Introducing the AWS Trust Center

Post Syndicated from Chris Betz original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/introducing-the-aws-trust-center/

At Amazon Web Services (AWS), earning trust isn’t just a goal—it’s one of our core Leadership Principles that guide every decision we make. As CISO of AWS, I’ve seen firsthand how this commitment to earning trust shapes our culture, our services, and our daily interactions with customers. Customers choose AWS over other providers because they trust us to provide the most secure infrastructure and services, and to tell them exactly how data is being protected.

To make that information even easier to find, we’re launching the AWS Trust Center, a new online resource that shares how we approach securing your assets in the cloud. The AWS Trust Center is a window into our security practices, compliance programs, and data protection controls that demonstrates how we work to earn your trust every day.

Building on a foundation of trust

Security has been our top priority since day one. When we launched AWS in 2006, we designed our infrastructure as the most secure cloud computing environment available. We knew we couldn’t just offer the same level of security as existing on-premises infrastructure. To earn customer trust, we had to disrupt and exceed the exacting industry standards of the world’s most security-conscious organizations. We continue to constantly reinforce security in our everyday decision making. With the Trust Center, we’re making it easier for you to understand how we protect your workloads, safeguard your data, and help you meet your compliance goals.

The Trust Center reflects our belief that more easily accessible information builds and maintains trust. Whether you’re looking for information about our data center controls, checking compliance certifications, or reviewing our shared responsibility model, you’ll now find the security and compliance information you need in one central location.

A single source of truth for security and compliance

In the Trust Center, you’ll find information about our approach to security at every level—from our physical data centers to our cloud infrastructure and our portfolio of cloud services. We’re including documentation about our security services and tools, helping you to understand both how we secure the cloud and how we help you secure your workloads within it. You’ll also find information about our compliance programs, including the certifications and attestations we maintain globally. This is valuable for teams working in regulated industries who need to demonstrate compliance to auditors and regulators.

The Trust Center highlights information about our data protection and privacy practices. Customers can learn how we protect your data and how we manage encryption. Further, we understand that customers are concerned about who can access their data and under what circumstances. We’ve consolidated detailed information about our operator access controls, which are designed to use the principle of least privilege at their core. You’ll learn about our zero-access designs for key services like AWS Key Management Service (AWS KMS) and Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (Amazon EC2), our use of forward access sessions (FAS) to cryptographically enforce customer authorization, and our global monitoring systems.

The Trust Center provides a central place to find information about service health and security events, so you have the information you need to maintain operational excellence. You can stay up-to-date on security bulletins, and check real-time service health status. If you need to report a security concern or conduct your own security assessment, we’ve made those processes even easier to find. Resources are organized for ease of access, with direct links to the agreements, documentation, and resources you need to make informed decisions about your cloud security posture.

Empowering customers to drive secure innovation

What excites me most about the Trust Center is how it removes barriers for our customers. With detailed security information, easier links to compliance documentation, and operational insights now at your fingertips, you can move faster and innovate with confidence.

As we continue to innovate and expand AWS services, we’re committed to enhancing the Trust Center with the latest security information. This is a living resource that will evolve alongside our cloud and services. Maintaining your trust isn’t just about what we’ve built today—it’s about demonstrating, through both our commitments and delivery, that we’re worthy of being your trusted security partner. That’s our commitment to you, and that’s what the AWS Trust Center represents.

We invite you to explore the AWS Trust Center today, and we look forward to continuing to earn your trust, every day.

If you have feedback about this post, submit comments in the Comments section below. If you have questions about this post, contact AWS Support.

Chris Betz
Chris Betz

Chris is CISO at AWS. He oversees security teams and leads the development and implementation of security policies with the aim of managing risk and aligning the company’s security posture with business objectives. Chris joined Amazon in August 2023 after holding CISO and security leadership roles at leading companies. He lives in Northern Virginia with his family.

Upcoming Speaking Engagements

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2025/02/upcoming-speaking-engagements-43.html

This is a current list of where and when I am scheduled to speak:

  • I’m speaking at Boskone 62 in Boston, Massachusetts, USA, which runs from February 14-16, 2025. My talk is at 4:00 PM ET on the 15th.
  • I’m speaking at the Rossfest Symposium in Cambridge, UK, on March 25, 2025.

The list is maintained on this page.

[$] Fighting the AI scraperbot scourge

Post Syndicated from corbet original https://lwn.net/Articles/1008897/

There are many challenges involved with running a web site like LWN. Some
of them, such as finding the courage to write for people who know more
about the subject matter than we do, simply come with the territory we have
chosen. But others show up as an unwelcome surprise; the ongoing task of
fending off bots determined to scrape the entire Internet to (seemingly)
feed into the insatiable meat grinder of AI training is certainly one of
those. Readers have, at times, expressed curiosity about that fight and
how we are handling it; read on for a description of a modern-day plague.

Security updates for Friday

Post Syndicated from daroc original https://lwn.net/Articles/1009765/

Security updates have been issued by AlmaLinux (doxygen, gcc-toolset-13-gcc, gcc-toolset-14-gcc, kernel, and libxml2), Debian (chromium, postgresql-13, and webkit2gtk), Fedora (krb5, openssl, and python3.13), Mageia (ark, ofono, and perl-Net-OAuth, perl-Crypt-URandom, perl-Module-Build), Oracle (firefox, gcc, gcc-toolset-14-gcc, kernel, openssl, tbb, and thunderbird), Red Hat (libxml2), SUSE (chromium, golang-github-prometheus-prometheus, grafana, kernel, kernel-firmware-ath10k-20250206, kernel-firmware-bnx2-20250206, kernel-firmware-brcm-20250206, kernel-firmware-chelsio-20250206, kernel-firmware-dpaa2-20250206, kernel-firmware-mwifiex-20250206, kernel-firmware-platform-20250206, kernel-firmware-realtek-20250206, kernel-firmware-serial-20250206, kernel-firmware-ueagle-20250206, libtasn1, python312, qemu, SUSE Manager Client Tools, SUSE Manager Client Tools MU 5.0.3, and ucode-intel-20250211), and Ubuntu (activemq and libsndfile).

