[HN Gopher] O.mg Cable
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       O.mg Cable
        
       Author : fredley
       Score  : 1597 points
       Date   : 2021-09-02 16:25 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (shop.hak5.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (shop.hak5.org)
        
       | at-fates-hands wrote:
       | I would advise a trip to MG's own site that has a lot more
       | technical information on the cable:
       | 
       | https://mg.lol/blog/
       | 
       | Its kind of cool to see someone I've been following for years and
       | seeing the whole dev cycle of this product.
       | 
       | His exploding USB drive was pretty cool and came before this
       | idea:
       | 
       | https://mg.lol/blog/mr-self-destruct/
        
       | lmilcin wrote:
       | The trick is, you can't buy this particular one because you just
       | don't know what it does exactly.
       | 
       | I have tried to make a cable like that in the past be the best I
       | got was to hide the electronics in what looked like a bead.
       | Unfortunately, this only really works with USB-B devices where
       | users are already used to having beads on the cable which for
       | practical purposes limits attacks to printers and older scanners.
        
       | peter_retief wrote:
       | Scary that this is available to almost anyone now!
        
       | huhtenberg wrote:
       | HOLY mother of external linking!
       | 
       | This page pulls stuff off 44 domains!
        
       | tr33house wrote:
       | Just visiting this created a _Cart_ on my chrome new tab page for
       | Hak 5. Must be a new feature on Google Chrome. Just FYI
        
       | Eiriksmal wrote:
       | Wow! Is the trick that we now have powerful microcomputers small
       | enough to fit into a USB plug? That's pretty incredible
       | technology. How many years ago did this become possible? My IT
       | security training is dated, I am aware of the risks of plugging
       | in a random USB key, but just a cable from a helpful "coworker"?
       | Yikes.
        
         | 5faulker wrote:
         | Seems to be very tech-involved though.
        
         | kybernetikos wrote:
         | > How many years ago did this become possible?
         | 
         | I don't know, but I do know that back in 2013 you could get an
         | ARM computer running linux and a webserver with wifi and 16Gb
         | storage in a space the size of an SD card. That is still a bit
         | too big to fit inside a USB plug without being obvious, but not
         | by much. https://hackaday.com/2013/08/12/hacking-transcend-
         | wifi-sd-ca...
         | 
         | Fitting the electronics inside the usb plug itself has been
         | used for years in slimline usb memory sticks and in tiny
         | readers for micro-sd too.
         | 
         | I expect that this has been possible for nearly 10 years, but
         | maybe just not commercially viable for consumers for most of
         | that.
        
           | leeoniya wrote:
           | > Fitting the electronics inside the usb plug itself has been
           | used for years in slimline usb memory sticks and in tiny
           | readers for micro-sd too.
           | 
           | those readers usually heat up like crazy for any significant
           | length transfers. good in a pinch, though.
        
           | thrashh wrote:
           | Eye-Fi started as a company making Wi-Fi SD cards in 2005.
           | 
           | Chips have been small for decades. What's changed over the
           | years is that it's gotten cheaper and cheaper.
        
             | verytrivial wrote:
             | I'd say the total size of silicon has been small enough for
             | this for at least 20 years. The level of integration
             | between these components, skipping the need for packaging
             | and interconnect is what's allowed these covert devices,
             | probably driven by manufacturing optimization that makes is
             | financially tractable to only make 100 units, so that bit
             | is much cheaper yeah. Things like antennas and other bulky
             | non-silicon passive components are probably the limiting
             | factor now.
        
         | city41 wrote:
         | On a similar note, as I understand it skimmers placed on ATM
         | machines and the like are now so small they are almost
         | impossible to detect.
        
         | lrvick wrote:
         | There is already an Arm Cortex M0+ in the end of every USB type
         | C cable for power negotiation.
         | 
         | It has a complex codebase and firmware update methods to
         | migrate to new USB specs. Cheap cables don't even support
         | signing so go to town tampering with stock cables if you are so
         | inclined.
         | 
         | Also an Attiny85 can fit inside just about anything.
         | 
         | My favorite BadUSB hello world is using the Arduino HID library
         | to make a Digispark toggle caps lock randomly with maybe 10
         | lines of code. Drives people nuts.
        
           | megous wrote:
           | > There is already an Arm Cortex M0+ in the end of every USB
           | type C cable for power negotiation.
           | 
           | Only some of the Type-C cables. Normal 3A ones don't have
           | anything like this.
        
         | baybal2 wrote:
         | > now have powerful microcomputers small enough to fit into a
         | USB plug
         | 
         | Like 20 years ago? 32 bit micros were actually not that far
         | behind low end CPUs until they start to fall off dramatically
         | in the 90, and post-90nm age because perf was good enough.
         | 
         | After nineties, CPU improvements were guided as much by
         | software getting worse, slower, and more shoddily written, than
         | genuine need for more raw computing power.
        
         | fragmede wrote:
         | That level of miniaturization is far older than Apple's removal
         | of the iPhone headphone jack in 2016, but the related
         | lightning-to-audio jack dongle had a microcontroller with a DAC
         | inside that you'd never think existed due to the form factor.
        
           | trangus_1985 wrote:
           | The Lightning-to-HDMI adapter is also an insane
           | miniaturization. It runs a (very) stripped down version of
           | iOS/darwin (not sure what apple counts it as) that is loaded
           | in about a second when you plug in the phone, establishes a
           | network connection, and streams compressed video frames over
           | the network over USB to the HDMI.
           | 
           | That's why when you use the iPhone HDMI adapter, everything
           | looks a little bit compressed. Because it is.
        
             | crazygringo wrote:
             | Yup. It's actually an incredibly clever piece of tech that
             | lets the iPad/iPhone get around the fact that lightning
             | doesn't have enough bandwidth to transmit HDMI.
             | 
             | For regular home/app views, it does hardware compression of
             | the iPad's screen, outputs that over lightning, then the
             | adapter decompresses it to raw HDMI.
             | 
             | While for Netflix/etc. streams, it outputs the stream
             | _directly_ to the adapter to decompress, without quality
             | loss. (And at full size as well, rather than double-
             | letterboxed.)
             | 
             | I still haven't figured out the magic of how apps like
             | Netflix are able to do overlays of subtitles on top of the
             | compressed video stream. Best I can tell, there must be a
             | separate API for that, that gets sent in parallel.
        
               | Dylan16807 wrote:
               | As far as working within the constraints of USB 2, it's a
               | solid way to do things.
               | 
               | And I'll even leave aside the issue of running a whole OS
               | just to decode video.
               | 
               | But this is dealing with 1080p output. That's not very
               | intensive. A lightning port has two high speed data
               | pairs. You don't even need USB 3 speeds to transmit HDMI
               | over one of those data pairs, and then put in like a $2
               | redriver.
               | 
               | If you set up double-sided output I think you could even
               | have a _passive_ lightning to HDMI adapter. But that 's a
               | side issue, my main point is the bandwidth available that
               | makes these tradeoffs unnecessary.
        
             | outworlder wrote:
             | Ok, this is the most amazing tidbit I've learned in this
             | site in months.
             | 
             | Thanks for the comment. Had no idea. Mind blown.
        
             | gregsadetsky wrote:
             | I didn't know about this! Thank you. Truly nuts:
             | 
             | https://hackaday.com/2019/07/30/apple-lightning-video-
             | adapto...
        
           | varikin wrote:
           | Just for reference, here are a couple breakdowns of how
           | impressive the iPhone headphone jack is. It is impressive how
           | good it is and how tiny it is.
           | 
           | https://www.ifixit.com/News/8448/apple-audio-adapter-
           | teardow...
           | 
           | https://www.kenrockwell.com/apple/lightning-adapter-audio-
           | qu...
        
             | duped wrote:
             | It would be more impressive if they could fit it inside the
             | phone.
        
               | ChuckNorris89 wrote:
               | Funny enough, that shouldn't be a challenge for Apple
               | since the world's slimmest smartphone ever made actually
               | has a headphone jack[1], so Apple excuse of not enough
               | space inside the phone is horse shit to force everyone
               | into the Airpods ecosystem.
               | 
               | [1]https://youtu.be/Ijssm6Qv5nE
        
               | djrogers wrote:
               | It was never thickness, it's was depth.
        
               | ChuckNorris89 wrote:
               | What's the difference in this case? Volume is a
               | multiplication of dimensions on all axis. If they didn't
               | compromise on thickness that means they have more
               | international volume available to reduce the other
               | dimensions which they didn't as modern iPhones don't lack
               | depth either, barring the mini, they're all quite large
               | on all axis.
        
               | 1-more wrote:
               | remember project aria? Apple actually did that and
               | everyone got mad!
        
         | NamTaf wrote:
         | It's a copy of the NSA ANT Coppermouth cables. That was part of
         | the Snowden leak, so it's been possible since at least then
         | (the doc itself is circa 2008) if you have a three-letter name
         | and a national security black budget.
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_ANT_catalog
        
           | maqp wrote:
           | Well the technology differs a bit.
           | 
           | The NSA implant was a passive retroreflector implant, which
           | when illuminated by powerful radio waves, broadcasted back
           | what was being typed, or what was visible on screen.
           | 
           | This seems to be more of a tiny chip that captures and stores
           | keystrokes etc.
        
             | cryptonector wrote:
             | So, like The Thing?
        
             | emaro wrote:
             | Including a web server and radio communication.
        
           | lrvick wrote:
           | Attacks like this have been in use since long before that
           | leak.
           | 
           | See all the Sandisk U3 drive based badusb payloads that
           | people could cleverly hide into all sorts of form factors.
        
             | tossaway9000 wrote:
             | Bunnie did a super neat talk about something similar
             | 
             | https://youtu.be/ruEn7TE4YMM
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | Was it actually something Snowden released, or part of the
           | second leaker's data that got attributed to Snowden?
        
           | svnpenn wrote:
           | https://wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_ANT_catalog
        
           | sushisource wrote:
           | Why is the NSA _so good_ at coming up with sweet codenames
           | for things? I swear it 's someone's full time job there.
        
             | thinkingemote wrote:
             | The real answer? Because these people are just like us,
             | geeks, nerds, techies, early adopters. They are just the
             | same people we live and work with.
             | 
             | The film Enemy of the State (1998) was science fiction
             | except with the parts where the techy operators were just
             | normal nerds like us. That what was most scary part of the
             | film not the (at the time fantastic) surveillance.
        
               | einpoklum wrote:
               | They are really quite unlike us. And our sets of norms
               | is, shall we say, somewhat different to theirs.
        
               | thinkingemote wrote:
               | Morality is the difference. That's not exactly "norms"
               | but somewhat on an adjacent path. But in terms of
               | interest and participation in our club, *they are us*.
               | That's the true terrible reality.
               | 
               | A more accessible idea which is quite different but
               | allows some truth to shine in similarly is to consider
               | how many of us are utterly dependent on advertising in
               | our careers but we all adblock personally.
        
               | Teknoman117 wrote:
               | I would say it's that the set of morals or beliefs are
               | different. Believing that someone is without morals or
               | immoral is just the perspective of the observer.
               | 
               | Some of us don't agree with the intelligence gathering
               | behaviors of our governments, but they certainly might
               | not view it as an issue.
        
               | schoen wrote:
               | > That's not exactly "norms" but somewhat on an adjacent
               | path. But in terms of interest and participation in our
               | club, _they are us_. That 's the true terrible reality.
               | 
               | I remember "Spot the Fed" at DEF CON where I thought it
               | was reflecting this deep and kind of intractable
               | antagonism between the hackers and the government. It
               | turned out that the government was regularly recruiting
               | people there and at other hacker conferences, fairly
               | successfully, and still does. (First I thought that all
               | computer nerds would be at least somewhat anti-military
               | or anti-surveillance, and then I thought that at least
               | those who actively associate themselves with computer
               | culture and counterculture would be, and now I don't
               | really think either of those.)
               | 
               | The social distance between people working for spy
               | agencies and people who vocally criticize and oppose the
               | spy agencies is tiny. I worked at EFF and I've known
               | socially, or kind-of-socially, four people I can
               | immediately think of who worked directly for NSA at some
               | point in their careers, and those are, of course, just
               | the ones who chose to mention it. I've also seen someone
               | unsuccessfully try to recruit someone for NSA face-to-
               | face right in front of me, and had a boss whose next job
               | was alongside an NSA alum.
               | 
               | I also think that NSA alums are more likely to mention it
               | because they're less likely to have worked under false
               | pretenses in other countries (compared to, say, CIA
               | alums).
               | 
               | I had a relative who was a super-huge computer nerd (the
               | biggest computer nerd in my whole family, possibly more
               | than myself, and taught me a lot of my early Unix
               | knowledge) who had previously held a clearance and worked
               | in aerospace engineering (I think on radars or
               | something). He didn't work for a spy agency, but did work
               | on military projects. And nobody could hold a candle to
               | his Unix expertise.
               | 
               | It's pretty striking how diverse in our beliefs we all
               | are (not just about surveillance and espionage, but kind
               | of on every issue and question). Maybe we don't notice it
               | because of social pressures to act like we agree more
               | than we do. Being fascinated with surveillance and
               | secrecy is a common trait in our circles, but it seems
               | that might translate into trying to fight it, or into
               | trying to do it.
        
               | FeepingCreature wrote:
               | > The social distance between people working for spy
               | agencies and people who vocally criticize and oppose the
               | spy agencies is tiny.
               | 
               | That sort of makes sense to me? The average member of the
               | public doesn't generally think about what spy agencies
               | do. If you assume that recruitment is based more on
               | topical proximity than positive/negative opinion, that's
               | what you'd expect to see.
        
               | AYBABTME wrote:
               | I for one don't necessarily disagree with government
               | having a monopoly on violence and all that jazz. But I
               | guess that what makes me HN crowd is that I'm also easily
               | convinced to change my mind if someone brings up a
               | convincing argument.
        
               | xyzal wrote:
               | You imply hacking human minds to be more acceptable than
               | hacking computers?
        
               | einpoklum wrote:
               | No, I'm suggesting people be a bit more critical in their
               | choices of who are "us". They are both "us" in some
               | senses and "not us" in others.
        
               | jokethrowaway wrote:
               | Absolutely. It's the human mind's responsibility not to
               | be "hacked", by which I assume you mean exploited to e.g.
               | mindlessly scroll Facebook all day.
               | 
               | If most people are weak enough to become matrix-like
               | slaves to the machine, so be it. I don't believe in free
               | will and I don't think we need to preserve human life in
               | a certain way (e.g. the way our ancestors lived).
               | 
               | Sure, a lot of people will fail this test, or maybe they
               | prefer to live their life like that. I don't care, that's
               | on them, that's their choice - or, better, the way DNA
               | and the environment shaped this human shell.
               | 
               | If instead you wiretap my device, you're attacking my
               | privacy and I don't have a way to defend myself. You are
               | committing violence.
        
               | batch12 wrote:
               | If you don't believe in free will, why should anyone care
               | about your will to preserve your privacy? Sounds like you
               | only believe in your own free will.
        
               | IncRnd wrote:
               | If you don't accept that you have free will, than nothing
               | you write or say has any meaning.
        
               | Saptarishi wrote:
               | To be fair, I too have ended up thinking that free will
               | probably does not exist. Yet everyone else and I will
               | always continue to behave and live as if it existed, that
               | is my consolation.
        
               | hanche wrote:
               | It may be possible to believe you don't have free will,
               | yet act like you do and to find meaning in life. After
               | all, given how hard it is to even define "free will", how
               | can we know for sure whether we have it? Now recent
               | research seems to indicate (note the weasel words) that
               | we have less of this "free will" stuff than we like to
               | think. Yet hopefully, if you dig a little deeper, we find
               | something that qualifies as free will, even if we live in
               | a deterministic world. Which we don,t quite; see quantum
               | mechanics. But a free will based on QM seems no better.
               | Who wants a "free will" based on randomness?
               | 
               | Please forgive my ramblings. I may have been reading
               | Daniel Dennett too much, most likely with too little
               | understanding.
        
               | MichaelZuo wrote:
               | What someone says or writes could provide information
               | useful for predicting the future. That by definition has
               | meaning.
        
               | labster wrote:
               | There are several industries built around hacking human
               | minds: advertising, pay-to-win mobile games, political
               | consulting, user engagement services like Facebook, and
               | of course literature.
        
               | tkgally wrote:
               | > and of course literature
               | 
               | Of course. And education.
        
               | FeepingCreature wrote:
               | Eh, by that metric `sudo apt-get install` is hacking your
               | system.
        
               | fortran77 wrote:
               | I, for one, want to protect my Nation against terrorists.
        
