Proofpoint found today’s phishing kits range from “simple open-source kits with human-readable code and no-frills functionality to sophisticated kits utilizing numerous layers of obfuscation and built-in modules that allow for stealing usernames, passwords, MFA tokens, social security numbers, and credit card numbers.” How? By sending phishing emails with links to a fake target website, like a login page, to naive users. That, of course, is old news. Hackers have been using that technique for ages. What this “new kind of kit” brings to the table is a malware-planted MitM transparent reverse proxy. With this residing on the target’s PC, it intercepts all the traffic including their credentials and session cookies even if the connection is to the real site. ... One such program, Modlishka, already automates these attacks. Polish security researcher Piotr Duszyński, said of it, “With the right reverse proxy targeting your domain over an encrypted, browser-trusted, communication channel one can really have serious difficulties in noticing that something was seriously wrong.”
Multi-cloud models incorporate one of more services from more than one cloud provider (and optionally may include on-premises or hybrid architectures). In this scenario, the difference is that services from multiple cloud providers are used. A DBMS offering and the applications that rely on it may be deployed both on-premises and/or on one or more clouds. As such, all of the considerations of hybrid cloud may apply with the added considerations of deploying software in multiple cloud environments. These offerings have historically been limited to independent software vendors (ISVs) rather than native CSPs, as the ISVs have more of a vested interest in making sure that their software runs in as many environments as possible. However, cloud service providers are increasingly engaging in multi-cloud and intercloud scenarios. The multi-cloud scenario generally appeals to end users who are concerned about cloud vendor lock-in and want to be able to move their applications easily to a different cloud provider.
Knowing the exact entity behind a batch of addresses can be crucial, and blockchain intelligence companies have ways of finding that. They aggregate information from multiple sources, often using off-chain data to enrich their understanding of transactions. They look at dark web forums, social media posts, and court papers among others. "You can be on Facebook, and you see [someone] soliciting funds in bitcoin and there's an address there," Redbord says. That address is copied and can be associated with a cybercriminal ring, a terrorist organization, or other illicit entities, depending on the case. Such nuggets of information are gathered by blockchain intelligence companies and stored for future references. "[We] are building a giant blacklist of cryptocurrency addresses," Redbord adds. This process of categorizing addresses is done in the background. Investigators using blockchain intelligence software simply input the address corresponding to the payment. Then, they can see the flow of digital money.
We’re entering an era where our personal data will be more valuable than ever, and consumers are beginning to wake up to that fact. A report in 2019 indicates over 60 percent of respondents felt connected devices were “creepy,” which will likely slow adoption of such devices. While all of this may sound daunting, there are some interesting innovations addressing the pain points. And you’re likely enjoying the benefits of this thinking without even realizing it. To understand, we have to go into a room filled with networking gear. Most of us are familiar with server rooms thanks to TV shows and movies where we see some generic, but high-tech, “data center.” What most consumers don’t realize is that companies don’t just upgrade all their data center hardware at once. Just as you likely don’t buy a new router when you buy a new laptop, data center components are swapped out over time, here and there, and can wind up as a patchwork of vendors and services. Some time ago, network administrators unified their management while allowing underlying systems to micro-manage the individual components.
Many IoT devices are connected to the internet and can be accessed by hackers from anywhere in the world. This makes them ripe for attack. Hackers can exploit vulnerabilities in these devices to gain access to sensitive data or even take control of them. Another issue is that many IoT devices are not well-integrated into existing IT security frameworks. As a result, they may not be properly protected against cyber threats. For example, many IoT devices lack adequate firewalls and intrusion detection systems, making them susceptible to attack. Finally, there is also a risk that malicious actors could weaponize IoT devices for use in DDoS attacks or other cyberattacks. For example, hackers could exploit vulnerabilities in smart TVs or other internet-connected devices to launch a devastating DDoS attack against a company or organization. To mitigate these security problems, organizations should take steps to secure their IoT devices properly. They should ensure that all devices have strong passwords and are routinely updated with the latest security patches.