Searching for the cause of hung tasks in the Linux kernel

Post Syndicated from Oxana Kharitonova original https://blog.cloudflare.com/searching-for-the-cause-of-hung-tasks-in-the-linux-kernel/

Depending on your configuration, the Linux kernel can produce a hung task warning message in its log. Searching the Internet and the kernel documentation, you can find a brief explanation that the kernel process is stuck in the uninterruptable state and hasn’t been scheduled on the CPU for an unexpectedly long period of time. That explains the warning’s meaning, but doesn’t provide the reason it occurred. In this blog post we’re going to explore how the hung task warning works, why it happens, whether it is a bug in the Linux kernel or application itself, and whether it is worth monitoring at all.

INFO: task XXX:1495882 blocked for more than YYY seconds.

The hung task message in the kernel log looks like this:

INFO: task XXX:1495882 blocked for more than YYY seconds.
     Tainted: G          O       6.6.39-cloudflare-2024.7.3 #1
"echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
task:XXX         state:D stack:0     pid:1495882 ppid:1      flags:0x00004002
. . .

Processes in Linux can be in different states. Some of them are running or ready to run on the CPU — they are in the TASK_RUNNING state. Others are waiting for some signal or event to happen, e.g. network packets to arrive or terminal input from a user. They are in a TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE state and can spend an arbitrary length of time in this state until being woken up by a signal. The most important thing about these states is that they still can receive signals, and be terminated by a signal. In contrast, a process in the TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE state is waiting only for certain special classes of events to wake them up, and can’t be interrupted by a signal. The signals are not delivered until the process emerges from this state and only a system reboot can clear the process. It’s marked with the letter D in the log shown above.

What if this wake up event doesn’t happen or happens with a significant delay? (A “significant delay” may be on the order of seconds or minutes, depending on the system.) Then our dependent process is hung in this state. What if this dependent process holds some lock and prevents other processes from acquiring it? Or if we see many processes in the D state? Then it might tell us that some of the system resources are overwhelmed or are not working correctly. At the same time, this state is very valuable, especially if we want to preserve the process memory. It might be useful if part of the data is written to disk and another part is still in the process memory — we don’t want inconsistent data on a disk. Or maybe we want a snapshot of the process memory when the bug is hit. To preserve this behaviour, but make it more controlled, a new state was introduced in the kernel: TASK_KILLABLE — it still protects a process, but allows termination with a fatal signal. 

How Linux identifies the hung process

The Linux kernel has a special thread called khungtaskd. It runs regularly depending on the settings, iterating over all processes in the D state. If a process is in this state for more than YYY seconds, we’ll see a message in the kernel log. There are settings for this daemon that can be changed according to your wishes:

$ sudo sysctl -a --pattern hung
kernel.hung_task_all_cpu_backtrace = 0
kernel.hung_task_check_count = 4194304
kernel.hung_task_check_interval_secs = 0
kernel.hung_task_panic = 0
kernel.hung_task_timeout_secs = 10
kernel.hung_task_warnings = 200

At Cloudflare, we changed the notification threshold kernel.hung_task_timeout_secs from the default 120 seconds to 10 seconds. You can adjust the value for your system depending on configuration and how critical this delay is for you. If the process spends more than hung_task_timeout_secs seconds in the D state, a log entry is written, and our internal monitoring system emits an alert based on this log. Another important setting here is kernel.hung_task_warnings — the total number of messages that will be sent to the log. We limit it to 200 messages and reset it every 15 minutes. It allows us not to be overwhelmed by the same issue, and at the same time doesn’t stop our monitoring for too long. You can make it unlimited by setting the value to “-1”.

To better understand the root causes of the hung tasks and how a system can be affected, we’re going to review more detailed examples. 

Example #1 or XFS

Typically, there is a meaningful process or application name in the log, but sometimes you might see something like this:

INFO: task kworker/13:0:834409 blocked for more than 11 seconds.
 	Tainted: G      	O   	6.6.39-cloudflare-2024.7.3 #1
"echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
task:kworker/13:0	state:D stack:0 	pid:834409 ppid:2   flags:0x00004000
Workqueue: xfs-sync/dm-6 xfs_log_worker

In this log, kworker is the kernel thread. It’s used as a deferring mechanism, meaning a piece of work will be scheduled to be executed in the future. Under kworker, the work is aggregated from different tasks, which makes it difficult to tell which application is experiencing a delay. Luckily, the kworker is accompanied by the Workqueue line. Workqueue is a linked list, usually predefined in the kernel, where these pieces of work are added and performed by the kworker in the order they were added to the queue. The Workqueue name xfs-sync and the function which it points to, xfs_log_worker, might give a good clue where to look. Here we can make an assumption that the XFS is under pressure and check the relevant metrics. It helped us to discover that due to some configuration changes, we forgot no_read_workqueue / no_write_workqueue flags that were introduced some time ago to speed up Linux disk encryption.