               | hirako2000 wrote:
               | Not exactly, you, have been convinced that protecting
               | your Nation against terrorism was an important priority,
               | so you endorse the budget going into it and the
               | infringements on your liberties, in exchange for the
               | feeling of safety.
        
               | metamet wrote:
               | Pretty confidant that the odds of someone who works for a
               | three letter agency responding to you here is much higher
               | than most forums.
        
               | mrguyorama wrote:
               | You are commenting on a forum full of people who build
               | tools and technology for facebook and google and probably
               | palintir and a thousand other facial recognition and
               | thoughtcrime style systems.
        
               | jokethrowaway wrote:
               | Sure, Facebook and Google are pretty evil organisations
               | but they can never match the scope of surveillance of
               | governmental agencies.
               | 
               | Facebook and Google need the user to use their services
               | and they say (despite the message being in legalese) what
               | they're going to track. There is consent involved in
               | these organisations, it's a voluntary transaction.
               | 
               | The government can (and did) just intrude on everything
               | without consent or penalties.
               | 
               | From a moral point of view, I would be open to work for
               | BigTech, but I wouldn't work for a state actor.
        
               | smsm42 wrote:
               | In theory, yes. In practice, if you'll try to avoid any
               | interaction with sites affiliated with Google, Facebook
               | or feeding surveillance data to them, you'll quickly
               | discover that the internet became very small and much
               | less usable than before. You don't need to use Facebook
               | or search on Google to be tracked by them. Google owns
               | one of the largest ad networks in existence, so if you
               | visit any site that has ads or analytics trackers, the
               | data about it will go to Google. Any site featuring
               | Facebook social button may feed the data to Facebook. If
               | you write to somebody with @gmail address Google knows
               | about it. And so on, and so forth. For a highly
               | technically skilled person, it _might_ be possible to
               | avoid interactions with Big Tech while being able to
               | still using modern technology, but it won 't be easy. For
               | a normal person without deep technical background it's
               | pretty much hopeless unless they avoid using the internet
               | entirely. Of course, using the internet is "voluntary",
               | but this is a very weak consolation.
               | 
               | And, also, both Google and Facebook eagerly cooperate
               | with state actors in censorship and other aspects -
               | likely surveillance too. So there's not much difference
               | in that aspect whether you work for the government
               | directly or for somebody who takes marching orders from
               | the government while being formally independent.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | abvdasker wrote:
               | There are probably some generalizable differences between
               | software engineers who work for intelligence agencies vs
               | private sector engineers. The most significant factor
               | being that government engineers need to be able to get a
               | security clearance and pass the attendant background
               | checks and interviews. Most of the engineers I've worked
               | with in the private sector probably couldn't pass these
               | checks because of foreign nationality or recreational
               | drug use. It's a virtual certainty that the need for a
               | security clearance produces a strong selection effect.
               | Not saying it makes the intelligence engineers better or
               | worse just that I'm sure there are some significant
               | differences.
        
               | restingrobot wrote:
               | I just wanted to point out that obtaining a security
               | clearance is not nearly as hard as you make it sound. For
               | _most_ organizations prior recreational drug use does not
               | preclude you from the clearance.
        
               | scthrow wrote:
               | I have a clearance and a somewhat checkered past.
               | 
               | A lot of what they look for is consistency in accounts of
               | previous behaviors between you and any references /
               | interviews they undertake, trying to assess if you're
               | currently honest.
               | 
               | Another big thing they are trying to decide is if you are
               | blackmailable.
               | 
               | (throwaway because I have the sort of clearance you are
               | not supposed to advertise that you have)
        
               | wyclif wrote:
               | Can confirm (source: I have a friend that works for a
               | three-letter agency). Before I sit for a clearance
               | interview, I asked him about it. I used to think I'd
               | probably be disqualified, but I learned that was not the
               | case at all. Much of what they're trying to determine is
               | your exposure to potential blackmail.
        
               | R0b0t1 wrote:
               | How recent? Posts like "FBI can't find hackers" have been
               | frontpaging for years but people who have responded to
               | the ads say they were dismissed at the clearance step or
               | advised to not continue due to it.
        
               | thrownblown wrote:
               | John McAfee discussing getting his security clearance
               | when he worked for Lockheed-Martin: "They asked me very
               | revealing questions.... Had I ever taken drugs? Yes. What
               | kinds? Almost every kind. Uh, how much? A lot. Have you
               | ever sold drugs? Yes. So I assumed I would never get the
               | clearance but I did and it came in very quickly."
               | 
               | (clearly decades ago, and he's less than reliable, but
               | fun nonetheless!)
        
               | ByteJockey wrote:
               | It's not so much a problem if you do drugs.
               | 
               | It's a problem if you do drugs and are hiding it from
               | someone (say, family). Then you can be blackmailed.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | mlang23 wrote:
               | Maybe they are like you, but they are definitely not like
               | me.
        
               | jeffrallen wrote:
               | Amen, brother. The spooks recruited at my university, but
               | I skipped that session. Hard pass.
        
               | 6177c40f wrote:
               | And let's not forget that many of them are probably
               | browsing HN at this very moment. They could be you, they
               | could be me!
        
               | apricot wrote:
               | hi
        
               | mhh__ wrote:
               | Maybe they are you(r open source code)
        
               | DaiPlusPlus wrote:
               | > They could be you, they could be me!
               | 
               | Couldn't be me: the private sector pays me waaaaaaaay
               | more.
               | 
               | Also, you can't work for the feds if you ever touch the
               | ganja, which is ridiculous. _Everyone_ I personally know
               | in infosec leads a very... alternative west-coast
               | lifestyle which is not conducive to career progression in
               | an east-coast, button-down-shirt environment.
        
               | loxias wrote:
               | This.
               | 
               | I entertained the idea of working in the public sector a
               | while ago, for a brief time, until I learned that pot is
               | fine in my past, but not in my present. "How the heck do
               | you expect me to get the code written?"
               | 
               | Also, I've been told that getting a clearance is more
               | burden than blessing. You have restrictions that an
               | "ordinary person" doesn't have, along with criminal
               | penalties for violating them. Whereas, without a
               | clearance, if they _really_ need you for something, they
               | 'll bring you in anyway.
        
               | jdironman wrote:
               | Not sure I understand those last two sentences. Could you
               | clarify?
        
               | balls187 wrote:
               | Things may have changed, but in my prior life when I had
               | a clearance, for example, dating (or marrying for that
               | matter) a foreign national would result in heavy vetting,
               | including possibly losing your clearance and/or being
               | terminated.
        
               | nirse wrote:
               | I hope it would have just been your contract that would
               | have been terminated? ;-)
        
               | balls187 wrote:
               | These days I don't believe spying results in death, just
               | a long vacation at club fed.
        
               | frickinLasers wrote:
               | Don't do drugs (including marijuana), don't get blackout
               | drunk, don't talk about your work, don't need psychiatric
               | help... For the last sentence...Trump had all sorts of
               | clearance when he clearly should not have. But he was in
               | an important position.
        
               | garmaine wrote:
               | > don't need psychiatric help
               | 
               | Does that include regular old things like ADHD meds?
        
               | skoskie wrote:
               | No it does not.
        
               | frickinLasers wrote:
               | I don't know. I haven't worked in that system for many
               | years. That said, it was more received wisdom than a
               | written rule, and I was aware of exceptions who were
               | prescribed more than ADHD meds.
        
               | vxNsr wrote:
               | Putting aside the politics of it for a second, all
               | clearence stems from the executive branch which stems
               | from the president. Saying the president shouldn't have
               | clearance doesn't make a lot of sense, he's the one who
               | authorized it. He's the one who decides who gets it.
               | 
               | Anyone who thinks differently is arguing for a shadow
               | gov, i.e. unelected bureaucrats who answer to no one and
               | can make decisions unilaterally without consequence...
               | not exactly democracy.
        
               | frickinLasers wrote:
               | That statement wasn't about politics at all. Let me put
               | it another way: Had he been trying to get clearance for a
               | normal position, he would probably not have received it.
               | 
               | I also never said he had access to _everything_. Nobody
               | has access to everything. Not arguing for a shadow
               | government--it 's already a fact. It happened when
               | classification rules went from "what would harm national
               | security" to "what would cause problems if American
               | citizens found out we were doing this."
        
               | garmaine wrote:
               | In principle the president has access to EVERYTHING.
               | There is literally nothing he shouldn't have access to,
               | at least within the executive branch which includes
               | nearly all military/defense/intel secrets.
               | 
               | The only thing he does not have unrestricted access to is
               | Justice department stuff (e.g. FBI), although there'd
               | better be a damn good reason to deny it to POTUS if he
               | asks, and legislative branch secrets which really
               | infrequently comes into play. That's due to the whole
               | separation-of-powers, checks-and-balances thing. But
               | security clearances for everything in the executive
               | branch stem FROM the president. If he wants to reveal
               | some state secret, he can just tweet it with no
               | consequences, or blurt it out while on the phone with
               | foreign states. As Trump did on multiple occasions.
               | 
               | That said, of course there is a significant deep state
               | bureaucracy which attempts at times to keep certain
               | things hidden, even from the current president. But if
               | the president were to ask about it, they have to tell
               | him.
        
               | DaiPlusPlus wrote:
               | > Anyone who thinks differently is arguing for a shadow
               | gov, i.e. unelected bureaucrats who answer to no one and
               | can make decisions unilaterally without consequence...
               | not exactly democracy.
               | 
               | Lots of countries have an establishment "civil service"
               | comprised of those "unelected bureaucrats" that you
               | mention, and it actually works out quite well for them.
               | 
               | That said, they aren't unaccountable: they answer to
               | departmental heads, MPs, committees, etc. A big advantage
               | of the system is to prevent mad-swings in policy just
               | because the head-of-government changed.
               | 
               | For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Service_
               | (United_Kingdom)
        
               | andrepd wrote:
               | >A big advantage of the system is to prevent mad-swings
               | in policy just because the head-of-government changed.
               | 
               | You can frame this another way: it prevents meaningful
               | change even if the electorate demands it.
               | 
               | Sorry, I watched too much Yes Minister to think this is a
               | good thing x)
        
               | skoskie wrote:
               | Has a certain "damned if you do, damned if you don't"
               | vibe. There are pros and cons to both.
        
               | DaiPlusPlus wrote:
               | Yes, of course - but if a country already had a well-
               | oiled establishment civil-service which kept its finger
               | on the pulse of the nation then it would already be
               | aligned with the electorates' interests and voting-
               | intent.
               | 
               | I recognize I'm basically describing a utopia.
        
               | vinay_ys wrote:
               | Any power structure naturally seeks permanence.
               | Democratic elections with short office terms goes against
               | the nature. If we are not vigilant, shadowy forces will
               | take control of this mechanism too. Some could argue it
               | already has happened.
        
               | ShannyBabes123 wrote:
               | I like how Putin describes his impression of the powers
               | of the US President. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xykv
               | rGpCW6E&ab_channel=Russi...
        
               | hacker_newz wrote:
               | How is this a constructive response?
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | Friend of mine is head of IT for some government agency.
               | Not a spooky one - just a routine agency. However, given
               | the nature of IT and the data they need to store - they
               | are required to get security clearance.
               | 
               | For him it's been a minor nuisance at worst. He has
               | strong restrictions on travel. I think he needs approval
               | to travel abroad. He has relatives in other countries and
               | visits them often, so it can't be _too_ much of a
               | nuisance.
               | 
               | I believe he told me that he does have to report details
               | of where he went in each country and who he interacted
               | with upon his return. Not sure about the details.
               | 
               | Official website:
               | https://www.dm.usda.gov/ohsec/TravelResource.htm
        
               | JamesSwift wrote:
               | > I've been told that getting a clearance is more burden
               | than blessing
               | 
               | Yes it definitely can be, but depends on your personality
               | and stage of life. You are always cognizant of having a
               | clearance and the need to maintain it, and so you
               | consider that in your every day life. You also have to
               | open your life up in uncomfortable ways, even if your
               | only objection is in principal.
               | 
               | You probably don't sweat it too much later in life since
               | you generally are a more 'boring' person, but I had mine
               | in my mid 20's so was a lot more active in terms of
               | social life. One time I was in downtown SF with a buddy
               | hitting up bars etc and eventually had to cut out early
               | because things were getting more drug oriented. I also
               | used to play a lot of cards before getting a clearance
               | and had contacts who were in some shady stuff. I
               | basically excommunicated them from my life to avoid the
               | clearance hassle.
        
               | TremendousJudge wrote:
               | you can do the really spooky stuff without going to
               | prison. that's why they do it
        
               | Ms-J wrote:
               | This is very much the truth, I used to work in infosec.
               | Plus the moral implications of working for the feds! Too
               | much on my conscience.
        
               | skoskie wrote:
               | Here's a different picture. Put in your 20y at NSA right
               | out of school. Get retirement benefits, and then move to
               | the private sector, where they pay a premium for NSA
               | experience. Or, do contract work for NSA since you
               | already have clearance and contacts. They will pay you
               | about 4x more as a contractor.
        
               | nanidin wrote:
               | > Also, you can't work for the feds if you ever touch the
               | ganja, which is ridiculous
               | 
               | I believe it is possible to get security clearance after
               | cessation of drugs for multiple years, even drugs like
               | Heroin. I found the full rules[0] while reading an AMA on
               | /r/SecurityClearance.
               | 
               | [0] https://www.dni.gov/files/NCSC/documents/Regulations/
               | SEAD-4-...
        
               | Fnoord wrote:
               | > Also, you can't work for the feds if you ever touch the
               | ganja, which is ridiculous.
               | 
               | Calling it 'ridiculous' removes the debate concerning the
               | pros and cons on such rule. If you consider someone can
               | become vulnerable if they're addicted (to anything,
               | really) then it makes sense to be wary of a drugs
               | addiction. Especially if the resource the person is
               | addicted to is illegal.
               | 
               | That being said, I'd find it reasonable if they OK'ed
               | medical marihuana usage. I hope my gov (NL) does.
        
               | jackson1442 wrote:
               | Well it's a comparison. Not once on the security
               | clearance paperwork is alcohol mentioned, while if you
               | have smoked/eaten/etc. marijuana at ALL in the past 7
               | years, it's practically an instant deny unless it was
               | under some exigent circumstance. You can even be denied
               | if you don't partake but are close contacts with other
               | marijuana users.
               | 
               | Obviously if someone is _addicted_ to either, that is a
               | security risk. But the extent to which they reject people
               | for recreational marijuana use is laughable.
        
               | cosmojg wrote:
               | Can't you just lie?
        
               | skoskie wrote:
               | That is not wise. You do have to take a lie detector
               | test, and they are actually good at reading the results.
        
               | jackson1442 wrote:
               | They contact all your close contacts listed on the
               | paperwork. Lying also constitutes perjury in this case.
               | 
               | The unofficial advice I've heard is to not even bother
               | with SC if you use weed. Generally, it will be found out.
               | I looked into this as needing an SC was a possibility
               | with my current job.
        
               | teawrecks wrote:
               | So you don't think any alcoholics work for the NSA?
        
               | madengr wrote:
               | Plenty of people have lost their clearances over drinking
               | too much.
        
               | cosmojg wrote:
               | Not to mention, alcohol is a far more physiologically
               | addictive substance.
        
               | skoskie wrote:
               | So much tastier too.
        
               | jeffrallen wrote:
               | Piss off, spies. Why don't you come over to the light
               | side of the force?
        
               | droidist2 wrote:
               | I mean, it's a spectrum really isn't it? NSA, Facebook,
               | Google, they're all involved in surveillance in different
               | ways and to different degrees.
        
             | maqp wrote:
             | IIRC the funny thing is, the system that provides the
             | codenames is random in order for the system to not leak
             | information about what the code name is for. But since
             | there's no limit to how many times you can request a code
             | name, the system is being abused and users try until they
             | get a good one.
        
               | zarmin wrote:
               | What was the codename for the project to create that
               | system?
        
               | mhh__ wrote:
               | The British system were called Rainbow Codes
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_Code
               | 
               | See this from the article:
               | 
               | "During WWII, British intelligence was able to glean
               | details of new German technologies simply by considering
               | their code names. For instance, when they began hearing
               | of a new system known as Wotan, Reginald Victor Jones
               | asked around and found that Wotan was a one-eyed god.
               | Based on this, he guessed it was a radio navigation
               | system using a single radio beam. This proved correct,
               | and the Royal Air Force was able to quickly render it
               | useless through jamming."
               | 
               | Read R.V. Jones book "Most secret* war" if this kind of
               | war-engineering interests you.
               | 
               | * Pay attention to "most secret" rather than the ghastly
               | Americanism "top secret"!
        
               | Closi wrote:
               | Probably "Project Phoenix".
               | 
               | If you ask any project team to come up with a project
               | name they will probably pick 'Project Phoenix'.
        
