For many time I have spent awareness on cybersecurity and beta testing in opensource but also on proprietor operating system, softwares and applications.
Myself, as graphic programmer, have to meet programming errors bound to development tool so to have the doubt: is there a Zero day?
To correct an error doesn’t say there isn’t an hidden Zero day, or rather an exception in the development tool that requests a change of procedure to avoid the unknown obstacle in that moment.
Some errors emerge after many time and after the use of software or platform, they are bound wear of the application codes.
In a video “Code error - Code correction” I have introduced a tedious argument in the hacking.
From a creative point of view I said directly the error is more lovely than the correction.
From a security point of view it’s exactly the opposite, or rather an enormous damage for everyone that meets a Zero day that it wasn’t corrected.
The motivation to spend awareness on cybersecurity is just this: to instruct the users of pc for home or professional motive to resolve incidental security issue until the bug correction so to have good practice useful to everyone also in the future that can transfer in other situation.
A pc isn’t a perfect machine. The major of users handle it in non professional mode and for home or game motive so there are controversis between common users and professionals with business activities because they don’t think in the same way.
If from home motive can be a pleasure to do some things, for example see a film or game and talk with absent kith and kin, from professional motive can be a war with fraudulent attempt to enter illegally in simple operation as a communication with a client or a colleague.
The human bug is disinformation, or rather they don’t know bug that can be carrier of illegality when they send a mail, a sms or they share or interact with app and games.
A bug or a Zero day are always a carrier of interference, if the bug is on the web or can bring to online activities as web surf or communication platform it's worse. Ask to stay online to use the service can make visible personal data in the case of attacks as "SQL injection" or can damage the digital asset in the case of attacks as "denial of service".
More than 2FA I have ask for the function of logout for who has application bound to used PID device without account manager online, if there is a security bug on platform or application in the case of logout the error is of platform or application that didn’t correct an incidental issue login or logout service.
Often the common users are unaware there is this type of bug and they think are immune from possible illegality that can try to enter in their accounts of service.
I believe however it’s always a good practice for all to use at least a 2FA system that in the extreme case can block the illegal attempt to access the service, the question of attacks "brute force" it’s better to leave to another occasion.
Comments