We used our side project (Hacker Sidekick) for cyber research. We gave it a CVE number and a description of what we needed: a proof-of-concept exploit for CVE-2026-23918, with a test environment, validation, and documentation. Let us know what you think! We sped up the video but no edits.
The ftc isn’t supposed to create laws though. I tend to overshoot on the consumer’s side, but the ftc is overstepping with actions like this. There should be a law passed on this point and then ftc can enforce. Or ftc can sue based on existing law and let courts buy their interpretation.
With all the accounting tricks it’s probably hard to know if this was a success. Likely there is a large share of the user base on trial periods or partner offers (e.g., free with T-Mobile)
Yeah good luck. I don’t think any hr decisions have ever been about data; it’s about following norms. If you can get the rand corp or heritage foundation to adopt this policy then maybe corporations would look into it.
That seems solvable with a payload of a transceiver that is dropped outside the range of the jammer. Then you only need a spool as long as the radius of the jammer + some margin.
It’s even worse. The consultants who run the audits (usually business school recent grads) work with other consultants who shill the third party software and implementation work.
Effectively, GDPR only applies to EU nationals. US folks have no such rights and anyone even remotely associated with an institution like U of M are forced to agree to whatever data terms and policies U of M wants.
This is not new. It’s been embedded in tvs for years. You can thank judges who don’t care about consumer privacy and mandatory arbitration clauses for the spreading of this junk. If consumers could sue these companies none of this would be happening.