               | erhk wrote:
               | Because all project work is reviving something that has
               | been done before?
        
               | jl6 wrote:
               | Because projects start in the smouldering ruins of as-is,
               | and their business case is mythical (and if you want to
               | rise in this environment you'd better be flame-
               | retardant).
        
               | wincy wrote:
               | No dude because it's a badass name. If it's super cool
               | you get to name it "Operation Dark Phoenix" which is even
               | more badass.
        
               | alasdair_ wrote:
               | Because the product is mythical and it will all end in
               | flames.
        
               | TedDoesntTalk wrote:
               | The Phoenix did not end in flames. It started in flames.
        
               | richardw wrote:
               | It's immortal and cyclical. There is no beginning or end.
               | Popular focus is obviously on one part of that cycle.
               | 
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_(mythology)
        
               | neuronic wrote:
               | No, because all new projects are on fire from the get go.
        
               | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
               | That or NexGen/NextGen.
               | 
               | Someone should do a study...
        
               | exikyut wrote:
               | * _Sigh_ *
               | 
               | ...Telstra in Australia called the transition from its 3G
               | network to 4G "Next-G".
               | 
               | Why is this suddenly so depressing lol ._.
        
               | maerF0x0 wrote:
               | For those looking for a source: Ed talks about this in
               | his book
               | https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/46223297-permanent-
               | recor...
        
             | elzbardico wrote:
             | Far better names than Microsoft or IBM
        
               | hbn wrote:
               | Microsoft Integrated Microcomputer Plug-and-Play Cable
               | Office 365 Extended Subscription for Workgroups 2021
               | Powered by Bing
        
               | echelon wrote:
               | Google Play Game Libraries _for Play_ (a real product
               | name)
               | 
               | I can't find a link referencing it, sadly.
        
               | nocman wrote:
               | Affectionately known as "MIMPCO 365 ESWPB 2021"
               | 
               | Hey! That's my Windows 10 product key!
               | 
               | (not really, but felt like it could be).
        
               | MR4D wrote:
               | Can't be a Windows key - it's too easy to type! ;)
        
               | glitchc wrote:
               | It's missing a K, a Q and a W, at least.
        
             | fidesomnes wrote:
             | yeah thats right, lick the boot right there, you missed a
             | spot, yeah that's right.
        
             | spoonjim wrote:
             | Coppermouth is just a combination of two American venomous
             | snakes: the copperhead and the cottonmouth.
        
               | onionisafruit wrote:
               | No. It's a combination of duracell copper top batteries
               | and smashmouth
        
             | selcuka wrote:
             | Coppermouth is a typo, the actual name NSA gave it is
             | Cottonmouth, a species of pit viper.
        
               | NamTaf wrote:
               | My apologies! I completely missed that I made that typo.
               | Either I was in the throes of exhaustion or my phone
               | spellchecked me :( Now it's too late to edit.
               | 
               | Yes, Cottonmouth is correct.
        
               | ncmncm wrote:
               | Coppermouth would be a good code name. Cottonmouth? Meh.
        
         | andai wrote:
         | In 2008 we had USB flash drives which extended only two
         | millimeters beyond the laptop when you plugged them in, and
         | Wifi dongles in the same form factor.
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | In the leaks that happened around the time of Snowden's
         | revelations, there were DVI/monitor cables that had
         | transmitters that would broadcast the decrypted signal so that
         | someone with the receiver nearby could "share" the screen. No
         | software installed for security software to find. Just a cable
         | that could be installed by the cleaning crew after hours.
        
         | janekm wrote:
         | Not just the microcontroller but also the wifi radio and
         | antenna... But a USB-A socket is pretty big anyway. This isn't
         | too different from the tiny wireless mouse dongles that have
         | been around for a few decades.
        
         | moonchild wrote:
         | See also http://tomu.im/.
        
       | haswell wrote:
       | When Apple inevitably removes all physical ports from some future
       | iteration of iPhone, I wonder if they'll use the existence of
       | tech like this to market the change as a benefit to security.
       | 
       | I'm simultaneously impressed, curious and disturbed.
        
         | system2 wrote:
         | I still don't understand why they even have usb connection on
         | Iphone. I have not attached a cable to it for years. Wireless
         | charging, bluetooth headset, and all other bluetooth devices.
         | Icloud backup as well as government spyware called CSAM never
         | needed a cable.
        
           | Minenash wrote:
           | I still use the 3.5mm headphone jack over Bluetooth, because
           | of the price of Bluetooth headphones, and also not having to
           | ever worry about battery life. The only downside for me is
           | that I can't use the headphones, and charge and walk around,
           | but that's a lot less annoying then the other things. And
           | with Bluetooth, there tends to be brief pauses (<1sec) where
           | I can't hear anything.
           | 
           | I also use my phone as my computers webcam. It's _way_ better
           | wired than the wifi for me (which honestly shouldn 't be
           | true, but).
           | 
           | I almost never use wireless charging, because it takes longer
           | to charge, is everyday inefficient, and most people don't own
           | wireless chargers. And even if they do, it's never in as many
           | places as normal chargers. On an old phone, I ruined the port
           | and had to only use wireless charging, and it was so
           | annoying.
           | 
           | And app development is so much nicer when you have a USB
           | connection. When I lost the ability to do so, coding was a
           | good amount more work
        
           | tcoff91 wrote:
           | I use the USB connection every day to do iOS development. A
           | high bandwidth reliable wired link is a very nice thing to
           | have for dev.
        
             | system2 wrote:
             | They can sell developer phones if needed. The percentage of
             | developers probably is not even 0.001%
        
       | progman32 wrote:
       | As an aside: somewhat ironic that a shop selling gear such as
       | this has such a large 3rd-party javascript footprint. At least
       | some of that js is required for the page to work, as I'm unable
       | to see pictures of the device. I counted 25 3rd party domains in
       | uMatrix. That's quite the attack surface.
        
         | foxfluff wrote:
         | It threw a modal at me after enabling scripts and scrolling a
         | bit. Yeah, not reading further.
        
           | MaxikCZ wrote:
           | Oh why thank you. Yes, I just landed on your page for the
           | first time, looking around to see what you got there.
           | 
           | What? If only I give you my email adress you will send me
           | info about your page on a weekly basis as if I were the most
           | interested person? And I have no guarantee you wont share my
           | adress further? That sounds like an amazing deal! Let me sign
           | up right now, before I even can read a paragraph on your
           | page, I feel like I will definetly not regret it.
           | 
           | --
           | 
           | Seriously, how do these modals still have high enough
           | conversion rate to justify their existence?
        
         | Natsu wrote:
         | You can get pictures if you enable scripts for a couple of
         | shopify domains, but it just looks like an ordinary USB cable,
         | which is kind of the point.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | hoppla wrote:
         | I bought something from them once, and they shared my email
         | address with Facebook to do targeted advertising - that was not
         | something I expected they would do.
        
         | moron4hire wrote:
         | How is that ironic? Seems more in-character. Selling a device
         | to steal data, they also extract data from whomever is visiting
         | the site.
        
       | londons_explore wrote:
       | These are normally made with something like an esp32 squeezed
       | into the plug.
       | 
       | To exfiltrate data by WiFi, there is a neat way to get data
       | out... Just have the esp32 connect to all unencrypted WiFi
       | networks in turn and send the data out via a DNS tunnel.
       | 
       | Then the attacker can provide their own WiFi network, but it will
       | also work with airplane WiFi, cafe WiFi, guest networks, etc.
       | 
       | And obviously with DNS tunnelling it works against WiFi networks
       | that require a 'sign in' after connection, even without signing
       | in.
        
       | zbentley wrote:
       | Yet another reaffirmation that physical access is game over.
       | 
       | "But the case is locked!" Are the peripherals? Even if the case
       | connectors are locked away behind a bird-box/knockout, if someone
       | left one of these dangling unplugged off of the keyboard, do you
       | think your field technician won't unlock the box and plug it
       | right back in?
        
       | anonu wrote:
       | This is incredible.
       | 
       | I remember in the early days of the web getting a copy of the
       | Anarchist Cookbook. One idea was to glue the phosphorus material
       | from a match stick to the spinning portion of a floppy disk. Of
       | course that was a n00b level hack.
       | 
       | We've come a long way since then...
        
       | geniium wrote:
       | This is crazy! Everyone can be James Bond today
        
       | Ansil849 wrote:
       | The product description does a really poor job of explaining what
       | this is to someone who has never heard of it. It's just a wink-
       | wink-nudge-nudge reference to some DEFCON talk.
       | 
       | Can someone explain what this is? Is it a hardware keylogger?
        
         | distortedsignal wrote:
         | It can also do keystroke injection.
        
       | auslegung wrote:
       | I want to need one of these things. Pranks on my friends are
       | difficult with a lockdown and permanent wfh status, so I'd need a
       | better reason. Can anyone think of non evil uses? My imagination
       | is stunted I guess.
        
         | yreg wrote:
         | I'd be afraid to prank someone with a tool like this. It seems
         | like it would be easy to unintentionally hack said friend or at
         | least make them believe that you might have hacked them.
        
         | Arrath wrote:
         | Mine is too, I can only come up with prank ideas.
         | 
         | I do wonder how thoroughly they vet their customers, and what
         | silly things I could get up to with one.
        
         | rkagerer wrote:
         | Couple legitimate uses could be to test a driver or "port
         | mirror" for debugging. (It does more than just keylog... eg.
         | logs raw HID reports)
        
       | jmartrican wrote:
       | We can't even trust our own cables. How do we combat this type of
       | attack vector?
        
         | fredley wrote:
         | Buy your own cables, and as you unwrap them, secure a tamper
         | seal around them in some way. Commit the tamper seal codes to
         | memory. Only then can you be absolutely sure.
        
       | pdimitar wrote:
       | Can somebody recommend good charging cables with the data lanes
       | disabled? Would put my mind at ease when I'm traveling.
        
         | judge2020 wrote:
         | I can't find any on Google that specifically are made without
         | the data lane. Maybe these magnetic ones don't do data[0].
         | Could also try burning the data lanes on the lightning part of
         | the cable[0] (although you might have issues if it's a
         | lightning-to-C cable, I would guess it uses the data lanes for
         | power negotiation).
         | 
         | 0: https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/3-in-1-cable-led-
         | ligh...
         | 
         | 1: https://nyansatan.github.io/lightning/
        
           | pdimitar wrote:
           | Good warning, thank you.
           | 
           | I don't care much about quick charging when in a hotel room
           | though. I just want to make sure my phone isn't being probed
           | while I'm sleeping.
           | 
           | And when I need quick charging, I have the right cables and a
           | strong external battery.
        
         | not1ofU wrote:
         | Somethink like this, it is adapter with data lanes removed, for
         | charging in public places. There are other tools like the ones
         | listed on the hak5 site also.
         | https://maltronics.com/products/usb-protector The guy running
         | the site also has a youtube channel focused on security related
         | tech news https://www.youtube.com/c/Seytonic/featured.
        
         | etskinner wrote:
         | You could do that, but then you'd need to forgo USB Power
         | Delivery, Qualcomm quick charging, etc.
         | 
         | One thing I've heard other comments mention here is a USB
         | condom (USB data blocker). It's just a male to female adapter
         | with only the power lines patched through, not data lines.
        
           | rsync wrote:
           | I can vouch for usb condoms.
           | 
           | Not only do they allow safe use of Arbitrary power ports but
           | they also allow me to charge my phone from my laptop without
           | syncing for updating things...
        
           | sva_ wrote:
           | If you have a powerbank with you (which may be empty), you
           | could also charge the powerbank using the untrusted power
           | source, and at the same time charge the phone via powerbank
           | to "sanitize" the source. This way you could still benefit
           | from quickcharging.
        
             | pdimitar wrote:
             | Yep, this is what I usually end up doing while traveling.
             | The battery doesn't care about the data lane even if the
             | charger is somehow malicious, and my devices get pure
             | juice.
        
             | dolmen wrote:
             | Do you have references for powerbanks that support
             | QuickCharge?
        
               | pdimitar wrote:
               | Most of them do nowadays. I used both Anker and Xiaomi
               | and both were excellent.
        
           | pdimitar wrote:
           | USB condom LOL :D
           | 
           | Got any links for those?
        
             | dredmorbius wrote:
             | https://duckduckgo.com/?q=USB+condom&ia=about
        
               | pdimitar wrote:
               | Thanks for exercising being snarky!
               | 
               | I _very obviously_ meant concrete brands and models that
               | people would recommend.
               | 
               | I'm touched that you think I can't search for stuff on
               | the net. :D
        
               | dredmorbius wrote:
               | Your "very obviously" wasn't read that way here.
               | 
               | Synctstop and Int3.cc seem to be popular. The latter is
               | recommended by Bruce Schneier here: https://www.schneier.
               | com/blog/archives/2018/12/bad_consumer_...
        
       | lrvick wrote:
       | See also:
       | 
       | C-to-C charger cables with Bluetooth remote activated dual
       | payloads: https://sneaktechnology.com/product/usbninja-custom-
       | type-c-t...
       | 
       | I easily modified mine to mimmic Apple Keyboard USB IDs to avoid
       | notifications. Works great!
       | 
       | Cellular GPS tracking car charger:
       | https://www.amazon.com/Charger-Locator-Professional-Listenin...
       | 
       | Cellular GPS tracking USB charger cable:
       | https://www.ebay.com/itm/223990414124
       | 
       | I have been making, collecting, and testing toys like this for
       | more than a decade.
       | 
       | It is a race to the bottom on price now.
       | 
       | Your best defense for USB code execution attacks is use Linux
       | with USBGuard or QubesOS with the default USB quarantine VM.
       | 
       | Windows and Mac users are currently easy targets. I don't know of
       | any good defenses there.
        
         | lostmsu wrote:
         | Am I missing something? The worst thing the cable can do is
         | send HID commands, and snoop on traffic between your USB-
         | connectable device and PC?
        
           | PeterisP wrote:
           | "HID commands" are a big thing given sufficient automation.
           | You can execute arbitrary code with just HID commands either
           | by typing everything in, or by having the cable present a
           | storage device from which to get data and using HID commands
           | to enable the storage device, fetch and execute it.
        
           | blablabla123 wrote:
           | USB has been littered with bugs. I never got why this didn't
           | get more news coverage but at least it was possible to read
           | memory from USB. Personally for me it's also a reason that I
           | switched to USB-C that there are less people around with
           | USB-C cables.
           | 
           | https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/118854/attacks-.
           | ..
        
           | lrvick wrote:
           | They could do lots of things:
           | 
           | - Keylogging
           | 
           | - Manipulate USB Power negotiation to cook your hardware
           | 
           | - Sniff traffic from other USB devices on the same internal
           | hub.
           | 
           | - Log your location
           | 
           | - Log screen lock/unlock times/habits via voltage draw and
           | permitted device type enumeration
           | 
           | - Install malware via keyboard emulation
           | 
           | - Sound exfiltration by emulating USB speakers
           | 
           | - Screenshot by emulating a USB/thunderbolt external monitor
           | 
           | - Mouse movement/click injection to prevent screen locking
           | 
           | - Exfiltrate data to hidden internal flash memory
        
           | hansjorg wrote:
           | See for example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMA_attack
        
           | at-fates-hands wrote:
           | You can actually do quite a lot with it, in terms of getting
           | data and dropping various payloads:
           | 
           |  _There is also an editor and parser for Duckyscript - the
           | scripting language used by the Rubber Ducky offensive USB
           | drive - which acts as a virtual keyboard and launches
           | keystroke injection attacks. That alone opens up a wide array
           | of custom payloads for the O.MG cable. There also appear to
           | be attack payloads for Windows and Ubuntu systems._
           | 
           |  _In April 2019, when the video was released, MG and the team
           | of hackers working on the embedded cable were also developing
           | extra functions such as detecting user activity /inactivity.
           | According to the Hak5 listing, they also appear to have
           | cracked another key problem: USB enumeration._
           | 
           | https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2019/10/02/omg-evil-
           | lightni...
        
         | tubbs wrote:
         | With growing car theft in the US I've been curious about
         | implanting GPS trackers on my own older enthusiast vehicles.
         | There appears to be many options on Amazon but I can't bring
         | myself to trust any of them. Has anyone here gone down that
         | road before?
        
           | CobaltFire wrote:
           | I second this, and hope someone has some advice/input.
        
           | djrogers wrote:
           | > With growing car theft in the US
           | 
           | Odd, this got me wondering, and I can't find any reliable
           | statistics that show a rise in car thefts. Everything I see
           | shows a pretty steady decline over the past 30 years in spite
           | of an increasing the number of cars on the road.
        
