cybersecurity

Just heard about this on a podcast, and I've often looked for ways to put my skills to use on a volunteer basis. This would probably also be an excellent resume builder for students / aspiring cybersecurity professionals.

In his groundbreaking new research, HTTP/1.1 Must Die: The Desync Endgame, Kettle challenges the security community to completely rethink its approach to request smuggling. He argues that, in practical terms, it's nigh on impossible to consistently and reliably determine the boundaries between HTTP/1.1 requests, especially when implemented across the chains of interconnected systems that comprise modern web architectures. Mistakes such as parsing discrepancies are inevitable, and when using upstream HTTP/1.1, even the tiniest of bugs often have critical security impact, including complete site takeover.

This research demonstrates unequivocally that patching individual implementations will never be enough to eliminate the threat of request smuggling. Using upstream HTTP/2 offers a robust solution.

I just read this article in a marketing blog from portswigger, the maker of the penetration testing tool burp suite.

Can someone with more insight explain what we're supposed to do? Completely disabling HTTP/1.1 is probably not doable for many organisations.

Security researchers at Cisco Talos discovered critical vulnerabilities in Dell's ControlVault3 hardware security module that affect over 100 Dell laptop models[^1]. Called "ReVault," these five vulnerabilities allow attackers to compromise the system in two main ways:

1. Post-compromise persistence: A non-administrative user can exploit the Windows APIs to execute arbitrary code on the ControlVault firmware, steal security keys, and modify the firmware to maintain access even after Windows reinstallation[^1].

2. Physical attack: An attacker with physical access can directly connect to the Unified Security Hub board via USB, bypass login credentials and disk encryption, and even trick the fingerprint reader into accepting any fingerprint[^1].

The affected ControlVault3 and ControlVault3+ modules are primarily found in Dell Latitude and Precision business laptops used in cybersecurity, government, and other security-sensitive environments[^1].

Key mitigations include:

• Installing the latest firmware updates
• Disabling unused security peripherals
• Enabling chassis intrusion detection
• Using Windows Enhanced Sign-in Security (ESS)
• Monitoring for suspicious crashes in Windows Biometric Service[^1]

[^1]: Cisco Talos - ReVault! When your SoC turns against you…

Weekly thread to discuss whatever you’re working on, big or small, at work or in your free time.

Weekly thread for any and all career, learning and general guidance questions. Thinking of taking a training or going for a cert? Wondering how to level up your career? Wondering what NOT to do? Got other questions? This is the time and place to ask!

We’re glad to announce version 2.14.0 of Vulnerability-Lookup!
This version introduces several new features, enhancements, and fixes.

What's New

New Watchlist View

You can now view your monitored products and their related vulnerabilities directly in the browser, mirroring the structure of email notifications. Authenticated RSS/Atom feeds are available. (#181)

(enable audio in the screencast)

GNA Verification

We added a way to confirm whether a Vulnerability-Lookup instance is officially operated by a GNA. The information is available on the About page. (#179)

Optional CVD Process

The Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure module can now be disabled if not applicable to your deployment. (#178)

Changes

Other changes include a smoother post-login experience and a fail-safe around ML-Gateway calls for related vulnerabilities. (#170)

Changelog

📂 To explore the full list of changes, visit the changelog on GitHub:
https://github.com/vulnerability-lookup/vulnerability-lookup/releases/tag/v2.14.0

🙏 Thank you very much to all the contributors and testers!

Feedback and Support

If you encounter any issues or have suggestions, feel free to open a ticket on our GitHub repository:
https://github.com/vulnerability-lookup/vulnerability-lookup/issues/
Your feedback is always appreciated!

Follow Us on Fediverse/Mastodon

You can follow us on Mastodon and get real time information about security advisories:
https://social.circl.lu/@vulnerability_lookup/

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/39439229

Op-ed by Dr. Dave Venable, Chair of the Institute for Strategic Risk and Security (ISRS), and Mykola Volkivskyi, President of the Geneva Center for Diplomacy and Conflict Resolution who previously served as Advisor to the Chairman of the Committee in the Ukrainian Parliament.

