This Week In Security: NOAuth, MiniDLNA, And Ticket To Ride

There’s a fun logic flaw in how multiple online services handle OAuth logins, that abuses Microsoft’s Azure Active Directory service to allow account takeovers. The problem is how a site handles the “Sign In With Microsoft” option, when there’s an existing account under the same email address. This is an irritating problem for an end-user, when a site offers multiple sign-in options. Trying to remember which option was used to set up an account is a struggle, so many services automatically merge accounts.

The problem is that the Microsoft Azure authentication information includes an email address, but Microsoft hasn’t done any verification that the account in question actually controls that address. And in fact, it’s trivial for the Azure admin to change that address at whim. So if the service accepts that email address as authoritative, and auto-merges the accounts, it’s a trivial account takeover. And it’s more than just a theoretical problem, as researchers at descope were able to demonstrate the attack, and have found multiple medium and large services that were vulnerable, as well as at least two authentication providers that themselves were vulnerable to this attack.

Microsoft has pushed updates to the Azure AD service to make the issue easier to avoid, though it seems that the unverified “email” field is still being sent on authentication transactions. There is a new flag, “RemoveUnverifiedEmailClaim” that eliminates the issue, and is enabled by default for new applications. Unfortunately this means that existing vulnerable applications will continue to be vulnerable until fixed on the application side. Continue reading “This Week In Security: NOAuth, MiniDLNA, And Ticket To Ride”

Ask Hackaday: The Turing Test Is Dead: Long Live The Turing Test!

Alan Turing proposed a test for machine intelligence that no longer works. The idea was to have people communicate over a terminal, with another real person and with a computer. If the computer is intelligent, Turing mused, most people will incorrectly identify the computer as a human. Clearly, with the advent of modern chatbots, that test is now broken. Despite the “AI” moniker, chatbots aren’t sentient or even pre-sentient, but they certainly seem that way. An AI CEO, Mustafa Suleyman, is proposing a new test: The AI has to take a $100,000 budget and earn $1,000,000.

We were a little bemused at this. By that measure, most of us aren’t intelligent, either, and it seems like this is a particularly capitalistic idea. We could probably write an Excel script that studied mutual fund performance and pull off the same trick, given enough time for the investment to mature. Is it intelligent? No. Besides, even humans who have demonstrated they can make $1,000,000 often sell their companies and start new ones that fail. How often does the AI have to succeed before we grant it person status?

Continue reading “Ask Hackaday: The Turing Test Is Dead: Long Live The Turing Test!”

China Plans Its Own Megaconstellation To Challenge Starlink

Satellite internet used to be a woeful thing. Early networks relied on satellites in geostationary orbits, with high latency and minimal bandwidth keeping user demand low. That was until Starlink came along, and provided high-speed, low-latency internet access using a fleet of thousands of satellites in Low Earth orbit.

Starlink has already ruffled feathers due to concerns around light pollution and space junk in particular. Now, it appears that China may be readying its own competing constellation to avoid being crowded out of low orbits by the increasingly-popular service.

Continue reading “China Plans Its Own Megaconstellation To Challenge Starlink”

Congratulations To Our Op-Amp Challenge Winners!

The real world is analog, and the op-amp is the indispensable building block of many analog circuits. We wanted to give you analog fanatics out there a chance to shine and to encourage our digital brothers and sisters to dip their toes in the murky waters where ones and zeroes define the ends of a spectrum rather than representing the only choice. Hence, we presented the Op Amp Challenge. And you did not disappoint!

We received 83 entries, and it was extraordinarily hard to pick the winners. But since we had three $150 DigiKey shopping sprees to give away, our six judges buckled down and picked their favorites. Whether or not you’ve got the Golden Rules of the ideal op-amp tattooed on your arm, you’ll enjoy looking through all of the projects here. But without further ado…

The Winners

[Craig]’s Op Art is an X-Y voltage generator to plug into an oscilloscope and make classic Lissajous and other spirograph-like images, and it’s all done in analog. Maybe it was his incredible documentation, the nice use of a classic three-op-amp tunable oscillator, or the pun hidden in the title. Whatever the case, it wowed our judges and picked up a deserved place in the top three.

Hearkening back to the pre-digital dinosaur days, [Rainer Glaschick]’s Flexible Analog Computer is a modular analog computer prototyping system on a breadboard backplane. Since you have to re-wire up an analog computer for your particular, it’s great that [Rainer] gave us a bunch of examples on his website as well, including a lunar lander and classic Lorenz attractor demos.

And there was no way that [Chris]’s interactive analog LED wave array wouldn’t place in the top three. It’s a huge 2D analog simulation that runs entirely on op-amps, sensing when your hand moves across any part of its surface and radiating waves out from there. You have to admire the massive scale here, and you simply must check out the video of it in action. Glorious!