           | mhh__ wrote:
           | It might be an interesting project to build your own in this
           | case.
           | 
           | If you want to trust them I would have as much redundancy as
           | you are comfortable paying for i.e. the software in these
           | products is often dogshit so one failure or bug shouldn't let
           | your car end in a scrap merchant.
        
           | chillaxtian wrote:
           | AirTag
        
             | spiderfarmer wrote:
             | Doesn't work as it notifies the person traveling with it.
        
               | smoldesu wrote:
               | What if I don't have an iPhone
        
               | hultner wrote:
               | Of you hide it well enough? I can think of some creative
               | spots in a car, like behind the dash, in the door, inside
               | of the a seat, etc.
        
               | kube-system wrote:
               | If the thief has an iPhone, they will see this: https://s
               | m.mashable.com/mashable_pk/image/default/uploads252...
        
               | giarc wrote:
               | I thought it only chirped if the owner clicked that
               | option in "Find My" app.
        
               | callesgg wrote:
               | Its not that it is chirps it is that any iPhone beeing
               | tracked by a airtag for a extended amount of time will
               | inform its owner that it is being tracked.
        
               | StingyJelly wrote:
               | It's quite easy to clobber the speaker
        
               | flutas wrote:
               | It still alerts (UI Prompt) on any iPhone that it travels
               | with for too long (~24hr).
        
           | pvarangot wrote:
           | I would only do this if you either know the police will help
           | retrieve your car if you have the location, or if you are
           | ready to engage the robbers yourself. Otherwise it's useless
           | to know where it is.
           | 
           | I have experience trying to get the cops to help in Oakland
           | and San Jose and they really didn't want to.
        
             | bigiain wrote:
             | A lot of the cellular gps trackers have ignition kill
             | capability, where you can send it a specific sms message
             | and it'll pull a wire to ground or open circuit a pair of
             | wires, which you can use to remotely kill the engine.
             | 
             | A friend of mine got a motorcycle back by watching its
             | movements via the gps tracking, and killing the engine
             | while the guy was riding in a safe-ish and high visibility
             | place, so the thief just parked it and walked away.
        
               | sealeck wrote:
               | I imagine (not a lawyer) that this expose you to a
               | variety of charges.
        
               | pvarangot wrote:
               | IANAL, but I think in California as long as you don't use
               | excessive force it's ok, but yeah if you kill the engine
               | at a high speed or if you get unlucky and the thief gets
               | seriously injured then you will get in trouble if they
               | want to go after you.
        
             | frickinLasers wrote:
             | This is ridiculous. Wtf are cops good for, then?
        
               | lrem wrote:
               | From European experience: dealing with violent crime and
               | writing reports for insurance claims for others.
        
               | ncmncm wrote:
               | Cracking heads. The rest is just PR.
               | 
               | They don't work for you. They know they don't work for
               | you.
        
               | dilyevsky wrote:
               | Tbf oakland is a low bar (as well as sf). Here just 15 mi
               | down the road they investigated and arrested a credit
               | card thief who stole my wife's card and I didn't even ask
               | for it. They also regularly capture cat converter thieves
               | with sting operations. Overall I've been quite impressed
               | with San Mateo PD
        
               | pvarangot wrote:
               | We were also surprised by the Oakland thing, as I know
               | they helped with petty crime where the damage was less
               | than a full blown stolen car. It was not a very shady
               | area and it was in their jurisdiction. I heard it's not
               | that uncommon, and a SFPD officer told us that it's
               | probably because we said the robbers where armed and they
               | just don't get involved with that.
               | 
               | The car got recovered by an asset management crew though
               | and it went smoothly AFAIK.
        
               | mrexroad wrote:
               | I second this. I even had a local Bay Area PD help me
               | recover a stolen bike after finding it posted.
        
           | lb1lf wrote:
           | -Wouldn't an airtag (or two...) fit the bill nicely?
           | 
           | (Assuming even car thieves use iPhones there's some poetic
           | justice to be served in their own smartphones bringing them
           | down...)
        
             | surfsvammel wrote:
             | They will get a warning saying there is an air tag
             | travelling with them. I have this problem. We have an air
             | tag on one of my kids shoes when we are out, and whenever
             | I'm not with them, my partner gets spammed with warnings on
             | her phone saying there is an unknown air tag travelling
             | with her.
        
               | JTbane wrote:
               | That's Apple's so-called "stalker warning", a ridiculous
               | concept.
        
               | bigiain wrote:
               | > a ridiculous concept
               | 
               | Says a guy who's never had a friend or family member
               | who's been stalked.
        
               | JTbane wrote:
               | If someone can get close enough to drop an AirTag on your
               | person or in your car, they can harm you regardless.
        
               | djur wrote:
               | A lot of people have the opportunity to interact with
               | your (unattended) car or your belongings in situations
               | where they couldn't harm you without taking a substantial
               | risk. Imagine a person you interact with at a bar who
               | drops an AirTag in your purse while you are briefly
               | distracted.
        
               | ghostly_s wrote:
               | > We have an air tag on one of my kids shoes when we are
               | out
               | 
               | what the hell?
        
               | surfsvammel wrote:
               | We use this when we are at amusement parks, museums or in
               | the city. We also have a piece of white tape, with our
               | phone number, on the kids so that if they get lost, and
               | someone finds them, they can call us up.
        
               | after_care wrote:
               | Seems legit, kids can run away or be kidnapped. It's
               | important to know where your kids are.
        
               | vagrantJin wrote:
               | > Seems legit, kids can run away or be kidnapped. It's
               | important to know where your kids are.
               | 
               | Ah yes. This statement is more terrifying than Apples
               | half-assed PR fireball a few days ago.
               | 
               | The same folks who bought iphones because its has better
               | "privacy" than Android...
               | 
               | ...are using iphones to track their kids whereabouts.
               | It's like a dystopian punchline masked in the _Friends_
               | laugh track.
        
               | Tostino wrote:
               | Tracking a kid at an amusement park, presumably a quite
               | young one, is entirely fine IMO. I remember when I was 4
               | or so, I waited until my parents weren't looking to sneak
               | off and go play with a toy in the gift shop my parents
               | didn't let me see earlier in the day. I just about gave
               | them a heart attack.
        
               | canadianfella wrote:
               | What's the problem?
        
               | _carbyau_ wrote:
               | Yeah it is important to know where your kids are. I go
               | with "pay attention".
               | 
               | I guess there are going to be scenarios where tracking
               | could help and maybe even allow the kids freedom to roam
               | within a large zone - the back paddock of a farm say -
               | while still allowing parents to find them.
               | 
               | But I still like capability and trust more.
        
               | alasdair_ wrote:
               | Some people have more children than adults. "Pay
               | attention" is the default state but it's not always
               | possible to pay complete attention to both children and
               | everything else, every moment of every day.
        
               | e-clinton wrote:
               | Right. All depends on age. Makes sense for an 8y/o, not
               | for a 15y/o
        
               | surfsvammel wrote:
               | This is for a 3y/o and a 5y/o
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | yellowapple wrote:
               | Right? Who the hell puts the tracker in a shoe? Shoes can
               | be taken off.
               | 
               | Professionals put the trackers in the kids' teeth, _a la_
               | Spy Kids.
        
             | blantonl wrote:
             | I think the airtag might actually alert them that they are
             | being tracked - the anti-stalker features built into the
             | network will alert an iPhone user when an airtag they don't
             | own is in the vicinity while moving and changing locations.
        
               | aero142 wrote:
               | If the air tag is sufficiently hidden, perhaps this is a
               | feature and not a bug. Maybe this will make them stop the
               | car and leave it, which sounds like a win to me.
        
           | lrvick wrote:
           | Check out AutoPi. Open source, plugs into your ODBII port so
           | you can not only track your car but also get maintaince
           | alerts etc.
        
             | drewzero1 wrote:
             | Depending on how old the enthusiast vehicles are, they
             | probably don't have an OBD-II port (or possibly any port at
             | all). None of mine do, up to the mid 90s.
        
               | kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote:
               | My truck barely has an electrical system (6v, positive
               | earth), let alone a computer.
        
               | fragmede wrote:
               | 1996 is when OBD2 became mandatory for all cars
               | manufactured in the United States
        
             | Sebb767 wrote:
             | > plugs into your ODBII port
             | 
             | Which is usually quite easy to check. It's not a guarantee,
             | but with someone sophisticated enough to crack a modern car
             | there's a good possibility they know to check the OBDII
             | slot.
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | They come with extension cables. You can always plug it
               | in under the dash and leave the exposed one disconnected.
               | 
               | If they are sophisticated and have time to take the whole
               | car apart then you are SOL anyway as they will find any
               | transmitters with an SDR.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | abraae wrote:
           | If you want to diy it, Check out ray Ozzie's recent project
           | featured here on HN recently. Very reasonable priced with one
           | up front payment for (10 ?) years of connectivity
        
             | sipacate wrote:
             | Here are some articles and projects where we show how to do
             | Asset Tracking. One article is about an Iceland trip, the
             | other is about building out a GPS tracker, complete with
             | data dashboards.
             | 
             | Iceland: https://blues.io/blog/vacation-gps-asset-tracker/
             | 
             | Full Asset Tracking Project: https://www.hackster.io/paige-
             | niedringhaus/low-code-gps-asse...
             | 
             | Adapting this for a car would be straightforward.
        
             | electrum wrote:
             | $49 for the device and data: https://blues.io/
        
             | mikeatlas wrote:
             | https://blues.io/
        
               | heleninboodler wrote:
               | This feels like a dumb question, but I can't find
               | dimensions of the Notecard anywhere and I can't quite
               | judge the scale from the pictures. How big is it?
        
               | c17r wrote:
               | https://github.com/blues/note-
               | hardware/blob/master/Notecard/... has the measurements,
               | looks like 35mm x 30mm
        
               | bigiain wrote:
               | Keep in mind that's he card with a M.2 edge connector on
               | one end. Mostly you'd be plugging that into something, at
               | least to hook up the power/data lines. They sell "Note
               | Carriers" for that, which end up making the combo bigger
               | than that.
               | 
               | Here's a pic of the note card plugged into their
               | Raspberry Pi note carrier. That's a standard 40 pin 0.1"
               | spacing connector on the left, so it's 2" plus the
               | mounting holes in that dimension. 65x57mm and about 20mm
               | tall for the stackable 40 pin socket+pins.
               | 
               | https://flic.kr/p/2mkQAS7
        
               | Workaccount2 wrote:
               | What service are they using that gives 10 yrs of
               | connectivity for a flat price?
        
               | stingrae wrote:
               | It's not 10 years of unlimited data. It's 500MB of data
               | usable over 10 years.
        
               | brk wrote:
               | Probably "VC Cash".
               | 
               | I've got a couple of the units and can say they are
               | working well and very easy to interface with.
        
         | SavantIdiot wrote:
         | Read the reviews on the GPS tracking charger... either the
         | people who bought it couldn't figure out how to use it, or its
         | another scam product from china we see flooding amazon.
        
           | lrvick wrote:
           | When we audited it as best we could tell it was phoning home
           | to some central Chinese server if you put a sim in it.
           | 
           | So spy tools that spy on the spys.
           | 
           | It is sketchy as all hell and should not be sold.
           | 
           | That said this stuff pops up everywhere.
           | 
           | I just cite it as examples.
        
         | pa7ch wrote:
         | Curious if chromeOS does anything special here to mitigate usb
         | attacks.
        
           | lrvick wrote:
           | They do nothing.
        
           | staticassertion wrote:
           | You need to explicitly mount (in your ChromeOS settings) any
           | USB devices to the Linux system. Other than that I'm not
           | aware of any specific mitigations.
        
             | grepfru_it wrote:
             | So if I plug in a usb keyboard or mouse, they do not work
             | until I activate them in settings? Sounds like an easy way
             | for grandma to buy Dell over Google
        
               | staticassertion wrote:
               | In the _Linux environment_ specifically. The average user
               | is not using the Linux environment, it has to be enabled
               | in developer settings.
        
         | hughrr wrote:
         | When USB came out I was working in the defence sector. We
         | closed the vector off with cages for the PCs with tied looms
         | under desks, epoxy in all the holes we didn't want people to
         | use and with threat of being in deep shit.
        
           | lrvick wrote:
           | When I was frequently using things like this on coworkers in
           | red teaming (back when being in an office was a thing)
           | putting my own desktop in a steel cage with a good lock
           | proved effective against retaliation.
           | 
           | Then we moved on to attacking the firmware in each others
           | keyboards.
        
             | ManBlanket wrote:
             | Being in an office is definitely still a thing. Let's be
             | real, vaccinated adults working from home is a privilege.
             | Mostly a white upper middle class one. Always was.
        
             | infogulch wrote:
             | Since this has generated some discussion on locks and
             | picking, there's been some interesting developments on
             | "unpickable locks" that sidestep the tolerance problem by
             | decoupling setting the pins from testing them. I.e. pins
             | are tested all at once after they are physically decoupled
             | from the key & keyway, eliminating state space reduction
             | attacks (aka picking one pin at a time) leaving only brute
             | force.
             | 
             | One such effort features locks made by Stuff Made Here sent
             | to Lock Picking Lawyer. According to LPL the locks are
             | theoretically sound and he did not attempt to pick them,
             | but these particular implementations had a couple (easily
             | fixable) bypasses. Made for interesting videos on both
             | sides:
             | 
             | Stuff Made Here describes the design in detail: TWO
             | Unpickable (?) Locks for Lock Picking Lawyer! -
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A2NY29iQdI
             | 
             | Lock Picking Lawyer reviews them and performs some
             | bypasses: [1299] Unpickable Locks From Stuff Made Here -
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ecy1FBdCRbQ
        
               | minism wrote:
               | Thanks for sharing, fascinating stuff.
        
               | infogulch wrote:
               | Whelp it seems I recalled _incorrectly_ this time,
               | because LPL _did_ pick the second one open, via a
               | weakness in the design that he believes can be patched. I
               | don 't think my _sentiment_ was totally off base, but
               | clearly my statement about not being picked was factually
               | incorrect.
        
             | gruez wrote:
             | >putting my own desktop in a steel cage with a good lock
             | proved effective against retaliation.
             | 
             | >Then we moved on to attacking the firmware in each others
             | keyboards.
             | 
             | In what world is hacking keyboard firmware easier than
             | lockpicking?
        
               | mhh__ wrote:
               | If you don't know how to pick a lock it's a lot easier. I
               | assume I could learn but I know a lot more about firmware
               | than barrels.
        
               | Forge36 wrote:
               | Harder to spot visibly?
        
               | michaelt wrote:
               | I once saw a PC security case where instead of the lock
               | cylinder retracting a bolt, it turned a screw thread and
               | opened the case by about half a millimeter. It took the
               | guy unlocking it a good fifty turns to get the PC out of
               | it.
               | 
               | And there were two - one on each side. What's more, it
               | was a tubular lock, so if you were single-pin picking
               | you'd have to pick it 5 times per rotation.
               | 
               | Nothing that would stand up to a battery powered angle
               | grinder, of course.
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | I don't know anyone that would SPP a tubular lock in the
               | field.
               | 
               | $40 for tools designed to pick all pins at once and make
               | a "key" with some quick impressioning motions.
               | 
               | Some do have spool pins. In those cases you will need
               | manual fiddling to pick it once then you have a key to
               | keep spinning.
               | 
               | Still, sounds like an interesting design. Link?
        
               | michaelt wrote:
               | I was under the impression impressioning relied on all
               | the lock's springs and driver pins being identical, and
               | that better tubular locks avoided that?
               | 
               | I looked for a picture of the case but couldn't find one.
               | I was in that college CAD lab... quite a long time ago.
        
               | jayd16 wrote:
               | It's a gentleman's sport.
        
               | Godel_unicode wrote:
               | In the world where one is a firmware exploit developer
               | and don't know how to pick locks...?
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | We were all capable of both and had to plan accordingly.
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | In a world where I am the one choosing the locks.
               | 
               | I taught everyone else involved to lockpick in the first
               | place and chose locks well beyond any of our skill levels
               | to pick.
        
               | dharmab wrote:
               | In a world where keyboards are open source programmable
               | devices: https://qmk.fm/
        
               | mijoharas wrote:
               | software problem, not a hardware problem. :)
        
               | jimmySixDOF wrote:
               | and what's this site we are on's name again ?
        
             | hughrr wrote:
             | We just broke the locks on the cages with a screwdriver.
             | Locks only keep honest people honest.
        
               | xenadu02 wrote:
               | Most common locks can be easily picked with a tiny bit of
               | practice. I'm completely incompetent but I can pick any
               | Master lock in 5 minutes or less.
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | Which is why you should never use Master Locks.
               | 
               | I am pretty decent at lockpicking but I can't pick a
               | Medeco or better in any practical amount of time and very
               | few in the world can.
               | 
               | Little bit more money vastly reduces your attack surface.
        
