|
|
|
|
|
|
by shripadk
2843 days ago
|
|
|
> There are three people across three different parts of the world who corroborate the report - CTO of a global technology group, a security based analyst and a professor of Computer Science. I wonder how this is "sensationalist". Put out the patch in public domain or at least provide some technical information on the vulnerability itself (by making the said report public). Every time a story of this sort comes out it inevitably ends in a lot of hand waving and sensationalism: how a reporter got access to a secret WhatsApp group that sells a patch in exchange for 2500 rupees and it allows access to the UIDAI system. What makes it worse is that we are supposed to just accept whatever this CTO and his two other researcher friends have to say without any way to validate it ourselves. I don't see this happening with any other vulnerability disclosure: be it Spectre, Meltdown or plethora of other exploits which have detailed explanation of the exploit itself. Considering that it affects a billion plus people and as claimed by the article that Aadhaar is "compromised" and "cannot be fixed without requiring a fundamental change in the system" there is no reason now to hold back on technical details. "This is pretty feasible, and looks like something that would be possible to engineer" On the one hand you say the patch which can be bought for 2500 rupees already does this and at the same time you use words like "possible to engineer" and "feel pretty comfortable". Since when have feelings and possibilities gotten more prominence than technical explanations? I'm not saying that the system is foolproof. On the other hand I am waiting for that one article that goes into technical details of the exploit than just sensationalism. |
|
|