Summary: In this case, nothing critical happened to the system, but the hung tasks warnings gave us an alert that our file system had slowed down.

Example #2 or Coredump

Let’s take a look at the next hung task log and its decoded stack trace:

INFO: task test:964 blocked for more than 5 seconds.
      Not tainted 6.6.72-cloudflare-2025.1.7 #1
"echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
task:test            state:D stack:0     pid:964   ppid:916    flags:0x00004000
Call Trace:
<TASK>
__schedule (linux/kernel/sched/core.c:5378 linux/kernel/sched/core.c:6697) 
schedule (linux/arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h:85 (discriminator 13) linux/kernel/sched/core.c:6772 (discriminator 13)) 
[do_exit (linux/kernel/exit.c:433 (discriminator 4) linux/kernel/exit.c:825 (discriminator 4)) 
? finish_task_switch.isra.0 (linux/arch/x86/include/asm/irqflags.h:42 linux/arch/x86/include/asm/irqflags.h:77 linux/kernel/sched/sched.h:1385 linux/kernel/sched/core.c:5132 linux/kernel/sched/core.c:5250) 
do_group_exit (linux/kernel/exit.c:1005) 
get_signal (linux/kernel/signal.c:2869) 
? srso_return_thunk (linux/arch/x86/lib/retpoline.S:217) 
? hrtimer_try_to_cancel.part.0 (linux/kernel/time/hrtimer.c:1347) 
arch_do_signal_or_restart (linux/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c:310) 
? srso_return_thunk (linux/arch/x86/lib/retpoline.S:217) 
? hrtimer_nanosleep (linux/kernel/time/hrtimer.c:2105) 
exit_to_user_mode_prepare (linux/kernel/entry/common.c:176 linux/kernel/entry/common.c:210) 
syscall_exit_to_user_mode (linux/arch/x86/include/asm/entry-common.h:91 linux/kernel/entry/common.c:141 linux/kernel/entry/common.c:304) 
? srso_return_thunk (linux/arch/x86/lib/retpoline.S:217) 
do_syscall_64 (linux/arch/x86/entry/common.c:88) 
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe (linux/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:121) 
</TASK>

The stack trace says that the process or application test was blocked for more than 5 seconds. We might recognise this user space application by the name, but why is it blocked? It’s always helpful to check the stack trace when looking for a cause. The most interesting line here is do_exit (linux/kernel/exit.c:433 (discriminator 4) linux/kernel/exit.c:825 (discriminator 4)). The source code points to the coredump_task_exit function. Additionally, checking the process metrics revealed that the application crashed during the time when the warning message appeared in the log. When a process is terminated based on some set of signals (abnormally), the Linux kernel can provide a core dump file, if enabled. The mechanism — when a process terminates, the kernel makes a snapshot of the process memory before exiting and either writes it to a file or sends it through the socket to another handler — can be systemd-coredump or your custom one. When it happens, the kernel moves the process to the D state to preserve its memory and early termination. The higher the process memory usage, the longer it takes to get a core dump file, and the higher the chance of getting a hung task warning.

Let’s check our hypothesis by triggering it with a small Go program. We’ll use the default Linux coredump handler and will decrease the hung task threshold to 1 second.

Coredump settings:

$ sudo sysctl -a --pattern kernel.core
kernel.core_pattern = core
kernel.core_pipe_limit = 16
kernel.core_uses_pid = 1

You can make changes with sysctl:

$ sudo sysctl -w kernel.core_uses_pid=1

Hung task settings:

$ sudo sysctl -a --pattern hung
kernel.hung_task_all_cpu_backtrace = 0
kernel.hung_task_check_count = 4194304
kernel.hung_task_check_interval_secs = 0
kernel.hung_task_panic = 0
kernel.hung_task_timeout_secs = 1
kernel.hung_task_warnings = -1

Go program:

$ cat main.go
package main

import (
	"os"
	"time"
)

func main() {
	_, err := os.ReadFile("test.file")
	if err != nil {
		panic(err)
	}
	time.Sleep(8 * time.Minute) 
}

This program reads a 10 GB file into process memory. Let’s create the file:

$ yes this is 10GB file | head -c 10GB > test.file

The last step is to build the Go program, crash it, and watch our kernel log:

$ go mod init test
$ go build .
$ GOTRACEBACK=crash ./test
$ (Ctrl+\)

Hooray! We can see our hung task warning:

$ sudo dmesg -T | tail -n 31
INFO: task test:8734 blocked for more than 22 seconds.
      Not tainted 6.6.72-cloudflare-2025.1.7 #1
      Blocked by coredump.
"echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
task:test            state:D stack:0     pid:8734  ppid:8406   task_flags:0x400448 flags:0x00004000

By the way, have you noticed the Blocked by coredump. line in the log? It was recently added to the upstream code to improve visibility and remove the blame from the process itself. The patch also added the task_flags information, as Blocked by coredump is detected via the flag PF_POSTCOREDUMP, and knowing all the task flags is useful for further root-cause analysis.

Summary: This example showed that even if everything suggests that the application is the problem, the real root cause can be something else — in this case, coredump.

Example #3 or rtnl_mutex

This one was tricky to debug. Usually, the alerts are limited by one or two different processes, meaning only a certain application or subsystem experiences an issue. In this case, we saw dozens of unrelated tasks hanging for minutes with no improvements over time. Nothing else was in the log, most of the system metrics were fine, and existing traffic was being served, but it was not possible to ssh to the server. New Kubernetes container creations were also stalling. Analyzing the stack traces of different tasks initially revealed that all the traces were limited to just three functions:

rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x9/0x3c0
dev_ethtool+0xc6/0x2db0 
bonding_show_bonds+0x20/0xb0

Further investigation showed that all of these functions were waiting for rtnl_lock to be acquired. It looked like some application acquired the rtnl_mutex and didn’t release it. All other processes were in the D state waiting for this lock.