               | Godel_unicode wrote:
               | > Little bit more money
               | 
               | Aren't medeco padlocks like $100, whereas master lock
               | padlocks are less than $20?
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | vdqtp3 wrote:
               | What's the value of the asset it's protecting?
        
               | dekhn wrote:
               | I remember learning how to break master locks back in the
               | 1980s. But I also heard they changed the mechanism after
               | that.
        
               | danachow wrote:
               | I'm pretty sure they did on a number of models, but it
               | wasn't for the better
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | I went to home depot a couple years ago and bought every
               | model of master lock they sold. Picked all of them in an
               | afternoon.
               | 
               | I then taught kids to pick them.
        
               | dekhn wrote:
               | do you mean combo locks, or key locks?
        
               | ris wrote:
               | That would generally be considered "detectable intrusion"
               | though.
        
               | liketochill wrote:
               | Not if you replace it with another lock that looks
               | similar
        
               | richardw wrote:
               | I think when you get home and your key doesn't work on
               | the lock, it might tip you off.
        
               | liketochill wrote:
               | When I had towers or pizza boxes I pretty much never
               | touched them once it became normal to leave them on all
               | the time, which was as soon as they were always
               | downloading from the internet at 3.3 kbps.
               | 
               | If the case was locked in a cage I wouldn't notice until
               | I needed to put access the tower to plug in a usb, which
               | might not be for weeks these days.
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | I don't expect good locks to keep people out. I expect
               | good locks to be tamper evident so I know I can't trust
               | my system.
        
               | btbuildem wrote:
               | Imagine someone broke the lock, but did nothing more.
               | 
               | You'd be driven mad trying to find what the intrusion was
               | on your system.
        
               | Ajedi32 wrote:
               | Unfortunately, there aren't really all that many "good
               | locks" on the market. The Lock Picking Lawyer on
               | YouTube[1] has pretty much destroyed my faith in the
               | modern lockmaking industry.
               | 
               | [1]: https://www.youtube.com/c/lockpickinglawyer/videos
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | I have hundreds of locks and lock bypass tools. I make
               | sure to pay for ones that are not quickly defeated when
               | it counts.
               | 
               | LPL covers most locks in the wild which are bad, but
               | locks like the Protec2 are quite strong and while it is
               | implied one person in the world can beat it with custom
               | tools (huxleypig)... even then not quickly.
        
               | Godel_unicode wrote:
               | And the best features are (proudly) locked behind
               | patents, so if you need a great lock in a form factor
               | they don't make, oh well.
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | Some of the best locks are very very hard to buy as well
               | and still protected with weird export controls held over
               | from the encryption export days.
               | 
               | I frequently use FF-L-2740 spec locks, which is the spec
               | locks need to hit for use in classified government work,
               | military contractors etc. They are very good locks I
               | can't begin to defeat in any practical amount of time and
               | don't know anyone who can. Particularly since they have
               | timed brute force lockouts.
               | 
               | Problem is not a single vendor is allowed to sell locks
               | of that spec to civilians by contract so you have to jump
               | through lots of hoops to get them.
        
               | traceroute66 wrote:
               | > there aren't really all that many "good locks" on the
               | market.
               | 
               | You can say that again.
               | 
               | I was once proud of myself for having thoroughly
               | researched the market and I thought EVVA MCS was a safe
               | bet[1].
               | 
               | Then someone showed me a YouTube video (published a year
               | after I bought the locks) of someone picking it (not LPL,
               | another YouTuber). Given the cost of EVVA MCS I was not a
               | happy bunny.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.evva.com/int-en/products/mechanical-
               | locking-syst...
        
               | repiret wrote:
               | He can defeat just about anything, but he's also
               | exceptionally skilled. As a consumer of locks, I expect
               | them to be defeatable by a skilled lockpicker. But I
               | don't expect them to be defeatable by a bic pen or by
               | reaching in the keyhole with an oddly shaped wire to move
               | the locking paul.
               | 
               | You can buy locks that don't have easy bypasses, and
               | can't be easily drilled, and can't be picked by
               | beginners.
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | You can also buy locks that can't be picked by people
               | like me who have been at it 20 years.
               | 
               | To keep people like me out for a while buy a Medeco. Pins
               | not only need to be at the right height, but also the
               | right rotation. They are a real pain in the ass to pick.
               | I don't even know any locksmiths that can pick them. Good
               | security for the money.
               | 
               | Bosnian Bill and LPL... Okay they can pick them, but they
               | are like the 0.0001% in skill.
               | 
               | Still even then pay an extra $100 for really high quality
               | disk detainer lock like a Protec 2 and you will keep even
               | them out for quite a while.
               | 
               | That is what I use on my luggage. TSA has to call me to
               | unlock them with my consent every time. The way I like
               | it. Great tip I picked up from Deviant Ollam.
        
               | d1lanka wrote:
               | Out of the brands you've mentioned, any particular models
               | of locks?
        
               | mmastrac wrote:
               | I'm surprised TSA doesn't just cut it off, TBH.
        
               | ukd1 wrote:
               | Also this; especially after watching this happen to
               | DeviantOllam
        
               | djrogers wrote:
               | > TSA has to call me to unlock them with my consent every
               | time.
               | 
               | No - no they don't.
               | 
               | Anything locked with a non-TSA compliant lock is fair
               | game for the bolt cutters, and frankly probably draws a
               | lot of extra attention.
               | 
               | All you're doing is asking for extra screening...
               | 
               | [1] https://www.tsa.gov/blog/2014/02/18/tsa-travel-tips-
               | tuesday-...
        
               | throaway46546 wrote:
               | Not if you have a firearm in your luggage.
        
               | chipsa wrote:
               | The part you're missing is : firearm means they shouldn't
               | (legally can't) try to open the case without you.
        
               | d1lanka wrote:
               | Which locks don't have easy bypasses?
               | 
               | I've been wondering the most
               | sophisticated/effective/secure locks regular consumers
               | have access to.
               | 
               | In other words, which locks does the Lock Picking Lawyer
               | himself use in his house to protect his family?
        
               | repiret wrote:
               | He has specifically mentioned BiLock as one he would
               | consider. As another comment in this thread mentioned,
               | Mendeco is also well regarded.
        
               | hirundo wrote:
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qV8QKZNFxLw
        
               | akavel wrote:
               | Apparently, picked here: https://youtu.be/ai5Hf-wPXFE
               | 
               | but check out this one instead:
               | https://youtu.be/sES_Hbj92BQ - ~2h to open fully (though
               | the author of the video claims impressioning could speed
               | up the thing; anyway, reportedly attacking the door is
               | just easier in this case)
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | I have Bowley locks in my collection. Amazing quality.
               | 
               | Not only does it take a couple hours to pick for an
               | expert but you have to make a custom set of tools that
               | only work on that one particular lock.
               | 
               | If a lock keeps someone out for several hours it is a
               | great lock.
        
               | Norlin wrote:
               | Guy who made the video here. The lock mechanism itself
               | isn't one of the easiest, but also not one of the hardest
               | to pick skill-wise. However, it does take a very long
               | time to pick through which means that the lock is doing
               | its job very well. Also, I have read that this lock is
               | very resistant to destructive attack as well. So
               | combining pick resistance with physical resistance, you
               | have a very good lock as long as it's installed on a good
               | door and the building has all other security measures in
               | place (no ground level unprotected windows, etc)
               | 
               | Also worth noting, Bosnian Bill (a more recognized name)
               | also attempted this lock here
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLeiPmfm-2s
        
               | godelski wrote:
               | Just because a highly skilled professional lock picker
               | can pick a lock doesn't mean you can nor the parent's
               | coworkers.
        
               | worik wrote:
               | For most uses of a lock its job is to keep honest people
               | out.
               | 
               | I have had doors kicked in, so these days I want the lock
               | to be the weakest, not strongest, part of the door. So
               | when it is kicked in it is a cheap lock that is destroyed
               | not an expensive hardwood door (I like hardwood doors...)
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | Most locks can be picked by a child with a hair pin. I
               | would know. I grew up as that child opening every door
               | and safe I could to amuse myself.
               | 
               | If a door is broken then a lock did its job. It let you
               | know you were broken into.
        
               | worik wrote:
               | Cheaper if the lock is broken. Locks (that are broken
               | easily) are cheaper than doors, which are not hard to
               | break and expensive to fix
               | 
               | Who is going to pick a lock that is cheap and easy to
               | break?
        
               | caf wrote:
               | Even cheaper just to leave the door unlocked, I suppose.
        
               | IncRnd wrote:
               | > Who is going to pick a lock that is cheap and easy to
               | break?
               | 
               | Probably a criminal who is trying to be quiet, so they
               | can enter your house.
        
               | JTbane wrote:
               | Watching his channel, a beefy disc tumbler locks seem to
               | be your best bet for keeping a bike secure.
               | 
               | For your home, a high security pin tumbler with security
               | pins are fine too. It takes very high skill to defeat
               | these.
        
               | nrr wrote:
               | The lock doesn't even need to be that good. As you said,
               | the name of the game is intrusion detection, not
               | necessarily intrusion avoidance.
               | 
               | The Lock Picking Lawyer chronicled very nicely a
               | technique for turning a KW1-keyed Kwikset core (extremely
               | common here in the US) into something that is tamper
               | evident. See the YouTube video linked herein.
               | 
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JlgKCUqzA0
               | 
               | This kind of thing thwarts covert attack attempts and
               | serves as a good way to trigger an audit on the trust of
               | the asset behind that lock.
        
               | Chirael wrote:
               | I'm into locksport as well and would favor that kind of
               | modification on a back door which is more likely to be
               | targeted by thieves. Not sure I'd do it on a front door
               | in case I put a family member actually locked themselves
               | out and actually needed a locksmith to be able to get in.
        
               | nrr wrote:
               | Sure, and the application of access control devices
               | generally requires a degree of discretion and
               | understanding what your threat model is.
               | 
               | If you don't fear your front door will be clandestinely
               | accessed, I feel it's perfectly valid not to worry about
               | doing this to the lock there.
               | 
               | Not being you, that isn't my call to make.
        
               | Chirael wrote:
               | Yeah, my threat model is common house thieves, not
               | intelligence agencies or police.
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | > I don't expect good locks to keep people out. I expect
               | good locks to be tamper evident so I know I can't trust
               | my system.
               | 
               | The term for what you want is a "seal", not a lock.
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | My school had a way to keep peripherals from wandering off,
           | but if all you need to do is swap the cables then I'm not
           | sure that would still work. Wrapping the cables into a wiring
           | loom makes that process slower, assuming the loom is
           | complicated enough. Did you ever use heat shrink? Or locking
           | cable ties?
           | 
           | What the school did was run a steel cable behind the desks,
           | then put a loop of the mouse chord through a steel washer and
           | ran the security cable through all the loops. If you secure
           | both ends you can't get the cables separated even with slack.
           | 
           | The trick is that the hole in the washer had to be smaller
           | than the connector so you couldn't fish it back through no
           | matter how much slack you get. That could still work for
           | USB-A, but these days the connectors are getting smaller than
           | the diameter of curvature of the cable, so you'd break it
           | trying to do this. And on many peripherals you could destroy
           | the chord without reducing the value of the device. One could
           | cut the cable and install this Trojan one on many devices
           | these days, the only telltale would be that the cable isn't
           | routed properly, which might be harder to notice immediately.
        
             | lrvick wrote:
             | On most keyboards and mice the cables are not soldered on
             | the inside but just a quick connector.
             | 
             | You can get a female/male versions of this connector placed
             | on either side of an attiny85 for a quick solderless
             | implant no one will ever see.
             | 
             | Then just undo 2 screws, plug your implant inside the
             | mouse/keyboard, screw it back.
             | 
             | To make this harder intentionally strip the screws with a
             | drill, understanding you will never be able to repair that
             | unit again.
        
               | a1369209993 wrote:
               | > To make this harder
               | 
               | Or, y'know, open it up and solder the connecter together
               | (or remove the connector and solder the cable wires
               | directly).
        
               | hinkley wrote:
               | My anecdote was a bit old and I'm certain some of those
               | devices had soldered cables, meaning that a sheared wire
               | couldn't be handled by buying a new chord or combining
               | parts of two mice. Because I specifically looked for that
               | a few times with no luck.
               | 
               | But they're right, these days when you crack open things
               | you often find a connector soldered to the motherboard
               | and the cable is merely plugged in. I think it's just
               | easier to manufacture. Pick and place, bulk solder and
               | then a machine to plug in the cable, fast as you like,
               | maybe with a loop in it as a poor man's strain protector.
        
               | a1369209993 wrote:
               | > meaning that a sheared wire couldn't be handled by
               | [...] combining parts of two mice.
               | 
               | Well, if you're _stealing_ them, you only need parts from
               | one mouse: cut the cable close to the mouse, untangle it
               | from whatever crap it 's locked to, take mouse and cable
               | home with you, disassemble mouse, feed cable back though
               | (I think it's called) grommet, strip cable, pick out
               | wires, solder wires to approriate mouse internals,
               | reassemble mouse, done. You have a working mouse with
               | only slightly shorter cable than before.
               | 
               | The point of using soldered cables for security is that
               | setting up a soldering iron near a computer is
               | conspicuous, so you get caught if try to install a
               | attiny85 inside the mouse that way. You can still _steal_
               | stuff just fine.
        
               | victorhooi wrote:
               | When you say strip the screw - do you mean strip the
               | screw head, by drilling out the head?
               | 
               | That's evil...
               | 
               | (Or do you know some way to strip the thread itself).
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | Yeah just intentionally drill the head so those screws
               | are not coming out again without power tools which should
               | be obvious in the open where they are deployed.
               | 
               | Or just epoxy the whole thing together.
        
               | mhb wrote:
               | Epoxying the screws in might be easier?
        
               | IIsi50MHz wrote:
               | Seems there are special drill bits for removing stripped
               | screws...
        
               | ioseph wrote:
               | Few strokes of a hacksaw and a rubber band (for grip). Or
               | just some pliers
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | If you can get away with using a drill on a keyboard and
               | mouse covertly, I want to watch.
        
               | mhb wrote:
               | Good luck with those and that size screw.
        
             | hughrr wrote:
             | All the cables were terminated inside the box and strapped
             | every 1 inch with cable ties. Nothing was exposed that
             | could be disconnected other than the monitor IEC lead.
        
           | max-ibel wrote:
           | That's hard if your laptop relies on USB-C for charging...
        
             | lrvick wrote:
             | I specifically don't recommend laptops that rely on USB C
             | charging for applications where trust is critical -unless-
             | they are running Linux with USBGuard or QubesOS.
             | 
             | That said I did make transparent and easily auditable USB
             | type C condoms for one client that really wanted to use USB
             | type C laptops.
             | 
             | Systems with security as a strong priority like the Librem
             | 14 use barrel jacks for good reason.
             | 
             | I am in fact implying those that allow use of macbooks at
             | coffee shops to directly access production systems at FAANG
             | and fintech companies are taking a very inappropriate risk
             | :-P
        
               | pgeorgi wrote:
               | USB C charging happens well below the OS layer, using
               | firmware that often isn't all that good. USBGuard or
               | QubesOS won't help there (but will somewhat mitigate
               | attacks trying to move up the stack)
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | The problem is not the charging. The problem is that a
               | fake charger cable can run an HID attack over the +/-
               | pins before it does a pass through to the power
               | negotiation MCU for charging.
               | 
               | A tampered USB C to C cable on a conference room table
               | can compromise people all day long.
               | 
               | If the USB C charge ports cut the data pins entirely then
               | great, but I have not seen that be the case on any
               | laptops yet.
        
               | dolmen wrote:
               | Because few want USB-C ports dedicated to charging. The
               | point of USB-C if flexibility. "One port to rule them
               | all".
        
         | traceroute66 wrote:
         | > Windows and Mac users are currently easy targets.
         | 
         | Not true, at least for iPhone / iPad users:                  -
         | 1. Download Apple Configurator (free to anyone)        - 2.
         | Create new config profile        - 3. Setup your device in
         | "supervised" mode and apply said profile (the reason for this
         | step is that the "best" config profile options are only
         | available in supervised mode).
         | 
         | Config profile items of interest include, but may not be
         | limited to:                  - "Allow USB accessories while
         | device is locked"        - "Allow pairing with non-configurator
         | hosts"        - "Allow putting into recovery mode from an
         | unpaired device"
        
           | lrvick wrote:
           | If the USB device is not permitted to enumerate when the
           | device is locked, then the payload just fires when
           | enumeration happens after unlock.
           | 
           | You either ban USB devices entirely or you make users approve
           | on every connection with no white listing.
        
