Leaderboard

Ba ce hater. Lasa ma omu sa faca 4 litere, daca el asa vrea :). E nevoie si de muncitori, nu doar de oameni eficienti.

Cand m-am angajat eu pe 1600 RON am cautat ceva si stiam bine mai multe limbaje de programare cu proiecte in portofoliu. Si mai stiam si lucruri de security, pe langa ceva networking, Linux si altele (mi-a placut sa invat citind carti, inca imi place asta). Am aplicat la vreo 80 de firme si am fost la vreo 10-15 interviuri. Nu a fost deloc usor, cum ma asteptam si ma asteptam si la mai mult din punct de vedere financiar din cauza unor povesti auzite, dar realitatea m-a lovit. Insa am prins intr-un loc foarte OK pe ceea ce imi placea (pe langa security) la acel moment: C/C++ (nu existau job-uri pe security atunci, sau nu stiam eu de ele). Ce vreau eu sa fac zicandu-va aceste lucruri e sa va aduc cu picioarele pe pamant. Ca va duceti la interviuri, cereti 2000 de EUR si rad aia de voi. Chiar daca ati invatat ceva prin facultate, nu e atat de util in practica cum v-ati astepta. Security nu se face in facultate, deci un maxim 10-15% utilitate in faptul ca aveti o diploma. Daca mergeti pe programare nu veti stii decat limbajul si maxim ati avea 2-3 proiectele care nu se compara cu proiectele Enterprise cu tone de framework-uri si module care se leaga intre ele. Altfel spus, pentru angajatori, fara experienta, valoarea nu este extrem de mare si de aceea nici nu pot da salarii foarte mari din prima. Veti creste treptat, mai rapid la inceput si mai greu ulterior, dar aveti nevoie de rabdare. Legat de salariu, ganditi-va asa: daca ati fi angajatori si ar veni o persoana ca voi la interviu ce salariu i-ati da? Cred ca mai important decat salariul de inceput sunt alte lucruri: sa te asiguri ca ai colegi OK si ca poti invata de la ei. Sa te asiguri ca e interesant ce face firma ca sa nu lucrezi cu scarba. Sa te asiguri ca proiectele sunt frumoase si ca lucrand la ele vei invata multe lucruri. Si sa va ganditi foarte bine cand alegeti domeniul: ai ales Java? Probabil o sa mergi pe Java toata viata (desi nu e tocmai obligatoriu, va fi destul de greu sa faceti pe viitor o schimbare, mai ales din punct de vedere financiar).

Cunosc caz de ospatar ce a fost angajat in domeniul IT pe 2500ron. Zero experienta, nici macar suita office nu stie. Habar nu am de ce l-au angajat si cum or sa ii ajute, dar banuiesc ca nu au gasit oameni cu studii/cunostinte in domeniu sa accepte salariul asta.

Nu cred ca mai este atat de relevant cati ani de studiu are cineva ca nu se invata mare lucru in facultate. Ca salariu minim nu va luati de pe mizeriile pe care le auziti la TV ca 2000 de EUR sau mai stiu eu ce. Eu am inceput cu 1600 RON si aveam destule chestii pe CV. Un 2000-2500 RON as zice ca e ok pentru inceput in RO, avantajul fiind ca in primii ani poate creste repede. Poti prinde si mai bine dar e posibil sa nu ai mariri prea dese sau prea mari. Si e posibil ca din cauza cererii unui salariu mai mare sa nu ajungi sa lucrezi undeva unde sa iti placa.

Researchers disclosed the ‘WarezTheRemote’ attack, affecting Comcast’s XR11 voice remote control. A security flaw allowing attackers to remotely snoop in on victims’ private conversations was found to stem from an unexpected device – their TV remotes. The flaw stems from Comcast’s XR11, a popular voice-activated remote control for cable TV, which has more than 18 million units deployed across the U.S. The remote enables users to say the channel or content they want to watch rather than keying in the channel number or typing to search. However, researchers found a serious vulnerability in the remote, allowing attackers to take it over (details below). Worse, the ensuing attack, dubbed WarezTheRemote, does not require any interaction from the victim — it’s extremely cheap to carry out (a hacker merely needs a low-priced RF transceiver and antenna), and can be launched remotely (from up to 65 feet away). Researchers worked with Comcast’s security team after finding the flaw and fixes have been released that remediate the issues that make the attack possible – however, in a disclosure post on Wednesday, they stressed that the incident is an important reminder of the inherent security and privacy issues plaguing even the least-suspected internet of things (IoT) devices. The Flaw By extensively reverse-engineering both the remote’s firmware and the software it communicates with on the set-top box, researchers found an error in the way the remote handles incoming RF packets. To understand the flaw, it’s first important to look at how XR11 voice remotes work. The remote communicates with the television set-top box over the RF4CE (Radio Frequency for Consumer Electronics) protocol. RF4CE, which is a subset of the Zigbee family of power-saving RF protocols, has a feature called, straightforwardly, “security” — which should encrypt the contents of RF4CE packets to bar attackers from injecting malicious packets into the connection. However, in the XR11’s implementation, the RF4CE “security” feature is set on a packet-by-packet basis. Each packet has a “flags” byte, and when one of its bits is set to 1, its contents will be encrypted – and if the bit isn’t set, the packet will be sent in plaintext. The vulnerability lies in the fact that the original XR11 firmware didn’t verify that responses to encrypted requests are encrypted as well, said researchers. That means an attacker within RF range (about 65 feet away) could view requests from the remote in plaintext – allowing them to easily formulate a malicious response to that request. The Attack Researchers say that the remote’s firmware queries the box it is paired with – be default – for a new firmware once every 24 hours. That means in a real-life attack, a bad actor would need to wait for the a firmware upgrade query to occur. Following this initial exchange, the remote then sends out a series of requests asking for the contents of the firmware image, chunk by chunk. The order these chunk requests are sent in is entirely predictable – meaning attackers can easily guess which chunk of the firmware the remote is asking for. Researchers said an attacker would only need a basic RF transceiver, which is cheap – a Texas Instruments CC2531 costs only a few dollars for a whole development kit – as well as a cheap 2 dBi antenna (researchers used a 16dBi antenna for better results). Researchers disclosed the vulnerability to Comcast April 21, and Comcast began to release a patch on July 24. On Sept. 24, Comcast confirmed that all devices were patched. “Nothing is more important than keeping our customers safe and secure, and we appreciate Guardicore for bringing this issue to our attention,” said Comcast in a press statement. Source

Security researchers uncovered a new attack dubbed Kraken that uses injected its payload into the Windows Error Reporting service to evade detection. The WerFault.exe is a service that shows some error happened with the operating system, Windows features, or applications, victims would assume some error happen, but attackers stealthy execute malware using the process. Fileless Malware Attack Security researchers from Malwarebytes observed a new attack with a zip file containing a malicious document dubbed “Compensation manual.doc” and it has an image tag that points to the website “yourrighttocompensation[.]com”. Inside the malicious document file, it includes a modified version of CactusTorch(shellcode launcher) VBA module that leverages the DotNetToJscript technique to load a .Net compiled binary into memory and execute it from VBScript. The new maliciously created Windows Error Reporting service will before some anti-analysis checks such as not running in an analysis/sandbox environment or a debugger. Once it feels safe after anti-analysis it decrypts and loads the final payload int he maliciously created Windows Error Reporting service. The payload is hosted on the website asia- kotoba[.]net in the name of favicon. At the time of the report, the target URL was down, so that Malwarebytes unable to retrieve this shellcode for further analysis. Researchers believe the attack relates to APT32, but not having enough evidence to attribute this attack. Via gbhackers.com