Archived

Spain's recent decision to award Huawei a contract worth €12.3 million to manage and store legally authorized wiretaps raises significant concerns about the country's commitment to digital sovereignty. This move jeopardizes Spain’s national security and undermines the trust that is essential for the intelligence-sharing frameworks of the European Union and NATO.

While Huawei has made considerable efforts to demonstrate technical compliance with European standards, the political reality is more complicated: any sensitive system it builds is, by default, subject to exploitation by Beijing. Huawei is subject to China’s 2017 National Intelligence Law and cannot credibly claim complete independence from the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP’s) security and intelligence apparatus. Despite this, Madrid’s procurement process proceeded as if the controversy around Huawei had no bearing on the domain of sensitive state surveillance networks.

[...]

Spain’s SITEL Contract is Effectively A Security Breach

Spain’s wiretap system, SITEL, functions as the core for Spanish law enforcement and intelligence wiretap activities, storing sensitive data about targets involved in terrorism, organized crime, and even foreign espionage.

Huawei is technically capable of managing such a system, but under China’s 2017 National Intelligence Law, the company is compelled to cooperate with Chinese intelligence services. This creates a constant vulnerability in any critical infrastructure that Huawei or any PRC company operates abroad. However, Spain's procurement process treated Huawei's bid as if it were a neutral supplier.

[...]

Belgium’s State Security Service (VSSE) added Huawei to a watchlist in 2023 due to concerns about potential espionage. The country’s cybersecurity agency later banned Huawei from 5G networks used in critical sectors after detecting unusual data traffic patterns at a Brussels telecom hub.

The “Generation” bribery scandal worsened these concerns. Members of the European Parliament accepted lavish perks from lobbyists linked to Huawei, raising fears that influence operations had penetrated EU regulatory bodies. This incident eroded public trust and showed how corruption scandals can weaken vendor neutrality.

Belgium’s swift and decisive response demonstrates a security-first approach, which should be adopted across the EU and transatlantic alliance. In contrast, Spain’s SITEL contract indicates either a gap in awareness or a willingness to take risks that could affect Europe’s shared security framework.

[...]

The approach to Huawei varies further across Europe. Greece demonstrates how economic dependence can override security concerns — the country chose Huawei as a key provider for its telecommunications infrastructure. Huawei has even offered discounted equipment and “training centers” for Greek engineers to strengthen this relationship further. However, leaked documents in 2024 revealed that Huawei provided perks to Greek officials to secure these contracts.

[...]

Recent patterns emerging from conflict zones further emphasize the urgent need for a unified security policy [in the EU member states]. In Russian-occupied parts of Ukraine, local populations and military operations are increasingly served by unauthorized mobile operators using Russian and potentially Chinese-supplied infrastructure. These networks—established in Crimea, Donbas, and southern Ukraine—are not only illegal under international law but also structurally opaque, enabling surveillance, population control, and disinformation on a large scale. Evidence indicates that Chinese vendors have been involved in providing equipment to these unauthorized operators, either directly or through intermediaries. In Crimea, for example, existing infrastructure was reportedly transformed using Russian intercept technology (SORM), raising concerns that Chinese equipment may have aided these transitions.

[...]

Spain’s Huawei contract highlights a deeper problem: the lack of binding standards to safeguard Europe’s intelligence infrastructure. Procurement policy is a matter of national security. As hybrid threats grow and alliances face unprecedented pressure, EU and NATO leaders must act to address this critical gap. Without enforceable guidelines, the trust that underpins Europe’s security framework is in jeopardy.

Europe’s credibility hinges on its ability to align its intelligence infrastructure with alliance standards; otherwise, it risks increasing strategic division.

Weekly thread for any and all career, learning and general guidance questions. Thinking of taking a training or going for a cert? Wondering how to level up your career? Wondering what NOT to do? Got other questions? This is the time and place to ask!