         | Hacktek wrote:
         | $600, 3 meter range. wtf? How is OMG Cable able to be so much
         | cheaper and get so much more range?
        
         | e40 wrote:
         | _Windows and Mac users are currently easy targets. I don 't
         | know of any good defenses there._
         | 
         | It's crazy to me that this is true. Does the government pay
         | Microsoft and Apple to keep it this way, or are they just
         | negligent?
        
           | fortran77 wrote:
           | Apple claims they're "secure by design" when clearly they're
           | not.[1] I don't think they're explicitly cooperating with any
           | Government, I just think they have enough disgruntled
           | employees who cooperate with the Government and companies
           | that sell penetration software to put in back doors and
           | enable exploits.
           | 
           | There's much less discontent among the rank-and-file at
           | Microsoft, so this sort of thing happens less with them.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.apple.com/business/docs/site/AAW_Platform_Sec
           | uri...
        
           | Closi wrote:
           | It's not really practical to defend against for most end
           | users.
           | 
           | Keeping a whitelist of known keyboards and mice is really the
           | only defence even on Linux, and unless you work in a data
           | centre that's probably way overkill.
           | 
           | With a home PC that doesn't really work though, because in
           | order to authenticate your mouse without some kind of central
           | mouse log on a server you probably need to click a button,
           | which you can't do without authenticating your mouse.
        
             | lrvick wrote:
             | Whitelists don't work.
             | 
             | As an attacker I just have the bootloaders of my malicious
             | devices advertize the USB IDs of whitelisted devices like
             | Apple Keyboards.
             | 
             | The computer has no way of knowing it is not authentic.
             | There is no signing or certification for USB devices.
             | 
             | The only solution is a kernel that can place all newly
             | attached USB devices in a queue for manual approval.
             | 
             | This is what USBGuard and QubesOS both do. The Linux kernel
             | and udev have native support to hook USB devices early
             | making this easy.
             | 
             | It means no one can drive by plug something in when your
             | computer is locked. You will get a popup asking if you want
             | to give some device other than the keyboard you booted with
             | access to behave as a keyboard .
             | 
             | Also the majority of attacks I have seen in the wild
             | attacking production systems were via endpoint compromises.
             | 
             | If your laptop has remote access to said high value
             | datacenter, then your laptop is a high value target.
             | 
             | Note though that laptops have a nice advantage for this
             | threat model as most have built in PS/2 trackpad and mouse
             | which can let you approve external keyboards/mice etc.
        
               | R0b0t1 wrote:
               | Can still pop OS with just enumeration and descriptors.
        
               | whyoh wrote:
               | >The only solution is a kernel that can place all newly
               | attached USB devices in a queue for manual approval.
               | 
               | Would it recognize the newly attached one, if you do the
               | swap while the computer is turned off and they have the
               | same HW ID?
               | 
               | Because if not, then it's not much better than what
               | Windows lets you do with group policies. Although on
               | Windows you could do this swap even while the OS is
               | running.
        
               | TeMPOraL wrote:
               | > _It means no one can drive by plug something in when
               | your computer is locked. You will get a popup asking if
               | you want to give some device other than the keyboard you
               | booted with access to behave as a keyboard ._
               | 
               | Makes me think, what would happen if I plugged this
               | cable, unplugged the keyboard, and power-cycled the
               | computer? Or do a hard power down, then the switcheroo,
               | and then power up? Would USBGuard/QubesOS block the new
               | device, even though it's the one it just booted with?
               | 
               | (I think finding your computer rebooted would fly under
               | the radar of most of the users - they'd blame it on
               | automatic updates or intermittent power failure.)
               | 
               | On that note, I wonder how small you could go with a MITM
               | device to attach between victim's peripheral and their
               | computer. Could you pack enough useful features in a
               | dongle that would not be immediately noticeable by most
               | users?
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | If you rebooted my computer you would be greeted with a
               | full disk decryption prompt which requires a smartcard
               | and a pin to unlock.
               | 
               | It won't go unnoticed.
               | 
               | If your computer can reboot itself for updates that
               | should be a cause for concern as it means your FDE is
               | being cached somewhere that can use it unattended. I
               | don't allow such things personally.
               | 
               | You do have to check for any untrusted USB devices at
               | boot on a desktop. No getting around that one as you need
               | to be able to use input devices at boot. Best bet is a
               | PS/2 keyboard but those are getting harder to find.
               | 
               | For a laptop you have a better story as you can trust the
               | internal PS/2 keyboard/mouse then use that to approve USB
               | things fresh as needed and dictate what applications they
               | get access to.
               | 
               | I connect my USB webcam to the one VM that needs it on
               | demand, for instance.
        
               | namibj wrote:
               | Assuming you're using LUKS with device mapper, this
               | reboot did be able to be a plain kexec, and the raw disk
               | key can be placed in a pre-defined location in RAM, like
               | how the dmesg buffer is something set up to be
               | persistent, for recovering information from right before
               | a crash, even if only via an automated log push daemon.
        
               | TeMPOraL wrote:
               | > _It won 't go unnoticed._
               | 
               | Of course the reboot itself will be noticed when the user
               | gets back - whether it's the login prompt, or boot
               | prompt, or just all applications being closed. I meant it
               | might not be noticed _as something unusual_ , warranting
               | further investigation. Typical user, even tech-savvy one,
               | will just think, "must have been a power glitch", or
               | "damn, those updates forced a reboot again".
               | 
               | The latter is something Windows users are conditioned
               | for. Coming back from the toilet to be faced by a fresh
               | login prompt is common enough even in the age of Windows
               | 10 - and especially when the laptop is controlled by your
               | employer, as IT tends to force a stricter schedule on
               | updates[0]. In my case, this happens 1-2 times a week.
               | While I'm working from home this doesn't matter, but if I
               | were back in the office and came back from lunch to a
               | rebooted computer, I would've assumed it was updates
               | again.
               | 
               | > _You do have to check for any untrusted USB devices at
               | boot on a desktop. No getting around that one as you need
               | to be able to use input devices at boot._
               | 
               | Makes sense, thanks for clarifying. I was assuming at
               | least some of these solutions are trying to eliminate
               | this requirement, but ultimately it may not be possible.
               | 
               | (Or perhaps it would be, if USB had something like HDCP
               | so that you couldn't construct a dongle that could be
               | transparently inserted between the computer and the
               | peripheral.)
               | 
               | > _For a laptop you have a better story_
               | 
               | Right. Also, in case of attacker forcing reboot, they
               | can't rely on users assuming it was a power glitch
               | because laptops have batteries.
               | 
               | > _I connect my USB webcam to the one VM that needs it on
               | demand, for instance._
               | 
               | I need to read more about such setups, where you
               | compartmentalize your system with VMs. Is there any good
               | primer you could recommend?
               | 
               | --
               | 
               | [0] - I'm increasingly convinced Windows 10 update system
               | is evil, and does this on purpose. It just _so happens_
               | that it always forces an update and reboot on my work
               | machine whenever I step away from it for more than 10
               | minutes. It 's like it was monitoring idle time, and
               | thinking "ooh, the user is away, let's reboot the machine
               | and lose all the state". I also recently had to switch
               | Lenovo updater malware to manual, because it kept
               | choosing the exact middle of our weekly team meeting as
               | the time to forcibly update video drivers, blanking my
               | screen for anywhere between 2 and 20 minutes.
               | 
               | (Did I mention I _hate_ automatic updates?)
        
             | max-ibel wrote:
             | There are dongles that only let power through:
             | 
             | https://www.amazon.com/PortaPow-3rd-Data-Blocker-
             | Pack/dp/B00...
             | 
             | But it's a pain in the neck to always use them and
             | difficult to enforce use in an enterprise setting.
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | And there are people who have disguised badusb attacks as
               | those dongles. Works every time.
               | 
               | I co-designed some transparent USB C ones for a client
               | that are easy to audit.
               | 
               | Hope to take them to market some day.
        
       | flixic wrote:
       | Took me a moment to realise, but this is for keyboards, not
       | iPhones. I don't think (?) anybody can access anything from an
       | iPhone using an evil cable (using publicly-known attacks).
        
         | ttul wrote:
         | I'm kind of surprised that Apple doesn't encrypt keystrokes
         | between its keyboards and the host machine, given than they
         | have the capability to enable the keyboard to authenticate the
         | host using PKI.
         | 
         | Maybe this is on their todo list.
        
           | girishso wrote:
           | So we can't use third party keyboards with Apple devices? No
           | thanks.
        
             | mikestew wrote:
             | That's...not what parent typed. Use whatever keyboard you
             | like, but you'll only get E2EE with an Apple keyboard.
        
               | VenTatsu wrote:
               | The cable claims that it's a random 3rd party keyboard
               | when it talks to the Mac, the cable claims it's a random
               | non Apple device when it talks to the keyboard, the
               | keyboard falls back to non-encrypted mode as it's not on
               | a product that supports it.
               | 
               | Man in the middle is hard to prevent when you need to be
               | compatible with incredibly broken insecure legacy
               | protocols.
               | 
               | Apple could maybe go the route that all new Apple
               | keyboards only work with new Macs and iOS devices, but
               | that would mean that they can't work with any existing
               | Apple hardware or third party systems.
        
               | ttul wrote:
               | And does Apple care? Unlikely... Preventing MITM cable
               | hacks is not a common use case.
        
               | amatecha wrote:
               | I guess the MITM attack could be mitigated in the OS by
               | showing an "encrypted keyboard connection" UI indicator
               | of sorts. Assuming the MITM hardware doesn't exploit a
               | vulnerability in the OS to incorrectly show that
               | indicator. ;)
        
           | duskwuff wrote:
           | You kind of get that with Bluetooth keyboards.
        
         | VenTatsu wrote:
         | These are more general purpose than just those attacks, the
         | author of the firmware has demo videos of cables attached to
         | Android and iOS devices that when the payload runs they open
         | the system browser and loads a specific page. Depending on what
         | you can do with a web page at any given time on those devices
         | it could be a springboard.
         | 
         | You could also do some passive/active data gathering. On
         | Windows when you plug in an iOS device, if the device trusts
         | the computer it will allow it to access all the photos and
         | videos on the device. The cable it self could then start
         | grabbing those images and sending them over the WiFi link. I
         | don't know if these cables support that, but the concept is
         | valid.
        
         | fragmede wrote:
         | The boot rom of iPhone 8 and older have a publicly known
         | exploit. If you plugged your phone in to charge, and then it
         | spontaneously rebooted, how much forensic digging could you
         | actually do?
         | 
         | How much are you willing to bet that there's _not_ a private
         | exploit against newer iPhones? Not in terms of dollars, but in
         | terms of private data that Apple 's iPhone that you're renting
         | from them has access to.
        
       | lisper wrote:
       | I'm not sure what is scarier, the existence of this cable, or the
       | amount of Javascript that this site tries to run when you visit
       | it. According to my NoScript plugin, it's loading Javascript from
       | at least 17 different domains.
        
         | kag0 wrote:
         | Totally unrelated to this cable, but since you mention it...
         | 
         | I've been trying to build web/single page applications using
         | new ES modules and no build tool, so all dependencies are
         | pulled from their creator/CDN rather than bundled locally.
         | Would this set off flags for a no-script user?
        
           | lisper wrote:
           | The more domains you load JS from, the more entities have
           | control over what happens on that page, and the higher the
           | risk that one of those entities is trying to do something
           | nefarious. So yes, loading all the scripts from one place
           | will set off fewer alarm bells, at least for me.
        
           | judge2020 wrote:
           | If they use pure noscript with scripts disabled globally,
           | then yes, it'll just be unable to load the one first-party
           | script.
        
       | icedistilled wrote:
       | After looking at that product page and seeing how something that
       | looks innocuous can be so insidious, does anyone else wonder just
       | a bit whether the page is not so innocent and visiting it may
       | have been a mistake.
        
         | prox wrote:
         | That would be shooting yourself in the foot really. Hackers
         | hacking hackers?
        
         | coding123 wrote:
         | Yes I had that thought too. However I was glad to learn of it's
         | existence so at least I know what is scarily possible.
        
         | blondin wrote:
         | yep.
         | 
         | chrome is now showing me a new "you added this to your cart"
         | feature on my new tab page. it says i have added that product
         | to my "cart".
         | 
         | that page is obviously doing something but i can't say anything
         | evil.
        
         | 8fingerlouie wrote:
         | Hak5 is legitimate. They sell all kinds of pentesting
         | equipment, and most of it is good. It's mostly just small ARM
         | linux "boxes" with some Bash scripts on top, though things like
         | the WiFi Pineapple will (attempt) to break wifi passwords for
         | you (https://shop.hak5.org/collections/sale/products/wifi-
         | pineapp...)
         | 
         | For lack of a better use (just a hobby for me), i use a Screen
         | Crap (https://shop.hak5.org/collections/sale/products/screen-
         | crab) along with a Key Croc
         | (https://shop.hak5.org/collections/sale/products/key-croc) for
         | a poor mans KVM to my headless server :)
         | 
         | I don't know about the omg.lol page :)
        
       | shapefrog wrote:
       | You should use a data blocker when using an unknown USB cable to
       | charge your phone. Occasionally described as a USB condom.
       | 
       | Simply a Male to Female USB adaptor with the data wires not
       | passed through.
        
         | shadilay wrote:
         | Is that USB-PD compatible?
        
           | mschuster91 wrote:
           | The "USB condoms" I know are USB2/3 only which means there
           | isn't any form of PD negotiation anyway, and the oldschool
           | Qualcomm Quickcharge and Apple's negotiation won't work
           | either as these depend on D+/D-.
           | 
           | A decent USB-C condom would _also_ have to cut not just the
           | USB2 D+ /D- line, but also the USB3 SS and SBU lines... the
           | really interesting thing is the CC wires, since without these
           | you can't have reversible connectors, but not cutting them
           | leaves an avenue for attackers (e.g. putting an USB-C port
           | into JTAG mode). And _on top_ of that USB-C PD 1 used the
           | Vbus line with an overlaid HF signal.
           | 
           | That means a decent USB-C condom will need:
           | 
           | - a low-pass on the Vbus line to block PD1
           | 
           | - cut D+/D-, SS, SBU
           | 
           | - cut CC1/CC2 and insert an as-dumb-as-possible controller
           | chip to handle plug orientation
        
             | PeterisP wrote:
             | What I hear from you is that a decent USB-C-condom needs to
             | be a smart "MITM" device that has sufficient internal logic
             | to proxy the power negotiation between devices at both
             | ends.
        
             | megous wrote:
             | You don't need orientation handling if you've cut all the
             | other signals, so...
             | 
             | Power negotiation is also not a big problem. Just use a
             | correct resistor on the CC pin and you can make the phone
             | use up to 5V/3A, which is plenty for any smartphone. You'd
             | have to make sure to use a 5V/15W capable power source,
             | though.
        
               | mschuster91 wrote:
               | > You'd have to make sure to use a 5V/15W capable power
               | source, though.
               | 
               | ... which precisely is something I cannot make sure on a
               | device where I'm tempted to use a USB condom, and it
               | won't be useful at all for laptops.
        
               | shapefrog wrote:
               | I actually learnt a lot from these comments, so my thanks
               | - USB-C is still just a mirrage on the horizion for me,
               | so not something I have considered deeply.
        
               | megous wrote:
               | So use Sink.Default instead, and live with 5W, that all
               | USB power sources support.
               | 
               | Security is inconvenient.
        
           | gumby wrote:
           | I have not seen one that is. You can block data access and
           | revert to USB 2-level power "negotiation" with a couple of
           | passives and that is all I've seen anyone do.
           | 
           | I did look into designing one a few years ago. The PD
           | negotiation is quite complicated (and is done through the
           | signaling lines, so you have to manipulate them yet block all
           | other uses).
           | 
           | That was early days for USB C -- there may be better chip
           | support for doing that today.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | sudobash1 wrote:
       | This is one reason I prefer good old 3.5mm audio jacks in my
       | phone. I have no fear of putting any headphones or adapter in
       | that port.
        
         | rmdashrfstar wrote:
         | Ignorance is bliss
        
         | knodi123 wrote:
         | That's the port that Square uses for transmitting data. ;-)
         | 
         | https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2181476/bandwidth-from-h...
        
         | clb92 wrote:
         | Wait until you learn that some phones have serial access
         | through the headphone jack.[1][2] I don't know much about it
         | yet, but I assume it can be exploited in some way, under some
         | circumstances.
         | 
         | [1] _DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE AND BACK OUT AGAIN: SERIAL OVER
         | HEADPHONE JACK_ https://hackaday.com/2016/10/21/down-the-
         | rabbit-hole-and-bac...
         | 
         | [2] _A better audio jack console cable for Google Nexus
         | devices_ http://www.pabr.org/consolejack/consolejack.en.html
        
       | EastSmith wrote:
       | Not sure why the data industrial complex is net yet giving cables
       | for free around malls, schools, etc.
        