The RTNL lock is primarily used by the kernel networking subsystem for any network-related config, for both writing and reading. The RTNL is a global mutex lock, although upstream efforts are being made for splitting up RTNL per network namespace (netns).

From the hung task reports, we can observe the “victims” that are being stalled waiting for the lock, but how do we identify the task that is holding this lock for too long? For troubleshooting this, we leveraged BPF via a bpftrace script, as this allows us to inspect the running kernel state. The kernel’s mutex implementation has a struct member called owner. It contains a pointer to the task_struct from the mutex-owning process, except it is encoded as type atomic_long_t. This is because the mutex implementation stores some state information in the lower 3-bits (mask 0x7) of this pointer. Thus, to read and dereference this task_struct pointer, we must first mask off the lower bits (0x7).

Our bpftrace script to determine who holds the mutex is as follows:

#!/usr/bin/env bpftrace
interval:s:10 {
  $rtnl_mutex = (struct mutex *) kaddr("rtnl_mutex");
  $owner = (struct task_struct *) ($rtnl_mutex->owner.counter & ~0x07);
  if ($owner != 0) {
    printf("rtnl_mutex->owner = %u %s\n", $owner->pid, $owner->comm);
  }
}

In this script, the rtnl_mutex lock is a global lock whose address can be exposed via /proc/kallsyms – using bpftrace helper function kaddr(), we can access the struct mutex pointer from the kallsyms. Thus, we can periodically (via interval:s:10) check if someone is holding this lock.

In the output we had this:

rtnl_mutex->owner = 3895365 calico-node

This allowed us to quickly identify calico-node as the process holding the RTNL lock for too long. To quickly observe where this process itself is stalled, the call stack is available via /proc/3895365/stack. This showed us that the root cause was a Wireguard config change, with function wg_set_device() holding the RTNL lock, and peer_remove_after_dead() waiting too long for a napi_disable() call. We continued debugging via a tool called drgn, which is a programmable debugger that can debug a running kernel via a Python-like interactive shell. We still haven’t discovered the root cause for the Wireguard issue and have asked the upstream for help, but that is another story.

Summary: The hung task messages were the only ones which we had in the kernel log. Each stack trace of these messages was unique, but by carefully analyzing them, we could spot similarities and continue debugging with other instruments.

Epilogue

Your system might have different hung task warnings, and we have many others not mentioned here. Each case is unique, and there is no standard approach to debug them. But hopefully this blog post helps you better understand why it’s good to have these warnings enabled, how they work, and what the meaning is behind them. We tried to provide some navigation guidance for the debugging process as well:

  • analyzing the stack trace might be a good starting point for debugging it, even if all the messages look unrelated, like we saw in example #3

  • keep in mind that the alert might be misleading, pointing to the victim and not the offender, as we saw in example #2 and example #3

  • if the kernel doesn’t schedule your application on the CPU, puts it in the D state, and emits the warning – the real problem might exist in the application code

Good luck with your debugging, and hopefully this material will help you on this journey!

Xerox Versalink C7025 Multifunction Printer: Pass-Back Attack Vulnerabilities (FIXED)

Post Syndicated from Deral Heiland original https://blog.rapid7.com/2025/02/14/xerox-versalink-c7025-multifunction-printer-pass-back-attack-vulnerabilities-fixed/

Xerox Versalink C7025 Multifunction Printer: Pass-Back Attack Vulnerabilities (FIXED)

During security testing, Rapid7 discovered that Xerox Versalink C7025 Multifunction printers (MFPs) were vulnerable to pass-back attacks. The affected products identified were:

  • Xerox Versalink MFPs
  • Firmware Version: 57.69.91 and earlier

This issue has been assigned the following CVEs:

  • CVE-2024-12510: LDAP pass-back vulnerability
  • CVE-2024-12511: SMB / FTP pass-back vulnerability

Product description

The Xerox Versalink C7025 Multifunction printer (MFP) is an all-in-one enterprise color printer designed to deliver print, copy, scan, fax, and email capabilities for enterprise business environments.

Credit

The pass-back vulnerabilities in the Xerox Versalink MFPs were discovered by Deral Heiland, Principal IoT Researcher at Rapid7. After coordination with the vendor, this disclosure is being published in accordance with Rapid7’s vulnerability disclosure policy.

Exploitation and remediation

This section details the potential for exploitation and remediation guidance for the issues discovered and reported by Rapid7, so that producers of this technology can gauge the impact of these issues appropriately and develop mitigations.

While examining the Xerox Versalink C7025, Rapid7 found that the Versalink MFP device was vulnerable to a pass-back attack. This pass-back style attack leverages a vulnerability that allows a malicious actor to alter the MFP’s configuration and cause the MFP device to send authentication credentials back to the malicious actor. This style of attack can be used to capture authentication data for the following configured services:

  • LDAP
  • SMB
  • FTP

Pass-back attack via LDAP (CVE-2024-12510)

If a malicious actor gains access to the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) configuration page and the LDAP services are configured for authentication, the malicious actor can then reconfigure the LDAP service’s IP address (Figure 1) and trigger an LDAP lookup on the LDAP User Mappings page (Figure 2) to authenticate against an attacker-controlled rogue system rather than the expected server.

