all 6 comments

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

This seems like a staged cyber event excuse to unleash hell on hackers, currencies, etc as part of the perpetual CYBER WARS.

[–]Mnemonic[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

What seems staged?

This isn't an attack on currencies, only a warning to be careful where you print out your 'secrets', as it's an old trick (see my other post of a 1995 film featuring a fax buffer 'hack' to get information.).

Nor is it an attack on hackers because basically it was done the scriptkiddy way.

If it's anything it's a wake up call for people that the InternetOfThings isn't as safe when it's plug-n-play connected to the internet.

I presume you don't mean the Pewdiepie - T series war?

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

No fuck Pew and T.

"Why the PewDiePie Printer Hack is a Warning for Crypto Investors"

What does that even mean? They're trying to associate crypto with that idiotic hack. If that connection is made then you have an excuse to go to war with Iraq though they had nothing to do with 9/11.

The info-cyber wars have been perpetual since the dawn of vacuum tubes and before. But now they're infinitely more extreme. This bullshit distraction with Pew and T feels like its been going on even longer.

It doesn't matter how it was done or even who did it if anything was even done (ie. Bay of Tonkin) as long as people believe there's something to get worked up over - including this unrelated "Warning for Crypto Investors".

If I'm wrong, I'll say, "Oops, sorry for wasting your time."

If nothing comes of it, I'll say, "Hmm. Wierd. Good I guess."

If it notches up and escalates, I'll say, "Remember when... good times."

Though I agree and hope you're right, that it's a wake up call for people that the InternetOfThings is a serious issue.

[–]Mnemonic[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Maybe you missed the last part of the article?

Implications for Crypto Holders

The major takeaway from the incident from a cryptocurrency security standpoint is that printing bitcoin wallet recovery seeds from a networked printer may be an incredibly risky activity. Though not the case in this specific incident, the process of hacking an internet-connected printer could involve stealing files stored on the printer’s internal memory, which may include past or pending print jobs. Theoretically, this could give a hacker access to a user’s bitcoin wallet if the recovery seed print file was present on the device’s memory.

It also reinforces the importance of good security practices when dealing with digital copies of paper wallets. Such copies should ideally not be saved on networked devices including printers, mobile phones, and computers because that potentially exposes them to hackers. In the event that paper wallets are printed, this should ideally be done on a non-networked printer which preferably has never been connected to a network previously and does not retain copies of print jobs on its internal memory.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"Oops, sorry for wasting your time."

Ha. Good catch. I stopped at the ASCII fist. I thought it was finished. Also I wasn't into it much. I hate the Pew v T hype. I wondered about your take, but it was my skewed frame.

They literally buried the lead.

A fair warning, but nothing really new. While this particular article is slightly less nefarious because it's not spun as tight as I'd initially assessed incorrectly, it doesn't negate... The CYBER WARS. dum dum dum...

[–]Mnemonic[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9C6MUTa2b0I

And 1995 wants their movie hacks back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzRjtvMQds4 (fax buffer)