       | ElectricMind wrote:
       | War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength -- George
       | Orwell, 1984.
        
       | dehrmann wrote:
       | I feel like there are some clever uses for this that aren't even
       | security related.
        
       | annoyingnoob wrote:
       | That is just evil.
        
       | rkagerer wrote:
       | This makes me miss older, simpler protocols. Sure, a parallel
       | cable could also be compromised to snoop but at least it couldn't
       | pretend to be some other device or install rootkits.
        
         | kortex wrote:
         | Challenge accepted. Any time you have physical access
         | (especially HID), you have the potential for exploits.
         | 
         | I couldn't find much for parallel port hax (in 5 min googling),
         | but I'm sure it's been done. Probably too old to be documented
         | on the shallow web.
         | 
         | https://www.quora.com/Can-a-computer-be-hacked-through-a-PS-...
        
         | SavantIdiot wrote:
         | That's because it isn't a cable, it is a computer.
         | 
         | In the 1980's I worked with CAD/CAM software that required
         | hardware dongles on parallel ports as an anti-piracy measure.
         | That probably could have been exploitable: e.g., instead of
         | returning the security response, cram a ton of data and cause
         | buffer overrun on their 80286 + DOS5 application and smash the
         | stack. It would be fun to go back in time and see just how
         | vulnerable that software was.
        
         | folmar wrote:
         | Sure it can. In the golden days of parport we've used parallel
         | port device autodetection based on Device ID. There was a lot
         | of place in the plug to use for a microcontroller in the end of
         | the parport times.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | soheil wrote:
       | > "self destruct" features that involve wiping the onboard flash
       | memory
       | 
       | Had an entirely different image in mind.
        
       | nicewarmvalley wrote:
       | But will it charge my phone?
        
       | throwawayswede wrote:
       | I wonder what happens if you fly with one of these.
        
         | StrLght wrote:
         | Most likely nothing in most countries. At least that's what my
         | experience was with something way more suspicious - pouch with
         | a lead layer, I use it for transporting film so it won't get
         | damaged by xrays. Around 60% of the times no-one even says
         | anything about it despite the bag looking like a huge square on
         | their screens.
         | 
         | I don't think transport security people would care about any
         | small tech stuff until something happens inflight because of
         | it.
        
         | OJFord wrote:
         | I would expect nothing, because the security we put ourselves
         | through is nowhere close to sophisticated enough to notice.
        
           | throwawayswede wrote:
           | I'm pretty sure this would look kind of weird under xrays.
           | They probably see thousands of cables and it'd be pretty easy
           | to spot the difference.
        
             | Arrath wrote:
             | They see thousands of cables and probably don't give any a
             | second glance for the bare few seconds they gaze at each
             | bag, an extra IC or two in the connector or not.
             | 
             | The sheer volume of bags that get run through those x-ray
             | machines in a shift, and the time given to look at each one
             | precludes too much fine grained inspection, especially for
             | something as minor as cables.
             | 
             | Airport security is pretty dismal at detecting actual
             | weapons or contraband, why should they be any better at
             | noticing a slightly different cable?
        
             | OJFord wrote:
             | Yes, perhaps. And so the day (after) someone brings down a
             | plane with a non-standard cable, they'll start looking for
             | cables that 'look kind of weird'.
        
             | evilduck wrote:
             | The TSA agent making $25/hr who was formerly a line chef or
             | retail worker or correctional officer or whatever is not
             | sophisticated enough to tell the difference. Suspicious
             | computer cables don't cause planes to fall out of the sky,
             | and that's about all that agency even pretends to care
             | about.
        
             | VenTatsu wrote:
             | Standard Apple cables already have a chip inside, and USB
             | 3.1 cables are also supposed to have chips inside.
             | 
             | I would also assume they are not paying enough attention to
             | even notice, there is no regulation against them so there
             | is no reason to even train to notice differences in USB
             | cables.
             | 
             | > They probably see thousands of cables and it'd be pretty
             | easy to spot the difference.
             | 
             | If anything seeing thousands of cables will make them less
             | likely to notice anything, change blindness is a real
             | problem in jobs like that.
        
       | soheil wrote:
       | One thing cables are good at is being long enough to act as great
       | antenna. It makes sense the wifi range is 2KM.
        
       | andix wrote:
       | Does it work like a normal USB Cable, so can you still charge
       | your phone with it and connect it to the PC?
       | 
       | Couldn't find this information. If yes, you can just switch
       | someones cable in his bag and attack him with that. We need to be
       | very careful in the future with our cables...
        
       | soheil wrote:
       | Other than state against state actors what are legitimate use
       | cases for this type of spying?
        
       | notorandit wrote:
       | Oh My God!
        
       | adolph wrote:
       | Reminds me of the 2013 blog post of Panic in which they discover
       | the lightening to hdmi "adapter" was in fact a small computer
       | performing transcoding to HDMI. It was much larger and bulkier
       | than 0.mg, but another example of a hidden computer in a place
       | where one might expect just some simple wires.
       | 
       | https://panic.com/blog/the-lightning-digital-av-adapter-surp...
        
       | strife25 wrote:
       | hak5!!!
       | 
       | Such a classic tech podcast. So cool to see them still around.
        
       | reilly3000 wrote:
       | It was my firm belief that many of the angry mobs at vote
       | counting offices around the 2020 elections were cover for
       | planting these types of devices. That is very much out of the
       | Roger Stone playbook. The lack of anomalies has shaken that
       | belief... but I do hope that the existence of these types of
       | devices is included in security training for future polling
       | staff.
        
         | mhh__ wrote:
         | The only true defense is a paper and pencil (why pencil:
         | Disappearing ink).
        
         | upearly4 wrote:
         | I vote (so to speak) for paper ballots and voter ID.
         | 
         | Of course in that case, Roger Stone's guy would have won
         | handily.
        
           | vajrabum wrote:
           | Be nice if convicted felon Roger Stone or his guy had ever
           | presented evidence of that in a court room. In federal court
           | it's sanctionable for a lawyer to lie to the court. Did you
           | notice that Sidney Powell, the former guy's attorney, was
           | sanctioned and referred to the bar for disciplinary action
           | for providing fraudulent information in court in connection
           | with a 2021 presidential election related lawsuit? Not a good
           | look for someone who claims to have been cheated.
        
         | SavantIdiot wrote:
         | Hak5 makes some great stuff, but yeah: how hard would it be to
         | swap the vote counters USB sticks with Hak5 BashBunnies loaded
         | with exfiltration software if their protocols suck to begin
         | with? I really hope there are root of trust procedures.
        
       | soheil wrote:
       | I'd be more than a little nervous ordering one of these cables
       | from a company that its sole job is creating spyware. If they're
       | okay with spying on their customers' customers why wouldn't they
       | spy on just their customers too?
        
       | mmastrac wrote:
       | Can you write custom code for this thing? I actually have some
       | non-nefarious use cases...
        
         | fredley wrote:
         | They sell a programmer for it, so probably!
        
           | mmastrac wrote:
           | Interesting. I'm not sure if that is for pre-programmed
           | payloads or not
        
             | fredley wrote:
             | As was posted in a separate thread, you might look at
             | http://tomu.im/ too
        
               | mmastrac wrote:
               | Those are pretty cool. One of the big use-cases for me is
               | small-form-factor USB-passthru sniffing, however. I don't
               | think any of the Tomu devices have that but would
               | definitely be an option if so.
        
         | VenTatsu wrote:
         | The product pages mention custom payloads, in some of the
         | images it looks like some variant of the DuckyScript used in
         | some of the other hak5 products. It likely depends on if what
         | you want to do is supported or if it would need changes to the
         | firmware to accomplish.
        
       | umvi wrote:
       | I don't get what these can be used for. Is the idea to swap it
       | out with your victim's iPhone charging cable and use it to
       | exfiltrate photos and stuff from the iPhone?
        
       | post_break wrote:
       | Been a follower of Hak5 since way back in the day. Even crashed
       | at the hak house with Darren a long time ago. Cool to see them
       | here since they actually hack stuff haha.
        
         | nebula8804 wrote:
         | Was very fortunate to meet Darren, Shannon, and Patrick Norton
         | at Defcon in 2019.
         | 
         | It was surreal to see them and even though I probably acted all
         | nervous around them (still kinda had a crush on Shannon even
         | after all these years) they were beyond nice and friendly.
         | 
         | They were super busy selling their kits (these OMG cables were
         | being sold unofficially as well lol) but they took the time to
         | chat about the history of Hak5(TechTV in the case of Patrick)
         | and to take pics. All around a superb bunch of folks.
         | 
         | Its crazy to think they have been doing Hak5 for like what
         | 15-16 years now?! So many great memories all thanks to their
         | hard work.
        
           | SavantIdiot wrote:
           | I've been going to DefCon for many years and the hak5 merch
           | booth is the first stop for all newcomers (myself included).
           | Long lines and people handing over fists-full of cash.
        
             | nebula8804 wrote:
             | I did my part and purchased something. :P
             | 
             | Seems like they get a big chunk of their yearly revenue
             | from Defcon sales. Makes sense as I bet a lot of hackers
             | might just want to do an in person transaction and this is
             | the perfect opportunity to do so.
        
               | SavantIdiot wrote:
               | Totally! Cash only, no CC trail or delivery address. I
               | lived in Charlotte NC for a brief period and I bought
               | some lock picks from a "spy outlet" store in a mall. They
               | scanned my driver's license and said they needed to keep
               | it on file for a year. This was ... 1992 maybe? Yikes
               | today.
        
       | rntksi wrote:
       | I remember about decades ago that keyloggers would be very scary
       | and powerful because your only defense was your password, and you
       | couldn't know someone was logging in at the same time as you if
       | you were not aware of it.
       | 
       | Nowadays, with 2FA and all the big companies doing extra security
       | check up when they see something wrong with the login patterns
       | ... I don't see the use of keyloggers anymore.
        
         | andix wrote:
         | Even if 2FA prevents you from logging in, you still get A LOT
         | of information from a keylogger.
         | 
         | You know the content of all the emails this user writes. You
         | know the websites they visit. Based on the 2FA auth key they
         | use, you may find out what kind of system it is.
         | 
         | A great start for social engineering. The target user writes an
         | email to someone and the day afterwards you can fake call them
         | and pretend to be the recipient of the email (you have all the
         | information). If you're lucky they wrote an email to management
         | and now you can pass orders in this call.
        
         | lrvick wrote:
         | I can assure you keyloggers still work very well at most major
         | companies.
         | 
         | Maybe in a couple more decades they will have begun to use
         | basic defenses already available.
        
       | _RPL5_ wrote:
       | Who buys this stuff? Other things in the shop:
       | 
       | > Screen Crab: This covert inline screen grabber sits between
       | HDMI devices - like a computer and monitor, or console and
       | television - to quietly capture screenshots. Perfect for
       | sysadmins, pentesters and anyone wanting to record what's on a
       | screen.
       | 
       | > Shark Jack: This portable network attack tool is a pentesters
       | best friend optimized for social engineering engagements and
       | opportunistic wired network auditing. Out-of-the-box it's armed
       | with an ultra fast nmap payload, providing quick and easy network
       | reconnaissance.
       | 
       | > Key Croc: The Key Croc by Hak5 is a keylogger armed with
       | pentest tools, remote access and payloads that trigger multi-
       | vector attacks when chosen keywords are typed. It's the ultimate
       | key-logging pentest implant.
       | 
       | They say "pentesters." What prevents a malicious actor from
       | buying and using these tools?
       | 
       | I think I am missing something here.
        
         | rout39574 wrote:
         | I think you are missing nothing.
        
         | SavantIdiot wrote:
         | I have a number of hak5 products to see what they fuss is about
         | and to learn what kinds of attacks to worry about being used on
         | me! In some cases they are not really usable anymore, like the
         | WiFiPineapple, which is largely useless due to WPA2 being
         | ubiquitous (yes, you can hack WPA2 but I don't feel like paying
         | for a ton of AWS lamda functions to get on my neighbors wifi).
         | They teach you about how things work from an entirely different
         | point of view. BashBunny is my favorite and it still works, but
         | who plugs in random USB sticks these days? I've never used it
         | but I learned a lot more about USB!
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | burnished wrote:
         | I think the only thing you are missing is that most people most
         | of the time don't want to hurt or bother others and that much
         | of society functioning relies on this.
         | 
         | Cause nothing stopping you from buying any of that, at what
         | looks like very reasonable rates.
        
           | hashkb wrote:
           | This is false. Most people will take advantage of any
           | situation where they detect a low enough chance of
           | consequences, regardleas of who is hurt. We act good because
           | we don't want to be caught, embarrassed, or convicted and
           | condemned.
           | 
           | It's not that most people want to hurt others. It's just that
           | most people care only for themselves. Source: reality.
        
             | burnished wrote:
             | Hey, we agree that most people don't want to hurt anyone! I
             | think we're much closer to agreeing than you suspect.
             | 
             | Now, we could quibble about whether people are more like to
             | help you or victimize you and we could both be right. Or,
             | we could observe that I'm correct about society functioning
             | mostly because people don't mess with other people very
             | much, you could chalk it up to friction and the lack of
             | interest in others, and I will chalk it up to general back-
             | ground good will.
        
             | jtsiskin wrote:
             | I don't think that is true. The 'median' person has empathy
             | and care, and would not hurt someone even if they could be
             | totally undetected - but there is a large skew, which makes
             | this true for the 'mean' person and thus 'reality', if that
             | makes any sense.
             | 
             | As an example: a bowl of candy on Halloween with a "take 2
             | pieces only please" sign on it. Most people will only take
             | 2. A few people will grab a handful. And one person will
             | come along and take the whole bowl.
        
             | stevetodd wrote:
             | I'm sorry for the world you live in. It's not that way for
             | everyone everywhere. I hope you can find your way to some
             | place better.
        
         | ryanSrich wrote:
         | I run a company that builds security awareness training
         | software. While we don't do any hands on hardcore stuff that
         | this hardware would be used for, I still have an interest in
         | keeping up with it, understanding it, and working that
         | understanding into our training curriculums.
        
         | fortran77 wrote:
         | Judging from the people who I see at DEFCON who follow the
         | "Hak5" people, it's mostly kids and not professionals.
        
         | sophacles wrote:
         | The same people that buy lockpicks buy these:
         | 
         | * enthusiasts
         | 
         | * professional security people (blue team, pentesters)
         | 
         | * criminals
         | 
         | in the last 2 cases, they buy them because it's cheaper than
         | making it themself.
        
         | WaitWaitWha wrote:
         | Yes, penetration testers, red teams, blue teams, auditors, and
         | a myriad of other security conscious roles take advantage of
         | these tools.
         | 
         | > What prevents a malicious actor from buying and using these
         | tools?
         | 
         | Nothing.
         | 
         | What prevents _any actor_ from buying  <insert any items here>
         | and using it maliciously? A significantly deeper question. I
         | rather promote this.
        
           | _RPL5_ wrote:
           | Well, for one, the US government prevents private actors from
           | buying all sorts of things. I am surprised that selling tools
           | which potentially "enable cyber crime" hasn't triggered some
           | overzealous regulator in DC yet. It seems like low-hanging
           | fruit.
        
             | epinephrinios wrote:
             | What prevents a criminal buying a chef's knife and
             | committing a crime with it?
             | 
             | I am surprised that selling tools which potentially "enable
             | murder" hasn't triggered some overzealous regulator in DC
             | yet. It seems like low-hanging fruit. /s
             | 
             | Pro-authoritarian sentiment keeps going strong. Why is it
             | so normalized these days?
        
           | seaman1921 wrote:
           | exactly, what prevents anyone from doing anything, really?
           | haha!
        
             | zarq wrote:
             | "motivation" is usually the answer. Motivation can be
             | (gaining) money, power, politics, etc.
        
               | WaitWaitWha wrote:
               | Which begs the question, how do we raise future
               | generations to have motivation which decreases
               | malfeasance?
               | 
               | I do not think there is a simple answer, but there is one
               | out there...
        
               | lrvick wrote:
               | I for one teach kids to hack and lockpick every chance I
               | get.
               | 
               | When you can pick every lock around you it changes your
               | worldview forever.
               | 
               | Kids should not avoid something wrong because they are
               | physically stopped by a lock.
               | 
               | They should avoid it because it is wrong.
               | 
               | Better they learn these skills from someone that will
               | teach the ethics to go with them.
        