Xerox Versalink C7025 Multifunction Printer: Pass-Back Attack Vulnerabilities (FIXED)

Xerox Versalink C7025 Multifunction Printer: Pass-Back Attack Vulnerabilities (FIXED)

By running a port listener on a host that the malicious actor controls, they are then able to capture the clear text LDAP service credentials as shown below in Figure 3. This attack requires access to the MFP printer admin account, and LDAP services must have been configured for normal operation to a valid LDAP server.
Xerox Versalink C7025 Multifunction Printer: Pass-Back Attack Vulnerabilities (FIXED)

Pass-back attack via user’s address book – SMB / FTP (CVE-2024-12511)

This attack allows a malicious actor to gain access to the user address book configuration to modify the SMB or FTP server’s IP address (Figure 4) and point the IP address to a host they control, potentially triggering a scan to file and capture the SMB or FTP authentication credentials.

Xerox Versalink C7025 Multifunction Printer: Pass-Back Attack Vulnerabilities (FIXED)

This attack allows a malicious actor to capture NetNTLMV2 handshakes or leverage the vulnerability in an SMB relay attack against Active Directory file servers. An example of capturing NetNTLMV2 handshake using the Metasploit capture/smb auxiliary module is shown below in Figure 5. In the case of FTP, the malicious actor would be able to capture clear text FTP authentication credentials.

Xerox Versalink C7025 Multifunction Printer: Pass-Back Attack Vulnerabilities (FIXED)

For this attack to be successful, the attacker requires an SMB or FTP scan function to be configured within the user’s address book, as well as physical access to the printer console or access to remote-control console via the web interface (Figure 6). This may require admin access unless user level access to the remote-control console has been enabled.

Xerox Versalink C7025 Multifunction Printer: Pass-Back Attack Vulnerabilities (FIXED)

Impact

If a malicious actor can successfully leverage these issues, it would allow them to capture credentials for Windows Active Directory. This means they could then move laterally within an organization’s environment and compromise other critical Windows servers and file systems.

Remediation guidance

Organizations leveraging Xerox Versalink MFP devices should upgrade to the latest patched version of the firmware to fix this issue. Additional details are available in the vendor advisory.

If patching the MFP devices cannot be done at this time, it is highly recommended to set a complex password for the admin account and also avoid using Windows authentication accounts that have elevated privileges, such as a domain admin account for LDAP or scan-to-file SMB services. Also, organizations should avoid enabling the remote-control console for unauthenticated users.

Disclosure timeline

March 26, 2024: Rapid7 contacts vendor to disclose vulnerabilities.
March 27, 2024 – April 11, 2024: Vendor acknowledges receipt of disclosure request; Rapid7 shares vulnerability details. Vendor confirms receipt of disclosure write up and assigns internal case number.
April 19, 2024 – June 11, 2024: Rapid7 requests input on patch ETA and coordinated disclosure date. Vendor requests additional time to determine patch and disclosure timeline; Rapid7 agrees.
July 23, 2024: Rapid7 requests an update on patch ETA and disclosure date.
July 31, 2024 – August 5, 2024: Vendor and Rapid7 agree on a coordinated disclosure date; Rapid7 agrees to test patches once available.
September 3, 2024: Extension requested.
September 26, 2024 – October 4, 2024: Rapid7 requests update. Vendor requests additional time to prepare update.
November 13 – 27, 2024: Rapid7 requests updates.
November 30, 2024 – December 6, 2024: Disclosure extended to January 2025.
December 11 – 30, 2025: Vendor provides CVE IDs and updates.
January 6 – 7, 2025: Vendor provides updates.
January 16, 2025: Disclosure extended to end of January.
January 24 – 27, 2025: Rapid7 requests confirmation on disclosure timeline. Vendor indicates patches are in testing and they will provide Rapid7 an update on progress later in the week.
January 29 – 31, 2025: Vendor indicates patches are generally available, requests that Rapid7 confirm fixes resolved the issue. Rapid7 tests firmware releases, confirms they resolve the vulnerabilities.
February 3, 2025: Vendor indicates advisories are available; Rapid7 notes that reciprocal disclosure will be delayed.
February 14, 2025: This disclosure.

AI and Civil Service Purges

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2025/02/ai-and-civil-service-purges.html

Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s chaotic approach to reform is upending government operations. Critical functions have been halted, tens of thousands of federal staffers are being encouraged to resign, and congressional mandates are being disregarded. The next phase: The Department of Government Efficiency reportedly wants to use AI to cut costs. According to The Washington Post, Musk’s group has started to run sensitive data from government systems through AI programs to analyze spending and determine what could be pruned. This may lead to the elimination of human jobs in favor of automation. As one government official who has been tracking Musk’s DOGE team told the Post, the ultimate aim is to use AI to replace “the human workforce with machines.” (Spokespeople for the White House and DOGE did not respond to requests for comment.)

Using AI to make government more efficient is a worthy pursuit, and this is not a new idea. The Biden administration disclosed more than 2,000 AI applications in development across the federal government. For example, FEMA has started using AI to help perform damage assessment in disaster areas. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has started using AI to look for fraudulent billing. The idea of replacing dedicated and principled civil servants with AI agents, however, is new—and complicated.

The civil service—the massive cadre of employees who operate government agencies—plays a vital role in translating laws and policy into the operation of society. New presidents can issue sweeping executive orders, but they often have no real effect until they actually change the behavior of public servants. Whether you think of these people as essential and inspiring do-gooders, boring bureaucratic functionaries, or as agents of a “deep state,” their sheer number and continuity act as ballast that resists institutional change.

