maybe technically right now they’re comparable for security, but their risk profile is different I think.
Imagine just targeting this place for phishing and creating a similar looking app with the same name, then sending fake communication to staff to say there is a new version and install it. They can just install it on their personal profile even if the work one doesn’t allow it and start putting data in it. In the case of a locked down work device they could just not install it. Also, there’s no reason for these devices to leave the grounds whereas personal devices will need to go out into the wild.
Maybe if you consider it a personal device if the staff has to relinquish all control of their entire personal device to the work provided security controls they can achieve a similar risk profile, but at that point it’s just a work device the staff had to pay for, not their personal device.
Sigh
Please show me your masters in computer science and your decade of working with the devices. No? Then let me help you out.
It could be fine IF they configured everything correctly and are enforcing things on the work profile. Or, it could be terrible IF they just said “install this app, that’s it”.
That is true of ANY solution. If they violate this, then they are federally liable. Nothing about who owns the device changes this so it is a non-starter.
Having a company provided device with poor guardrails would at least mean it’s not a device that the staff would do their personal stuff on, installing random apps.
First, applications concerning healthcare data are going to operate in both encryption at rest and encryption in flight. They will isolate all data flow to just that app and its external managed connections. So what other things you have on the device from an App Store are irrelevant.
Having a company provided device with strong guardrails and fully locked down for this purpose would avoid most of the risk of an undiscovered vulnerability being abused.
I don’t think you understand ANYTHING about how security profiles are loaded onto a device. I will keep this to an explain like I am 5 level. None of what you just said is true. It does not matter who owns the device. If they are using it , for work, and work manages conditional access policies on the device, with security policies loaded, it will enforce ALL of the same things for monitoring data flows inside apps relevant to the workplace. It will enforce OS versions or kick your ability to authenticate. There is NOTHING that device ownership will change. Repeating this makes it very clear you have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.
However well the work profile stuff is now separated in mobile OSs today, there can always be day 0s, and people will install any random apps on their phones or fall for plain social engineering. Maybe technically right now they’re comparable for security, but their risk profile is different I think.
You think. Yes, you think, because you don’t do this for a living nor have the slightest clue what you are discussing. Again. Zero day exploits are going to be the same no matter who owns the device. They impact software under the same managed rules that exist regardless. It doesn’t change if it is a company device. Holy shit.
Imagine just targeting this place for phishing and creating a similar looking app with the same name, then sending fake communication to staff to say there is a new version and install it. They can just install it on their personal profile even if the work one doesn’t allow it and start putting data in it. In the case of a locked down work device they could just not install it. Also, there’s no reason for these devices to leave the grounds whereas personal devices will need to go out into the wild.
The reverberation speaking this much out of your ass must be immense. The whole point with a security profile is it limits these actions, and the security profile on the device is THE FUCKING SAME whether it is a device owned by you or the company. Once the employee has it configured correctly, the same in tune, same defender policies, the same OS management, the same everything could be used.
Maybe if you consider it a personal device if the staff has to relinquish all control of their entire personal device to the work provided security controls they can achieve a similar risk profile, but at that point it’s just a work device the staff had to pay for, not their personal device.
Jesus wept. You don’t relinquish control of he whole device. Unless you are working in a SCIF, your physical device is not going to have the type of controls on it that need to prevent any access to Bluetooth or WiFi. It will be only managed insofar as the profile for security requires it to be. That means you selectively block actions and abilities related only to the data within the app context and surrounding risk vectors. I’m typing this on a phone with a security profile on it for work. It serves as my Authenticator, has work application data, and doesn’t have to interfere with other personal use. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how ANY of this works.
If you walked into Palo Alto today and sat down at the table with their engineering team, would you be telling them their firewall solution is flawed without knowing anything about it? I hope not. So why do that here?
Totally secure system!
