Posted On:video Archives - AppFerret
Researchers from NVIDIA published work with artificial intelligence algorithms, or more specifically, generative adversarial networks, to produce celebrity faces in high detail. Watch the results below.
If you ask two researchers what is the problem with Bluetooth they will have a simple answer.
“Bluetooth is complicated. Too complicated. Too many specific applications are defined in the stack layer, with endless replication of facilities and features.” Case in point: the WiFi specification (802.11) is only 450 pages long, they said, while the Bluetooth specification reaches 2822 pages.
Unfortunately, they added, the complexity has “kept researchers from auditing its implementations at the same level of scrutiny that other highly exposed protocols, and outwards-facing interfaces have been treated with.”
Lack of review can end up with vulnerabilities needing identification.
And that is a fitting segue to this week’s news about devices with Bluetooth capabilities.
At Armis Labs, Ben Seri and Gregory Vishnepolsky are the two researchers who discussed the vulnerabilities in modern Bluetooth stacks—and devices with Bluetooth capabilities were estimated at over 8.2 billion, according to the Armis site’s overview.
Seri and Vishnepolsky are the authors of a 42-page white paper detailing what is wrong and at stake in their findings. The discovery is being described as an “attack vector endangering major mobile, desktop, and IoT operating systems, including Android, iOS, Windows, and Linux, and the devices using them.”
They are calling the vector BlueBorne, as it spreads via the air and attacks devices via Bluetooth. Attackers can hack into cellphones and computers simply because they had Bluetooth on. “Just by having Bluetooth on, we can get malicious code on your device,” Nadir Izrael, CTO and cofounder of security firm Armis, told Ars Technica.
Let’s ponder this, as it highlights a troubling aspect of attack: Lorenzo Franceschi-Bicchierai at Motherboard:
“‘The user is not involved in the process, they don’t need to be in discoverable mode, they don’t have to have a Bluetooth connection active, just have Bluetooth on,’ Nadir Izrael, the co-founder and chief technology officer for Armis, told Motherboard.”
Their white paper identified eight vulnerabilities: (The authors thanked Alon Livne for the development of the Linux RCE exploit.)
Original article here.
We have all heard of Bitcoin. This video gives a more technical explanation of how Bitcoin works. Want more? Check out my new in-depth course on the latest in Bitcoin, Blockchain, and a survey of the most exciting projects coming out (Ethereum, etc): https://app.pluralsight.com/library/c…
Shorter 5 min introduction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5JGQ…
Written version: http://www.imponderablethings.com/201…
My Bitcoin address: 13v8NB9ScRa21JDi86GmnZ5d8Z4CjhZMEd
Arabic translation by Ahmad Alloush
Spanish caption translation by Borja Rodrigo, email@example.com, DFJWgXdBCoQqo4noF4fyVhVp8R6V62XdJx
Russian caption translation by Alexandra Miklyukova
.Original video here.
Bayesian Inference is a way of combining information from data with things we think we already know. For example, if we wanted to get an estimate of the mean height of people, we could use our prior knowledge that people are generally between 5 and 6 feet tall to inform the results from the data we collect. If our prior is informative and we don’t have much data, this will help us to get a better estimate. If we have a lot of data, even if the prior is wrong (say, our population is NBA players), the prior won’t change the estimate much. You might say that including such “subjective” information in a statistical model isn’t right, but there’s subjectivity in the selection of any statistical model. Bayesian Inference makes that subjectivity explicit.
Bayesian Inference can seem complicated, but as Brandon Rohrer explains, it’s based on straighforward principles of conditional probability. Watch his video below for an elegant explanation of the basics.
Original article here.
A huge online attack enabled by Internet-connected devices illuminates a problem keeping security experts awake at night.
When the website of security expert Brian Krebs recently went down, it wasn’t bad luck—it was the result of a huge surge of data: 620 gigabits per second. And now we know where it came from. It was an army of Internet-connected devices, being used as slaves to take down servers.
According to the Wall Street Journal, as many as one million security cameras, digital video recorders, and other connected devices have been employed by hackers to carry out a series of such attacks. When corralled together, these pieces of hardware can be used as a so-called botnet, collectively sending data and Web page requests to servers with such ferocity that they’re overwhelmed and ultimately crash.
It’s a powerful new way of putting an old idea into practice. Attackers have long installed malware on PCs to have them act as bots that they control, and more recently home routers and printers have been used to the same ends. But as Internet-connected devices proliferate in our homes and offices, the potential number of devices to draw upon is increasing dramatically.
The scale of the new set of attacks is unprecedented. According to the BBC, this recent spate has been able to barrage servers with data at rates of over a terabit per second. In addition to Krebs’s site, the targets have included the servers of French Web hosting provider OVH. The attacksmay have been carried out by the same botnet.
The news raises fresh concerns about the security of Internet of things devices. Purpose-built to be controlled over the Internet, such devices have been billed as the future of sensing and control to businesses and domestic users alike—from connected video cameras and speakers to smart thermostats and lightbulbs. While initially slow to gain popularity, they are proliferating as they’ve become increasingly user-friendly.
But there’s a problem. Many such devices are purchased, installed, and then used without much further attention being paid to their configuration. That means that they may never be updated, leaving huge scope for their exploitation by hackers if they contain a security flaw. (They invariably do.) Who, after all, bothers to update a lightbulb?
Earlier this year, the National Security Agency’s hacking chief, Rob Joyce, sounded caution over these kinds of devices. Their security is “something that keeps me up at night,” he said at the time.
His concern is understandable. Back in 2013, security researcher HD Moore set about interrogating the entire Internet from a stack of computers at his home. He found thousands of industrial and business devices that were insecure and vulnerable to attack. By now, that number could be much higher.
While it’s unfortunate for Brian Krebs and OVH that their servers were taken down, no great harm has been done. But when industrial devices become a part of these attacks, there may be more to fear.
Original article here.