This is why Trump and Musk’s actions are so significant. The more AI decision making is integrated into government, the easier change will be. If human workers are widely replaced with AI, executives will have unilateral authority to instantaneously alter the behavior of the government, profoundly raising the stakes for transitions of power in democracy. Trump’s unprecedented purge of the civil service might be the last time a president needs to replace the human beings in government in order to dictate its new functions. Future leaders may do so at the press of a button.

To be clear, the use of AI by the executive branch doesn’t have to be disastrous. In theory, it could allow new leadership to swiftly implement the wishes of its electorate. But this could go very badly in the hands of an authoritarian leader. AI systems concentrate power at the top, so they could allow an executive to effectuate change over sprawling bureaucracies instantaneously. Firing and replacing tens of thousands of human bureaucrats is a huge undertaking. Swapping one AI out for another, or modifying the rules that those AIs operate by, would be much simpler.

Social-welfare programs, if automated with AI, could be redirected to systematically benefit one group and disadvantage another with a single prompt change. Immigration-enforcement agencies could prioritize people for investigation and detainment with one instruction. Regulatory-enforcement agencies that monitor corporate behavior for malfeasance could turn their attention to, or away from, any given company on a whim.

Even if Congress were motivated to fight back against Trump and Musk, or against a future president seeking to bulldoze the will of the legislature, the absolute power to command AI agents would make it easier to subvert legislative intent. AI has the power to diminish representative politics. Written law is never fully determinative of the actions of government—there is always wiggle room for presidents, appointed leaders, and civil servants to exercise their own judgment. Whether intentional or not, whether charitably or not, each of these actors uses discretion. In human systems, that discretion is widely distributed across many individuals—people who, in the case of career civil servants, usually outlast presidencies.

Today, the AI ecosystem is dominated by a small number of corporations that decide how the most widely used AI models are designed, which data they are trained on, and which instructions they follow. Because their work is largely secretive and unaccountable to public interest, these tech companies are capable of making changes to the bias of AI systems—either generally or with aim at specific governmental use cases—that are invisible to the rest of us. And these private actors are both vulnerable to coercion by political leaders and self-interested in appealing to their favor. Musk himself created and funded xAI, now one of the world’s largest AI labs, with an explicitly ideological mandate to generate anti-“woke” AI and steer the wider AI industry in a similar direction.

But there’s a second way that AI’s transformation of government could go. AI development could happen inside of transparent and accountable public institutions, alongside its continued development by Big Tech. Applications of AI in democratic governments could be focused on benefitting public servants and the communities they serve by, for example, making it easier for non-English speakers to access government services, making ministerial tasks such as processing routine applications more efficient and reducing backlogs, or helping constituents weigh in on the policies deliberated by their representatives. Such AI integrations should be done gradually and carefully, with public oversight for their design and implementation and monitoring and guardrails to avoid unacceptable bias and harm.

Governments around the world are demonstrating how this could be done, though it’s early days. Taiwan has pioneered the use of AI models to facilitate deliberative democracy at an unprecedented scale. Singapore has been a leader in the development of public AI models, built transparently and with public-service use cases in mind. Canada has illustrated the role of disclosure and public input on the consideration of AI use cases in government. Even if you do not trust the current White House to follow any of these examples, U.S. states—which have much greater contact and influence over the daily lives of Americans than the federal government—could lead the way on this kind of responsible development and deployment of AI.

As the political theorist David Runciman has written, AI is just another in a long line of artificial “machines” used to govern how people live and act, not unlike corporations and states before it. AI doesn’t replace those older institutions, but it changes how they function. As the Trump administration forges stronger ties to Big Tech and AI developers, we need to recognize the potential of that partnership to steer the future of democratic governance—and act to make sure that it does not enable future authoritarians.

This essay was written with Nathan E. Sanders, and originally appeared in The Atlantic.

Кога ще избухне Румен Радев

Post Syndicated from Емилия Милчева original https://www.toest.bg/koga-shte-izbuhne-rumen-radev/

Кога ще избухне Румен Радев

Има въпроси шлагери, които се задържат за по-дълго на сцената на политическата естрада. „Кога ще избухне (с партия) Румен Радев?“ е един от тях. Този въпрос се върти с по-голяма или по-малка сила от началото на втория мандат на Радев, съвпаднал с политическата криза и позволил му да изпъкне в доспехите на народен закрилник-протагонист-стожер на нацията.

Президентът – къде умело, къде по-грубо, когато налага интересите си – балансира между ролите на арбитър и на активен играч, използвайки нестабилността като фон за своето политическо соло. Въпросът за негова партийна авантюра е рефрен, който никога не изчезва напълно, а само затихва, за да се върне с нов аранжимент при поредния политически трус. А трусовете зачестиха. 

Обичайно на въпросите дали ще дебютира със свой политически проект, Радев отговаря, че сам ще го каже, когато реши, но не казва „не“. Отговорите му са витиевати като на древна пророчица. Харесва му да поддържа напрежението, а в телевизионните студиа винаги се намира по някой и друг говорител, който разпалва аудиторията колко некадърни и невнятни са политиците, как „ключът е в президента и без негова партия ще гледаме едно и също“.

Неизбежна ли е Румен-Радевата алтернатива

Сигналите на държавния глава лесно могат да бъдат категоризирани:

„Аз съм президент, а не партиен лидер.“ Румен Радев обича да подчертава своята НАДпартийност, както и че ролята му е да бъде държавен глава, а не да се включва в партийните ала-бала. (Не че не го прави – въпреки че бяха орязани конституционните му правомощия да назначава служебни кабинети, без неговото съгласие такива не може да има, както се видя в случая с Горица Кожарева.)

