Yeah, that helps for sure. The other option is to see if there's a 3rd-party firmware for the router. The firmwares that come with home equipment out of the box are often pretty poor. And are often abandoned after they are shipped. However, something like dd-wrt / openwrt / tomato is likely to be better supported.
That's nice, but nothing that you describe helps protect against the vulnerability described.
When doing security testing of any system, one must consider the possibility of unforeseen consequences. That is, while you think that your test may be harmless, you'll really never know this for sure until you perform the test. And even then, you might not know of all possible damage that was done to the system.
Just as system architects and developers make certain assumptions that may introduce vulnerabilities, a security tester may make assumptions about the consequences of their actions. The problems happen when these assumptions don't map up to reality 100%.
Yes, airplanes' computer systems should receive security testing. But to perform any sort of testing without authorization and when there are potential safety (human life) consequences is inconceivably irresponsible. Regardless of whether or not the tester suspects any damage will occur.
The student observed the teacher's keyboard while the password was typed in. The student then used that observed password to unlawfully gain access to the system in question.
This has nothing to do with the wallpaper. The student leveraged unauthorized access to a system to do something.
If you've ever looked at an app store, you won't wonder.
Have you ever connected to a network that wasn't yours?
I'll give you a multiple-choice question.
Security companies want to:
a) Keep you secure.
b) Make more money.
Just put your pencil down when you're done.
"Adware is malware with better lawyers"
said @axeexcess on the Twitter
Yes, ZFS is amazing. But my concern about FreeBSD in general is that from an exploit mitigation perspective, it's in the dark ages. Like, maybe close to Windows XP. http://networkfilter.blogspot....
For a file server, great. But for anything that's parsing untrusted data or is exposed to the internet, I'd be concerned.
What will folks do when drones get to be insect sized?
The evidence that China was performing MITM attacks on Outlook.com was because of temporary use of an SSL certificate chain that wasn't signed by one of the hundreds of root CAs included with modern operating systems. (and therefore the software complained)
If the software people are using stops complaining about the SSL certificate chain, does that mean that they're not performing MITM anymore? Hell no. At the very least it means that they're just using an SSL certificate signed by one of the hundreds of trusted root CA certificates. You know, like CNNIC. The internet organization with ties to the Chinese government.
This sort of thing happens every month. Microsoft, Oracle, Apple, etc. This is news?
How do you teach a non-geek to find and recognize the canonical source for a software download? Is http://www.vlc.cc/ the official VLC site? Is http://www.7zipdownload.org/ the right place to get 7-zip? Is http://www.libtiff.org/ the place to get the latest LibTIFF? The answer to all of these is "No", but I'd like to hear the teaching technique that allows a non-geek to come to these conclusions.
If so, pursue it. Don't do it because all your friends are becoming managers.