Posts by florenciocano@infosec.exchange
 (DIR) Post #AcJMxcsw1Q8rycYkHQ by florenciocano@infosec.exchange
       2023-11-29T21:39:02Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @adam I have not verified it myself, but I don't think VMs require the same resources as containers...a container is just a process while VM is much more than that...about the breach, IIUC, part of the problem was having secrets in environment variables, but that's a bad practice and it is not intrinsically necessary in containers. The recommended way is using mounted secrets in projected volumes. I agree on the argument that sometimes we should be using VMs instead of containers, but I still think there are many use cases where containers are much better.
       
 (DIR) Post #AcnaSik6JbOBrmcip6 by florenciocano@infosec.exchange
       2023-12-14T11:30:17Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @mjg59 this is interesting. Could you elaborate this a bit please? I would say that machine certificates to identify and authorise the client are only feasible when the client is pre-established/known, what I would say is not the case in many breaches.
       
 (DIR) Post #AtO9SAQE3AtPJvNMMS by florenciocano@infosec.exchange
       2025-04-23T16:47:08Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @hetzner I would like that you talk about how to use Hetzner, use cases, tools, etc. Maybe mention what can be done and link to the documentation or a blog post
       
 (DIR) Post #AuFC3fL8wxBC4tsQ7c by florenciocano@infosec.exchange
       2025-04-29T20:30:38Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @riquisimo have you checked @hetzner ?