             | pwillia7 wrote:
             | I think this is a big problem for liberalism in the future.
             | When we have 20 billion people and technology is more
             | powerful and ubiquitous, big consequences could happen from
             | individual bad actors remotely. Even if only the tiniest
             | fraction of people wanted to do bad things, there would
             | still be quite a few of them and they'll have more access
             | as everything is more networked together.
        
               | teknico wrote:
               | There will never be 10 billion people alive at the same
               | time, let alone 20.
        
               | pwillia7 wrote:
               | What's the certainty there? Could you expand?
        
         | lrvick wrote:
         | I buy this stuff, but I run a security consulting company.
         | 
         | I also make my own stuff like this from time to time. A lot of
         | it is pretty easy. I could teach a class of people to make a
         | badusb device from scratch, code and all, in an hour. Any USB
         | capable microcontroller will do. Should we ban those too?
         | 
         | Bad actors have had more sophisticated hardware at their
         | disposal for decades.
         | 
         | Just look at teardowns of credit card skimmers.
         | 
         | Hak5 is not helping those people. They are helping white hats
         | catch up and helping spread awareness how easy this stuff is.
         | 
         | While your mind is adjusting to this, I encourage you to put
         | "crown vic fleet keys" in Amazon and buy yourself keys to the
         | police cars in your area.
         | 
         | The global state of security is a joke and we need people
         | helping onboard whitehats to help teach people to do better.
        
         | agitator wrote:
         | If anything, by making devices like this accessible to the
         | public, the end result is safer devices for everyone.
         | 
         | Without products like this you have criminals, a small amount
         | of enthusiasts/researchers, and government sponsored actors
         | exploiting vulnerabilities. If you put it out in the open, much
         | like open source software, everyone can do it, but there's more
         | pressure to fix blatant vulnerabilities.
        
           | AYBABTME wrote:
           | Isn't that the same argument people use in support of gun
           | ownership?
        
             | hashkb wrote:
             | The guns you can buy don't compare in any way to the guns
             | the bad actors have. Apples and oranges.
        
               | Zpalmtree wrote:
               | What are you talking about?
        
             | ViViDboarder wrote:
             | No. I've never once seen someone say that making guns more
             | available means that the general public gets better bullet
             | proof technology.
             | 
             | It, for example, hasn't resulted in accessible bulletproof
             | vehicles for all.
             | 
             | In technology, vulnerabilities found push companies to
             | develop and deploy protections for them.
        
             | mszcz wrote:
             | I don't think that it is. As I understand it the argument
             | in favor of guns is that they would supposedly protect you
             | against someone else with a gun.
             | 
             | I can't protect myself from someone with a RubberDucky with
             | a RubberDucky of my own. However, knowing that these tools
             | exist and how easy they are to acquire and the ability to
             | try one out for yourself might actually make you think
             | twice about plugging that random cable or USB drive into
             | your box.
        
           | jtsiskin wrote:
           | As a simple example, the "trust this computer?" prompt
           | standard on most phones. If devices like this were only known
           | by states governments, this feature likely would have taken
           | longer to become standard
        
         | ShakataGaNai wrote:
         | Hak5 isn't breaking any new grounds with their technology. They
         | just make it a little easier to get/use and a little sleeker.
         | Can someone abuse this? Sure. People misuse all sorts of handy
         | tools all the time. Knives? Staplers? 2x4s? Hammers? All have
         | been used to kill people - doesn't make them inherently bad.
         | 
         | The difference is most people know about those other things and
         | _don 't_ know about the things that hak5 sells. They don't even
         | know it's possible, let alone it exists and is usable.
         | 
         | Recently the lock picking lawyer got a USB drive lock in the
         | mail and while he picked the lock, he refused the plug in the
         | drive. People mocked him saying that he was silly for not
         | simply plugging in the drive into a VM or special purpose
         | computer. The next time around he brought out a USB Killer.
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctByXhte_-A ex:
         | https://usbkill.com/ .
         | 
         | If you don't know a random cable or USB drive can be dangerous,
         | you're likely to be the person who picks one up off the ground
         | and uses it. Or worse, see one sitting unattended in a coffee
         | shop or airport and decide you need a quick boost.
         | 
         | What's being sold is educational just as it is dangerous.
         | Terrible people are going to find a way to do terrible things.
         | The least you can do is educate yourself to make it harder for
         | them.
        
       | CultMember002 wrote:
       | We should not allow the Fed to stifle innovation and
       | technological progress. If we are not willing to take risks, then
       | we will never be able to reach out true potential of becoming a
       | truly advanced space faring civilization and a multi-planetary
       | species. The NHTSA does not have the technological capability to
       | understand advanced AI used in Autopilot and Full Self Driving
       | and they should stop their interference immediately. I have a
       | Tesla and I bought the Full Self Driving package. I believe it is
       | far more valuable than the current price. I am willing to pay 30
       | times more for Full Self Driving.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | aabajian wrote:
       | I live in Seattle and have had my car broken into three times.
       | Each time, they steal my iPhone's USB cable. I wonder, could they
       | add cellular connectivity to this cable and use it as a GPS
       | locator?
        
         | voiper1 wrote:
         | Sounds like now you should be worried if they "leave" your
         | iPhone USB cable, they might have switched it with one that
         | hacks you.
        
         | lucideer wrote:
         | Not sure about GPS but it includes remote access via WiFi, and
         | some of the cables on offer quote "Long Range WiFi (2 KM+)"
        
           | Y_Y wrote:
           | Why can't all my devices have 2km WiFi!?
        
             | VenTatsu wrote:
             | The cables have 2km WiFi with a directional antenna
             | (presumably on the other end), you could probably get
             | similar range out of most of your devices if your bases
             | station had a directional antenna, but that eliminates much
             | of the value for many WiFi applications.
        
             | megous wrote:
             | Because you'd share bandwidth with 100k other people in a
             | city. You'd be glad for the days of dialup.
        
         | PeterisP wrote:
         | Do you mean something like this -
         | https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001759023561.html ? You'd
         | just have to look for a version with the proper connector that
         | you need, that particular example is microUSB but there are
         | similar cables for iPhone.
        
         | baybal2 wrote:
         | I think you need to consider an armoured Mercedes
        
         | cbg0 wrote:
         | Are they really breaking into your car just to steal your USB
         | cable or is there other stuff you leave in plain sight?
        
           | SavantIdiot wrote:
           | My car was broken into 3pm in the afternooon in Austin last
           | summer. Nothing visible. They emptied the console and
           | glovebox.
           | 
           | They stole:
           | 
           | * cheap sunglasses
           | 
           | * tire pressure gauge
           | 
           | * box of bandaids
           | 
           | * my car's USER MANUAL, ffs
           | 
           | * charging cable
           | 
           | They left:
           | 
           | * small envelope with $80 cash tucked under the removable
           | console coin holder.
           | 
           | * all the coins.
           | 
           | So very confused.
        
             | exikyut wrote:
             | Armchair theory: taking the stereotypical idea of "squirrel
             | on crack" both seriously and literally, maybe people on
             | drugs become like bowerbirds with very, very broken
             | interestingness ranking.
             | 
             | All the stuff you mentioned was immediately visible (so no
             | complex problem solving to find it) and would probably look
             | "definitely probably valuable" to a hyped up 5 year old.
             | 
             | Aaaaand thennnn whoever did the stealing probably just sold
             | it all to someone else in _exactly the same condition_
             | (high on whatever) who also considered it valuable enough
             | to make a fair trade to swap it all for $amount of $thing.
             | 
             | I'm not sure what the balance is, but it's part-hilarious
             | and part-sad that, if this theory is correct, there's an
             | utterly illogical commodity market being sustained by
             | tweaked-out squirrels with half the attention span of a
             | goldfish, leaves people scratching their heads in its wake,
             | and is so confusingly successful people just don't park in
             | certain places.
        
           | fragmede wrote:
           | I'm in San Francisco, so not Seattle, but cars get broken
           | into for the sport of it by this point. A friend's had her
           | window broken and used, gross dog leashes and an old Nokia
           | charger stolen. The lost hours of work to replace the window
           | was the real cost to her dog walking business.
        
             | AtlasBarfed wrote:
             | I've never had my car broken into... but most of that was a
             | midwestern city not the coasts, although I've been in San
             | Fran, NYC, and DC.
             | 
             | I have a very messy car. Not rotting food messy, just a lot
             | of clothes and things, often a lot of workout clothes,
             | backup winter clothes, a couple blankets.
             | 
             | Thieves like clean cars. See target, break in, grab, leave.
             | Messy cars are slow, annoying, and induce too much
             | cognitive load.
             | 
             | If I lived in San Fran right now, I would have a shitty car
             | with a lot of clothing in it just for the purposes of
             | covering up things I don't want stolen and being annoying
             | to thieves.
        
               | daveidol wrote:
               | I don't think that would be nearly as big of a deterrent
               | in SF as you'd hope. It seems like nowadays any car that
               | CAN be broken into will be.
        
             | Karrot_Kream wrote:
             | Just park with your windows open if there's nothing they
             | can really take. Repairing the window isn't with the cost
             | or the time.
        
               | tschwimmer wrote:
               | As clever as this idea sounds, it's not a good
               | suggestion. I once accidentally left my windows down in
               | SF for 12 hours and my car was essentially stripped clean
               | - headrests, registration, proof of insurance, manual,
               | floor mats - all gone. Additionally all my doors and
               | trunk were wide open.
        
               | cromat3 wrote:
               | Sounds horrible and for me it is unimaginable. In
               | Croatia, you rarely hear that a car waa broken into even
               | in bigger cities. In smaller towns a lot of people don't
               | even bother to lock their cars.
        
               | burnished wrote:
               | I suspect it might be due to demand/ability to unload hot
               | goods. Or maybe yall got it good in Croatia and no one
               | feels the desire to go rifling through cars?
        
               | umeshunni wrote:
               | I suspect Croatia might have better law enforcement and
               | attorneys than SF does (look up Chesa Boudin)
        
               | bikezen wrote:
               | Ah yes, the solution to crime in the country with the
               | highest incarceration rate, is more incarceration!
        
               | burnished wrote:
               | If you google "Chesa Boudin" and hit question box marked
               | What Did Chesa Boudin Do? It reveals thus
               | 
               | "Then, in November, Boudin did something no San Francisco
               | DA had done before: He charged a police officer with
               | homicide, for the killing of an unarmed Black man in
               | 2017"
               | 
               | so maybe you're going off a little half-cocked
        
               | WaitWaitWha wrote:
               | Why do you think that is?
        
               | kntmckenebrt wrote:
               | In countries like Croatia the police is busy catching
               | criminals instead of helping them inject heroin, going
               | after mean people on Twitter, or calculating if the
               | robbed amount is under 900 USD and then apologising to
               | the thief and giving him a ride home like the SF police
               | do.
        
               | Karrot_Kream wrote:
               | I guess I've never driven a nice enough car. I used to
               | keep my windows down any time I parked along 8th/Harrison
               | and fwiw nothing ever happened to my car, though there
               | were obvious signs of folks rifling around inside. All my
               | documents were kept in a locked glove compartment and I
               | pretty much had nothing stealable in the car without
               | having the car be cased.
        
               | mrguyorama wrote:
               | My friend visited a car breakin prone area in canada
               | once, and left his car unlocked like his girlfriend
               | suggested. They broke his window anyway, and stole a
               | minecraft keychain and about $4 in change.
               | 
               | Hilariously he actually got the stuff back eventually
        
               | kevinmgranger wrote:
               | That might help in San Francisco, but in Seattle, that's
               | lost hours dealing with a soaked interior.
        
               | Karrot_Kream wrote:
               | Yeah this isn't for rainy or dusty environments for sure.
        
               | ddalex wrote:
               | It may be getting soaked in SF too, but with different
               | kind of fluids
        
               | rOOb85 wrote:
               | Thanks for the f-shack
               | 
               | - Dirty Mike & The Boys
        
               | isatty wrote:
               | And risk someone shitting in your car? No thanks.
        
               | 1-6 wrote:
               | Problem in San Francisco is, you'll get people sleeping
               | in your car if you do that.
        
               | CobaltFire wrote:
               | San Diego as well; happened to me Monday. Car didn't lock
               | all the way (older car) and they try every handle.
               | 
               | Thankfully they didn't wreck the car or anything. Just
               | laid the seat back.
        
               | dugmartin wrote:
               | Depending on the height of your windows I would think
               | sleeping would be the best thing other people could do to
               | your car.
        
               | ficklepickle wrote:
               | Dirty Mike and the boys will have an f-shack in there and
               | it will never be the same
        
               | m0llusk wrote:
               | Not sure why this is getting downvoted. I know at least
               | one person who had to get rid of their car after a stinky
               | street person crashed in it. This is a real thing that
               | happens and once an awful stench has permeated cloth and
               | upholstery there is no easy fix.
        
               | dctoedt wrote:
               | > * I know at least one person who had to get rid of
               | their car after a stinky street person crashed in it.*
               | 
               | Obligatory reference to the Seinfeld "The Smelly Car"
               | episode (one of the few I've actually seen). [0]
               | 
               | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Smelly_Car
        
               | lijogdfljk wrote:
               | I'd fear the associated smell.
        
           | shepherdjerred wrote:
           | Lightning cables are expensive, and Apple is definitely
           | encouraging car theft by not including them in the box
           | anymore.
           | 
           | edit: this was a joke and it got appropriately downvoted. I
           | regret nothing.
        
             | deelowe wrote:
             | A cable that costs $20 - $30 retail NEW doesn't seem worth
             | risking jail time over.
        
               | trenning wrote:
               | Man they're selling stolen $25 bottles of tequila on 3rd
               | Ave. Not even expensive stuff is hot commodity now,
               | especially if you live in a cash world. Most of the stuff
               | the street bazaars sell is straight up junk. A shiny
               | Apple cable is worth it
        
               | jtbayly wrote:
               | It's like soap, which is much cheaper. Both are easily
               | sold.
        
               | chooseaname wrote:
               | You may be underestimating how significant $20-$30 is to
               | some people.
               | 
               | Edit: wording.
        
               | deelowe wrote:
               | Are you suggesting a stolen cable brings the same sort of
               | premium as a new one from Apple?
               | 
               | Regardless, I'm not suggesting this at all. My point is
               | that there are likely ways to get something worth so
               | little without risking significant jail time.
        
               | __alexs wrote:
               | You may be surprised to learn that the economics of small
               | scale theft are pretty weird.
               | https://priceonomics.com/why-thieves-steal-soap/
        
               | deelowe wrote:
               | This is kind of my point. I guess I underestimated the
               | demand for iphone cables.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | progman32 wrote:
               | People break into cars to steal pocket change in the cup
               | holder, so a $5 cable isn't outside the realm of what a
               | thief would grab. Especially if they're already in the
               | car.
        
               | coryrc wrote:
               | There's no risk of jail for theft in Seattle.
               | 
               | https://crosscut.com/2019/10/whats-seattle-doing-solve-
               | its-s...
        
               | ajsnigrutin wrote:
               | And people wonder why there is so much crime...
        
               | coryrc wrote:
               | About half blame poverty/insufficient government handouts
               | and excuse the theft.
               | 
               | About half blame not prosecuting crime.
               | 
               | But no one wonders. Everyone "knows".
        
               | knownjorbist wrote:
               | You don't need government handouts, you need sane
               | policies that stop making CoL so expensive.
        
               | hansvm wrote:
               | It's worth it for someone. I've had people break into my
               | car for 3 quarters and a half ounce of super glue.
        
             | mhh__ wrote:
             | I genuinely think HN's emergent property of discouraging
             | jokes actively encourages this kind of misunderstanding and
             | inability to process ambiguous titles using common sense.
        
         | payme wrote:
         | >https://www.ebay.com/itm/223990414124
         | 
         | From lrvick's comment.
        
       | adam0c wrote:
       | that opening line of needing a million dollar budget LOL if
       | anyone follows @_MG_ you'll know that this has been a very long
       | project thats really not been that expensive the dude dropped a
       | load around defcon then hak5 came in and said hey we can charge
       | and arm and a leg for these...
        
         | puzzlingcaptcha wrote:
         | The quoted price refers to
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NSA_COTTONMOUTH-I.jpg
         | (although admittedly for 50 units. Bargain!)
        
       | xwdv wrote:
       | I fantasize all the time about buying stuff like this and using
       | it for nefarious purposes.
       | 
       | Unfortunately the only real legit use for it is boring security
       | work.
       | 
       | The best way to use this while avoiding big legal trouble would
       | be to stalk a single target that would never have any idea they
       | are being stalked and doesn't have much resources to come after
       | you legally. Maybe an ex-girlfriend or something.
        
         | saltyfamiliar wrote:
         | Would they really need many resources to take legal action?
         | What you're describing is illegal. They could simply call the
         | police if they found you out.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-09-03 23:04 UTC)