• 8 Posts
  • 6.54K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 15th, 2023

help-circle








  • that’s just it… any vulnerable system lets them get their nose in the door, then the camel starts snooping around the tent for whatever it can get. Eventually, they find away to something juicy.

    The thing is, whether we’re talking about digital or physical security, the weakest thing in any system is the humans. The sloppy passwords (c’mon it should have been Louvre25! lol.) is a human thing. clicking that phising scam is a human thing. kipping off to the egyption bedroom for tryste with receptionist is a human thing.

    the simple password isn’t the problem. The people being complacent is.





  • Usually, there’s a network for IP cameras, with a central server holding the video. There’s then, usually, a firewall to anything outside that, and frequently just a hardline to a monitoring system. (another computer with lots of monitors, typically.)

    Most modern systems can VPN to the firewall and run a client there via remote desktop, and then access the monitoring system that way; but the server itself is not.

    As to the complexity of the password, typically there’s different levels of permissions. The basic ones would just let you monitor real time, probably review recordings, and maybe rip those recordings. (but not change settings, or otherwise delete anything.) A place like the Lourve would have multiple guard stations connecting in on the local network; with dozens of guards watching cameras at any given time; and would each need their own account/logins if you wanted to make the password actually complex.

    a large part of the problem is just the sheer amount of people that would need to have acounts- the lourve says they have ~1300 ‘reception and security’ staff. (for the record, reception would also be part of the security envelope… though they probably wouldn’t need the password.)

    anyone dialing in from off sight would likely have their own password (and have elevated permissions to allow that.). Frequently, by remote desktoping into a system on the local network.

    You’ll also notice theyre not saying the security system was actually compromised- even if the cameras were pointed the right way, they’d still have gotten in and out because the windows were a point of vulnerability. They might have been able to respond faster, but they were in and out in ten minutes. a camera wouldn’t be able to stop that, if you account for normal human reaction times… if they’d even notice the ‘contractors’.



  • you saying I’m misunderstanding something doesn’t make it true.

    As it stands there’s 2 situation in which imigration could lead to criminal charges- one is re-entering after deportation. This really doesn’t happen. The other is entering at a place or time not designated. This also really doesn’t happen. (The people crossing the border are being “caught” by Border Patrol officers because they sit down and wait to be caught, and then invoke their right to seek asylum. something which is legal.)

    neither of these are happening. Immigration court isn’t even able to try a criminal case, because immigration law is not criminal law.