Continue reading “Congratulations To Our Op-Amp Challenge Winners!”

In Praise Of RPN (with Python Or C)

HP calculators, slide rules, and Forth all have something in common: reverse polish notation or RPN. Admittedly, slide rules don’t really have RPN, but you work problems on them the same way you do with an RPN calculator. For whatever reason, RPN didn’t really succeed in the general marketplace, and you might wonder why it was ever a thing. The biggest reason is that RPN is very easy to implement compared to working through proper algebraic, or infix, notation. In addition, in the early years of computers and calculators, you didn’t have much to work with, and people were used to using slide rules, so having something that didn’t take a lot of code that matched how users worked anyway was a win-win.

What is RPN?

If you haven’t encountered RPN before, it is an easy way to express math without ambiguity. For example, what’s 5 + 3 * 6?  It’s 23 and not 48. By order of operations you know that you have to multiply before you add, even if you wrote down the multiplication second. You have to read through the whole equation before you can get started with math, and if you want to force the other result, you’ll need parentheses.

With RPN, there is no ambiguity depending on secret rules or parentheses, nor is there any reason to remember things unnecessarily. For instance, to calculate our example you have to read all the way through once to figure out that you have to multiply first, then you need to remember that is pending and add the 5. With RPN, you go left to right, and every time you see an operator, you act on it and move on. With RPN, you would write 3 6 * 5 +.

While HP calculators were the most common place to encounter RPN, it wasn’t the only place. Friden calculators had it, too. Some early computers and calculators supported it but didn’t name it. Some Soviet-era calculators used it, too, including the famous Elektronika B3-34, which was featured in a science fiction story in a Soviet magazine aimed at young people in 1985. The story set problems that had to be worked on the calculator.

Continue reading “In Praise Of RPN (with Python Or C)”

Jack In, The 2023 Cyberdeck Challenge Starts Now

The modern laptop is truly a masterpiece of engineering, craming an incredible amount of processing power into a thin and lightweight package that can run for hours on its internal batteries, all for just a few hundred bucks. Combine that with the ubiquitous smartphone, and it’s safe to say that the state of mobile computing has never been better.

A retro-futuristic portable computer with a touch screen and a shoulder strapDespite this, over the last several years we’ve watched cyberdecks go from a few one-off examples to a vibrant community of truly personal computing devices. While there are some exceptions, most of them are larger, more expensive, and less portable than what’s available on the commercial market. But that’s not the point — a cyberdeck should be a reflection of the hacker that built it, not the product of a faceless megacorp.

Which is why we’re excited to officially announce the 2023 Cyberdeck Challenge, starting now and running all summer through to August 15th.

Whether it’s a ridiculously over the top wearable that wouldn’t look out of place in a cyberpunk anime or a pocket-sized gadget that you operate with a handful of unlabeled buttons, we want to see it. All we ask is that it be a functional device capable of some useful amount of computing, anything beyond that is up to you. Turn in one of the top three designs, and you’ll earn a $150 USD DigiKey shopping spree, just what you need to pack a few extra bells and whistles into your rig.

Continue reading “Jack In, The 2023 Cyberdeck Challenge Starts Now”

Cottonization: Making Hemp And Flax Fibers Into The Better Cotton

These days it’s hard to imagine that fabrics were ever made out of anything other than cotton or synthetic fibers, yet it wasn’t too long ago that hemp and flax-based fabrics — linen — were the rule rather than the exception. Cotton production has for centuries had the major disadvantages of requiring a lot of water and pesticides, and harvesting the cotton was very labor-intensive, making cotton rather expensive. In order to make separating the cotton fibers from the seed easier, improved versions of the cotton gin (‘cotton engine’) were developed, with the 19th century’s industrial revolution enabling a fully automated version.

What makes cotton attractive is the ease of processing these fibers, which are part of the seed pod. These fibers are 25 mm – 60 mm long, 12 μm – 45 μm fine fibers that can be pulled off the seeds and spun into yarn or whatever else is needed for the final product, much like wool. Hemp and flax fibers, in contrast, are extracted from the plant stem in the form of bast fibers. Rather than being pure cellulose, these fibers are mostly a mixture of cellulose, lignin, hemicellulose and pectin, which provide the plant with rigidity, but also makes these fibers coarse and stiff.

The main purpose of cottonization is to remove as much of these non-cellulosic components as possible, leaving mostly pure cellulose fibers that not only match the handleability of cotton fibers, but are also generally more durable. Yet cottonization used to be a long and tedious process, which made bast fiber-based textiles expensive. Fortunately, the steam explosion cottonization method that we’ll be looking at here may be one of the methods by which the market will be blown open for these green and durable fibers.

Continue reading “Cottonization: Making Hemp And Flax Fibers Into The Better Cotton”