„Хората очакват нова алтернатива, неизбежна е появата ѝ.“ Макар да не заявява ясно лични амбиции, той многократно е намеквал, че има нужда от „различен тип политика“, което кара анализаторите да виждат в това индиректно подгряване на почвата за бъдещ политически проект.

„България има нужда от промяна.“ Този лайтмотив върви в публичните му изяви още от първия мандат, когато Радев се позиционира като критик на статуквото, все едно какво – той е срещу него. Към настоящото правителство не е бил критичен, но още не е изминал и месец от избора му. Дали защото в изявления преди конституирането на кабинета той настояваше, че редовно правителство е необходимо в името на стабилността. Или защото поне две от четирите формации в управляващото мнозинство – БСП (след отстраняването на Корнелия Нинова) и „Има такъв народ“ – симпатизират на президента.

С неговите пет служебни правителства за осем години може да се каже, че Румен Радев е бил и петкратен премиер – без партия, но със стабилен рейтинг, свой апарат от бивши министри и дори лобистки договори като този с турската държавна компания „Боташ“, обслужващ приоритетно енергийните интереси на Анкара.

„Ще дойде време за отговори…“ Това е многоточието, което не закрива темата, напротив – оставя отворени всички опции. Някои партийни проекти бяха приписвани на президентска намеса, например „Български възход“ на един от служебните му премиери – Стефан Янев, но също и „Продължаваме промяната“, тъй като нейните лидери Кирил Петков и Асен Василев също бяха поканени за служебни министри от президента, който предостави терен за изява на политическите им амбиции.

Мъдрец в сянка? Не, благодаря

Какви варианти има пред Румен Радев? Може да избере ролята на „мъдреца в сянка“, както направи Жельо Желев, който създаде едноименната си фондация и основа Балканския политически клуб. Или да създаде свой политически проект и активно да влезе в играта с всички произтичащи от това рискове, които изпита също двумандатният президент Георги Първанов, регистрирал АБВ.

Изглежда малко вероятно Радев да си направи фондация и да изнася лекции тук и там. През тези десет години на „Дондуков“ 2, които ще се навършат догодина, властта му прилепна като мундир и няма индикации, че иска да напусне сцената. Политиката го направи известен, но той изгуби онази естествена и симпатична недодяланост, присъща на новаците, която обаче хората харесаха през 2017 г. – наред с професията и произхода му, с който се идентифицираха мнозина българи.

В момента около Радев има немалко фигури – съветници, други на високи позиции в различни институции, но и в изпълнителната и местната власт, придобили влияние и тежест благодарение на присъствието си в президентската орбита. Те не биха подкрепили негово доброволно оттегляне, тъй като ще бъде застрашено тяхното благополучие.

В крак с новото статукво

Моментът за „избухване“ на Радев преди президентския вот през есента на 2026 г. е благоприятен – ако се отвори възможност с предсрочни парламентарни избори. След избора на Доналд Тръмп за президент на Съединените щати започва да се формира ново статукво на сигурността в света, което не подминава и Европа. 

В българската политическа действителност от известно време изчезна употребата на термина „евроатлантически“. Тръмп говори лично с руския президент Владимир Путин, за да се договарят за мир в Украйна, но засега Европа и дори самата Украйна изглеждат изключени от този диалог. Радев, чиито проруски симпатии не са тайна, се оказа в новия тренд, налаган от американския президент, и ще си позволява безнаказано да се отклонява от традиционните евроатлантически рамки. Той е и единственият държавен глава в най-новата история на България, чиито външнополитически позиции са били в разрез с официалните позиции на държава членка на ЕС и НАТО, и той ги е демонстрирал на високи форуми.

Възможността за предсрочни парламентарни избори би могла да му предостави шанс да събере повече подкрепа, особено сред избирателите, които се чувстват отдалечени от традиционните западни алианси и търсят алтернатива в политика на неутралитет или дори на сближаване с Русия. Това би означавало стратегическо преосмисляне на външнополитическата ориентация на България.

Левицата изглежда като естествен терен за него, но е съмнително дали би успял да изгради модерна лява партия, различна от БСП, от каквато българската политика действително се нуждае.

Ако Радев изгрее със свой партиен проект, ще застраши първенството на ГЕРБ. Но също така биха могли да се спогодят, а останалите политически сили съвсем ще се маргинализират. Техният шанс е да използват ефективно времето до следващите президентски избори, за да се позиционират по най-добрия начин, включително и с кандидатите си за президент и вицепрезидент. Къде е Бойко Борисов в този гмеж от хипотези – на „Дондуков“ 2 или в Банкя?

Радев е на прага на решението: да излезе от властта или да открие нов път към нея. 

Времето му за избор наближава.

The ATS Group and a Regional Telecom Provider

Post Syndicated from Michael Kammer original https://blog.zabbix.com/the-ats-group-and-a-regional-telecom-provider/29671/

Our Premium Partners at the ATS Group have a regional telecom provider on the West Coast of the United States as one of their key clients. The provider covers a massive geographical area on a limited budget and serves thousands of (primarily rural) customers.

The Challenge

After recent price hikes by the “big-box” monitoring solutions, the provider needed an alternative with a more stable pricing model. Simply put, their budget was shrinking, but their software monitoring costs were expanding.

