Alex1Powell Categories For later read
7 days
30 days
All time
Recent
Popular
I kinda disagree with this.
Not disagree as in "He's wrong, this is complete bollocks" but as in "He's right about some things, wrong bout others, missing yet others and the things are much more nuanced and discretion must be applied".
I was asked to elaborate, so here it is.
The whole article is based on the premise "ransomware contains data that's private for you, once you upload it, everyone can get it from VirusTotal". This is wrong and incomplete in several ways.
To begin with, by far not all ransomware is hand-crafted for the victim and even when it is, by far not all of it contains personal information.
Furthermore, the author is confusing the ransomware executable (which is what you normally upload to VirusTotal, so that the scanners there can tell you what it is) with the ransom note. The note contains victim-specific data much more often than the executable.
Next, VirusTotal, while hugely popular, is not the only such service. I very much like id-ransomware for ransomware identification - and you never upload the executable there anyway; only encrypted files (and ransom note, if available; often it's not).
Not disagree as in "He's wrong, this is complete bollocks" but as in "He's right about some things, wrong bout others, missing yet others and the things are much more nuanced and discretion must be applied".
Never upload #ransomware samples to the Internet. Let me explain what information such a sample contains, why you shouldn't upload them, and what happens if you upload them after all. #SysAdmin #DFIR #malwarehttps://t.co/M4S3ET5Eqc
— Thomas Barabosch (@tbarabosch) December 28, 2020
I was asked to elaborate, so here it is.
The whole article is based on the premise "ransomware contains data that's private for you, once you upload it, everyone can get it from VirusTotal". This is wrong and incomplete in several ways.
To begin with, by far not all ransomware is hand-crafted for the victim and even when it is, by far not all of it contains personal information.
Furthermore, the author is confusing the ransomware executable (which is what you normally upload to VirusTotal, so that the scanners there can tell you what it is) with the ransom note. The note contains victim-specific data much more often than the executable.
Next, VirusTotal, while hugely popular, is not the only such service. I very much like id-ransomware for ransomware identification - and you never upload the executable there anyway; only encrypted files (and ransom note, if available; often it's not).
the absence of private demand makes government expenditure necessary. It repays itself by creating a stronger economy than would have otherwise been the case. For me that is the macro - non-household budget - reasoning. (1/13ish)
Making G contingent on a ultra low government rate of interest (ULGROI) seems household budget thinking: lower expenditure on interest payments is being portrayed as permitting the higher expenditure on G. (2/13)
All fine that this is permitting those who think in a household budget way (OBR, IFS etc) to support spending (or rather not prescribe austerity) but it is not the macro of the situation. (3/13)
As an aside I'd rather call out the household budget mob for prescribing austerity last time, not least in the week that the OECD publicly acknowledged austerity was overdone. Parotting their present argument seems to let them off the hook. (4/13)
As you know the low rate of interest - in advanced economies on government debt - is not a matter of chance but a consequence of a decade of reliance on QE and a wider global retreat from risk. (5/13)
I\u2019m not clear what you are arguing about the rate of interest\u2014you only mention it in passing here?
— Jo Michell (@JoMicheII) December 3, 2020
Making G contingent on a ultra low government rate of interest (ULGROI) seems household budget thinking: lower expenditure on interest payments is being portrayed as permitting the higher expenditure on G. (2/13)
All fine that this is permitting those who think in a household budget way (OBR, IFS etc) to support spending (or rather not prescribe austerity) but it is not the macro of the situation. (3/13)
As an aside I'd rather call out the household budget mob for prescribing austerity last time, not least in the week that the OECD publicly acknowledged austerity was overdone. Parotting their present argument seems to let them off the hook. (4/13)
As you know the low rate of interest - in advanced economies on government debt - is not a matter of chance but a consequence of a decade of reliance on QE and a wider global retreat from risk. (5/13)
A very interesting perspective from @jbralston. While I understand and respect Dr Ralston’s experience, I feel that it requires redress. I’m usually loath to making these kinds of interventions, but this is a subject close to me both personally & intellectually. 1/
I hope this thread is taken in the spirit decorum, respect, & admiration with which it is intended. Disclosure: My forthcoming monograph is an intellectual-historical study of the Syriac & Christian Arabic apologetic tradition, focusing on the Trinity, Incarnation, and cult. 2/
Now, Dr Ralston has said that although he is a Christian, the arguments of classical Muslim theologians against the Trinity & Incarnation win every time (though he allows that some medieval Christian Arabic thinkers had their moments). 3/
A solution, he proposes, is to write more theology in dialogue with Islam. I wholeheartedly agree. 4/
But I also think that this assessment (no doubt limited by this platform) rather diminishes the contributions of Middle Eastern Christians who have been theologising in the context of Islam for centuries (though I'm certain that was not Dr Ralston's intention). 5/
I'm still a Christian but also am sure that the classical Muslim mutakallimun pretty much win every argument about the logic of the incarnation and Trinity
— Joshua Ralston (@jbralston) December 14, 2020
I hope this thread is taken in the spirit decorum, respect, & admiration with which it is intended. Disclosure: My forthcoming monograph is an intellectual-historical study of the Syriac & Christian Arabic apologetic tradition, focusing on the Trinity, Incarnation, and cult. 2/
Now, Dr Ralston has said that although he is a Christian, the arguments of classical Muslim theologians against the Trinity & Incarnation win every time (though he allows that some medieval Christian Arabic thinkers had their moments). 3/
A solution, he proposes, is to write more theology in dialogue with Islam. I wholeheartedly agree. 4/
But I also think that this assessment (no doubt limited by this platform) rather diminishes the contributions of Middle Eastern Christians who have been theologising in the context of Islam for centuries (though I'm certain that was not Dr Ralston's intention). 5/
I don't know who needs to hear this (wypipo), but this is classic casual racism practiced by White people who refuse to listen to the concerns of Black people.
Y'all haven't earned our trust, that's why we don't trust you.
What Dr. Fauci said may indeed be correct (they've lied and flip-flopped so much, stood by in silence to let liars, protecting their personal interests), but using the race of the Black doctor to try and convince AA the government and medicine is safe is SO casually racist. I...
The reason many Black people don't trust the vaccines or the government is because America has NEVER made right what its done wrong to us African Americans as a group collectively.
And when they do apologize it's decades, sometimes centuries AFTER the harm has been done.
In the meantime, White racists be out here conjuring up more shit, schemes and scams to harm us with instead of reparations.
It's the classic abuser gaslighting his/her victims.
Black folks ain't falling for that anymore, nor should they. Nor should anyone be asking them to.
Y'all haven't earned our trust, that's why we don't trust you.
Dr. Anthony Fauci: "To my African American brothers and sisters ... this vaccine that you're gonna be taking was developed by an African American woman. And that is just a fact." pic.twitter.com/LsBqdsLXjB
— The Recount (@therecount) December 10, 2020
What Dr. Fauci said may indeed be correct (they've lied and flip-flopped so much, stood by in silence to let liars, protecting their personal interests), but using the race of the Black doctor to try and convince AA the government and medicine is safe is SO casually racist. I...
The reason many Black people don't trust the vaccines or the government is because America has NEVER made right what its done wrong to us African Americans as a group collectively.
And when they do apologize it's decades, sometimes centuries AFTER the harm has been done.
In the meantime, White racists be out here conjuring up more shit, schemes and scams to harm us with instead of reparations.
It's the classic abuser gaslighting his/her victims.
Black folks ain't falling for that anymore, nor should they. Nor should anyone be asking them to.
