212
this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024
212 points (99.5% liked)
politics
19103 readers
3210 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There's no need to point it out. Hundreds of hacker scanners are running all the time across the internet looking for unpatched Operating Systems with known exploits. These are automatic by the hackers because the flaws are well documented.
Imagine being told that there is one person in the world that will give you a million dollars cash and the only thing you need to do is ask them to give you the money. Now, imagine you have the phone numbers for every single person. It is trivially easy to set up a computer script that will go through the entire list and send each phone number a txt message asking them to give you the money. You'd start up this process and never have to revisit it except to check ever few weeks if someone responded that they'll give you the money.
This is how the hacker exploit scripts work. So for my example above, if I wanted my Windows XP computer hacked, I just need to leave it unpatched and plug it into the internet without any firewall. The hacking literally takes only 10 minutes for your Windows XP computer to be hacked.
Totally not how that works.
Like you think "hackers" are just scanning the entire Internet like in Matrix world and stumbling on stuff?
Lelz
Its not the ONLY way how it works, but it absolutely can work that way.
You don't have to take my word for it. You can, like, read the article I posted where they detail another IT professional went through the steps and recorded actual results. Is clicking on the link and reading too difficult because you're too busy with "Lelz"?
By your logic:
No, not by a long shot.
I am responding directly to your statement from your OP:
I'm saying the person with the data they want leaked can create the insecure place where they know it will get picked up but still maintain plausible deniability. I'm agreeing with you.
Cool.