The provider had a large stock of non-traditional IT equipment that all needed to be monitored effectively, and they also had only one month to get all monitored devices and endpoints over to a new solution.

On top of that, many of the provider’s legacy systems were directly related to regulatory compliance and therefore needed to be operational from day one.

The Solution

The provider set about migrating to a complete and robust Zabbix 7.0 solution that would eliminate any foreseeable issues – even the loss of an entire data center.

There were a few initial hiccups in the implementation when it came to getting PostgreSQL set up with database proxies, but the ATS Group team quickly arrived at an architecture that the provider was happy with. The clear and easy-to-follow Zabbix documentation was of particular help.

The Results

The new Zabbix solution, as implemented, was able to monitor a number of things that had previously been challenging, including:

• Doors. The provider badly needed a solution for monitoring doors, including entrance and exit doors as well as cabinet doors in data centers. They had long-term compliance issues with doors sticking open, employees forgetting to close doors, etc. Zabbix made it easy to develop custom SNMP traps that send alerts in case of open doors, solving the issue.

• Weather. The provider’s services are available over a large and varied geographical area that encompasses multiple states. The ability of Zabbix to predict weather changes across this area has been an important added bonus, with the provider now being able to get future weather alerts that can be used to compare against equipment tolerance levels. Personnel can then be sent to affected areas in anticipation of weather events, instead of being purely reactive.

• SLAs. The provider functions as an ISP that provides internet access to customers in rural areas, many of whom may not have other means of accessing the world around them. As such, they not only feel a strong sense of duty to provide consistent uptime, but they are bound by a strict set of service level agreements (SLAs). With Zabbix, it’s possible to provide SLAs for some of the remote edge equipment involved by building an integration with ServiceNow.

In conclusion

The telecom provider in question trusts Zabbix to guarantee rural broadband access for thousands of customers over an enormous geographic area. Zabbix not only gets the job done more effectively than other monitoring solutions, it does so at a fraction of the cost.

The post The ATS Group and a Regional Telecom Provider appeared first on Zabbix Blog.

Encryption for Everybody

Post Syndicated from Let's Encrypt original https://letsencrypt.org/2025/02/14/encryption-for-everybody.html

Let's Encrypt 10th Anniversary logo

2025 marks ten years of Let’s Encrypt. Already this year we’ve taken steps to continue to deliver on our values of user privacy, efficiency, and innovation, all with the intent of continuing to deliver free TLS certificates to as many people as possible; to deliver encryption for everybody.

And while we’re excited about the technical progress we’ll make this year, we’re also going to celebrate this tenth anniversary by highlighting the people around the world who make our impact possible. It’s no small village.

From a community forum that has provided free technical support, to our roster of sponsors who provide vital funding, to the thousands of individual supporters who contribute financially to Let’s Encrypt each year, free TLS at Internet scale works because people have supported it year in, year out, for ten years.

Each month we’ll highlight a different set of people behind our “everybody.” Who do you want to see us highlight? What use cases of Let’s Encrypt have you seen that amazed you? What about our work do you hope we’ll continue or improve as we go forward? Let us know on LinkedIn, or drop a note to [email protected].

Encryption for Everybody is our unofficial tagline for this tenth anniversary year. What we love about it is that, yes, it captures our commitment to ensuring anyone around the world can easily get a cert for free. But more importantly, it captures the reality that technical innovation won’t work without people believing in it and supporting it. We’re grateful that, for ten years (and counting!), our community of supporters has made an impact on the lives of billions of Internet users—an impact that’s made theWeb more secure and privacy respecting for everybody, everywhere.

Internet Security Research Group (ISRG) is the parent organization of Let’s Encrypt, Prossimo, and Divvi Up. ISRG is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. If you’d like to support our work, please consider getting involved, donating, or encouraging your company to become a sponsor.

Encryption for Everybody

Post Syndicated from Let's Encrypt original https://letsencrypt.org/2025/02/14/encryption-for-everybody/

Let's Encrypt 10th Anniversary logo

2025 marks ten years of Let’s Encrypt. Already this year we’ve taken steps to continue to deliver on our values of user privacy, efficiency, and innovation, all with the intent of continuing to deliver free TLS certificates to as many people as possible; to deliver encryption for everybody.

And while we’re excited about the technical progress we’ll make this year, we’re also going to celebrate this tenth anniversary by highlighting the people around the world who make our impact possible. It’s no small village.

From a community forum that has provided free technical support, to our roster of sponsors who provide vital funding, to the thousands of individual supporters who contribute financially to Let’s Encrypt each year, free TLS at Internet scale works because people have supported it year in, year out, for ten years.

Each month we’ll highlight a different set of people behind our “everybody.” Who do you want to see us highlight? What use cases of Let’s Encrypt have you seen that amazed you? What about our work do you hope we’ll continue or improve as we go forward? Let us know on LinkedIn, or drop a note to [email protected].

Encryption for Everybody is our unofficial tagline for this tenth anniversary year. What we love about it is that, yes, it captures our commitment to ensuring anyone around the world can easily get a cert for free. But more importantly, it captures the reality that technical innovation won’t work without people believing in it and supporting it. We’re grateful that, for ten years (and counting!), our community of supporters has made an impact on the lives of billions of Internet users—an impact that’s made theWeb more secure and privacy respecting for everybody, everywhere.

Internet Security Research Group (ISRG) is the parent organization of Let’s Encrypt, Prossimo, and Divvi Up. ISRG is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. If you’d like to support our work, please consider getting involved, donating, or encouraging your company to become a sponsor.

The collective thoughts of the interwebz