Here is the troubling fact: most organizations know that the cloud is different than on-prem, most of them also know the main differences. Yet, this knowledge doesn’t translate into better solutions. That is because most organizations face a challenge: "With all these cloud services out there, which one to use in each scenario?" Too many choices can lead developers/architects to some kind of decision paralysis. Instead of going through the many choices, they just resort to the most familiar. In the case of organizations who are used to building on-prem, this often means choosing the old-stack without even considering the alternatives. Having tens of cloud services is indeed a challenge (Azure has 400+ different services at the time of writing this, each service might have tens of built-in capabilities). However, it is still a good challenge to have. That is because if you’re not dealing with resolving this challenge you’re effectively dealing with the challenge of how to make the cloud behave like on-prem.
Today, good developers work across the stack – in fact, their success relies on their ability to engage with a range of stakeholders to deliver business outcomes, says Spencer Clarkson, chief technology officer at Verastar. "I think what makes a good developer nowadays is that rounded understanding," he says. "They need to be agile in working style, and also understand the concept of doing Agile development – fail fast, develop quickly." That's something that others recognise, too. Tech analyst Forrester says Agile delivery is critical to successful digital transformations, yet the best enterprises go even further. ... "Software development is now much more about gluing things together rather than building something from scratch," he says. "There's lots of good apps and products out there. It's how you glue them together – that's your IP. People need to have that aptitude first and be multiskilled second." Gartner also says organisations and their employees should be prepared to move in multiple strategic directions at once due to the ongoing requirements for innovation and digitisation.
SYCL and CUDA serve the same purpose: to enhance performance through processing parallelization in varied architectures. However, SYCL offers more extendibility and code flexibility than CUDA while simplifying the coding process. Instead of using complex syntax, SYCL enables developers to use ISO C++ for programming. Unlike CUDA, SYCL is a pure C++ domain-specific embedded language that doesn’t require C++ extensions, allowing for a simple CPU implementation that relies on pure runtime rather than a particular compiler. SYCL is a competitive alternative to CUDA in terms of programmability. With SYCL, there’s no need for a complex toolchain to develop an application, and the tools ecosystem is readily available, ensuring a hassle-free development experience. SYCL doesn’t need separate source files for the host and device. Instead, you can find the code for the host and the device in the same C++ source file. SYCL implementations are capable of splitting up this source file, parsing the code, and sending it to the appropriate compilation backend.
As it currently stands, the AIA lists four practices that are considered “an unacceptable risk” and which are therefore prohibited, including systems that distort human behaviour; systems that exploit the vulnerabilities of specific social groups; systems that provide “scoring” of individuals; and the remote, real-time biometric identification of people in public places. However, critics have previously told Computer Weekly that while the proposal provides a “broad horizontal prohibition” on these AI practices, ...”. In their letter, published 1 March, the civil society groups explicitly call for predictive policing systems to be included in this list of prohibited AI practices, which is contained in Article 5 of the AIA. “To ensure that the prohibition is meaningfully enforced, as well as in relation to other uses of AI systems which do not fall within the scope of this prohibition, affected individuals must also have clear and effective routes to challenge the use of these systems via criminal procedure, to enable those whose liberty or right to a fair trial is at stake to seek immediate and effective redress,” it said.
The very nature of the annual review sets up a dynamic where the manager critiques and the employee is on the defensive. The employee often feels that the manager focuses solely on shortcomings and not on achievements. They may wonder, “Why didn’t my manager mention this issue when it actually happened?” or “Why won’t my manager recognize the things I’ve done right?” The manager may be new to the position and not entirely familiar with the employee, their position, or work history, making a constructive review more challenging. In addition, many managers simply are not trained to communicate, coach, and lead effectively. With higher numbers of employees working remotely, reviews have an added layer of difficulty especially if they aren’t done in person. Body language can be harder to read. Without seeing the employee in action day-to-day, the manager might not be aware of how productive they are. Zoom fatigue can also cause many employees to remain silent rather than actively participate.
Quote for the day:
"Leadership is about carrying on when everyone else has given up." -- Gordon Tredgold