plant lover, cookie monster, shoe fiend
20346 stories
·
20 followers

US cargo tech company publicly exposed its shipping systems and customer data to the web | TechCrunch

1 Share

For the past year, security researchers have been urging the global shipping industry to shore up their cyber defenses after a spate of cargo thefts were linked to hackers. The researchers say they have seen elaborate hacks targeting logistics companies to hijack and redirect large amounts of their customers’ products into the hands of criminals, in what has become an alarming collusion between hackers and real-life organized crime gangs. 

A delivery truck of stolen vapes here, a suspected lobster heist there.

One little-known and critical U.S. shipping tech company has spent the last few months patching its own systems following the discovery of a raft of simple vulnerabilities, which inadvertently left the doors to its shipping platform wide open to anyone on the internet.

The company is Bluspark Global, a New York-based firm whose shipping and supply chain platform, Bluvoyix, allows hundreds of big companies to transport their products and track their cargo as it travels across the globe. While Bluspark may not be a household name, the company helps to power a large slice of worldwide freight shipments, including retail giants, grocery stores, furniture makers, and more. The company’s software is also used by several other companies affiliated with Bluspark.

Bluspark told TechCrunch this week that its security issues are now resolved. The company fixed five flaws in its platform, including the use of plaintext passwords by employees and customers, and the ability to remotely access and interact with Bluvoyix’s shipping software. The flaws exposed access to all of the customer’s data, including their shipment records, dating back decades. 

But for security researcher Eaton Zveare, who uncovered the vulnerabilities in Bluspark’s systems back in October, alerting the company to the security flaws took longer than the discovery of the bugs themselves — since Bluspark had no discernable way to contact it.

In a now-published blog post, Zveare said he submitted details of the five flaws in Bluspark’s platform to the Maritime Hacking Village, a non-profit that works to secure maritime space and, as with this case, helps researchers to notify companies working in the maritime industry of active security flaws. 

Weeks later and following multiple emails, voicemails, and LinkedIn messages, the company had not responded to Zveare. All the while, the flaws could still be exploited by anyone on the internet.

As a last resort, Zveare contacted TechCrunch in an effort to get the issues flagged. 

TechCrunch sent emails to Bluspark CEO Ken O’Brien and the company’s senior leadership alerting them to a security lapse, but did not receive a response. TechCrunch later emailed a Bluspark customer, a U.S. publicly traded retail company, to alert them of the upstream security lapse, but we also did not hear back.

On the third time TechCrunch emailed Bluspark’s CEO, we included a partial copy of his password to demonstrate the seriousness of the security lapse.

A couple of hours later, TechCrunch received a response — from a law firm representing Bluspark. 

Plaintext passwords and an unauthenticated API

In his blog post, Zveare explained he initially discovered the vulnerabilities after visiting the website of a Bluspark customer.

Zveare wrote that the customer’s website had a contact form that allowed prospective customers to make inquiries. By viewing the web page source code with his browser’s built-in tools, Zveare noticed the form would send the customer’s message through Bluspark’s servers via its API. (An API allows two or more connected systems to communicate with each other over the internet; in this case, a website contact form and the Bluspark customer’s inbox.)

Since the email-sending code was embedded in the webpage itself, this meant it was possible for anyone to modify the code and abuse this form to send malicious emails, such as phishing lures, originating from a real Bluspark customer.

Zveare pasted the API’s web address into his browser, which loaded a page containing the API’s auto-generated documentation. This web page was a master list of all the actions that can be performed with the company’s API, such as requesting a list of users who have access to Bluspark’s platforms, as well as creating new user accounts.

The API documentation page also had a feature allowing anyone the ability to “test” the API by submitting commands to retrieve data from Bluspark’s servers as a logged-in user. 

Zveare found that the API, despite the page claiming that it required authentication to use, did not need a password or any credentials to return sensitive information from Bluspark’s servers.

Using only the list of API commands, Zveare was able to retrieve reams of user account records of employees and customers who use Bluspark’s platform, entirely unauthenticated. This included usernames and passwords, which were visible in plaintext and not encrypted — including an account associated with the platform’s administrator.

With the admin’s username and password in hand, an attacker could have logged into this account and run amok. As a good-faith security researcher, Zveare could not use the credentials, as using someone else’s password without their permission is unlawful. 

Since the API documentation listed a command that allowed anyone to create a new user with administrator access, Zveare went ahead and did just that, and got unrestricted access to its Bluvoyix supply chain platform. Zveare said the administrator’s level of access allowed the viewing of customer data as far back as 2007.

Zveare found that once logged in with this newly created user, each API request was wrapped in a user-specific token, which was meant to ensure the user was in fact allowed to access a portal page each time they clicked on a link. But the token was not necessary to complete the command, allowing Zveare to send requests without the token altogether, further confirming that the API was unauthenticated. 

After establishing contact with Bluspark’s law firm, Zveare gave TechCrunch permission to share a copy of his vulnerability report with its representatives. 

Days later, the law firm said Bluspark had remediated most of the flaws and was working to retain a third-party company for an independent assessment.

Zveare’s efforts to disclose the bugs highlight a common problem in the cybersecurity world. Companies oftentimes do not provide a way, such as a publicly listed email address, to alert them about security vulnerabilities. As such, this can make it challenging for security researchers to publicly reveal security flaws that remain active, out of concerns that disclosing details could put users’ data at risk.

Ming Lee, an attorney representing Bluspark, told TechCrunch on Tuesday the company is “confident in the steps taken to mitigate potential risk arising from the researcher’s findings,” but would not comment on specifics of the vulnerabilities or their fixes; say which third-party assessment company it retained, if any; or comment on its specific security practices.

When asked by TechCrunch, Bluspark would not say if it was able to ascertain if any of its customer shipments had been manipulated by someone maliciously exploiting the bugs. Lee said there was “no indication of customer impact or malicious activity attributable to the issues identified by the researcher.” Bluspark would not say what evidence it had to reach that conclusion.

Lee said Bluspark was planning to introduce a disclosure program, allowing outside security researchers to report bugs and flaws to the company, but that its discussions were still underway.

Bluspark CEO Ken O’Brien did not provide comment for this article.

To securely contact this reporter, you can reach out using Signal via the username: zackwhittaker.1337

Read the whole story
sarcozona
11 minutes ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

mainly macro: A Post Neoliberal Consensus

1 Share


.

Dani Rodrik recently wrote an article entitled “The Post-Neoliberal Consensus is here”. He argues that it comprises three elements:

  1. the concentration of economic power has become excessive

  2. restoring dignity to people and regions that neoliberalism left behind, which in particular involves providing good jobs

  3. The government has an active role to play in intervening in the market economy

Such a ‘consensus’ is clearly not neoliberal. While some forms of neoliberal theory do worry about excessive market power, neoliberalism in practice does not. Equally neoliberalism celebrates rather than worries about the growing wealth at the very top. While neoliberalism may require a strong state, it is to protect an ‘unshackled’ and deregulated market economy, rather than directly intervene in that economy. Of course Trump’s MAGA economy, if it has any coherent logic at all, is also not neoliberal, because there the state does intervene in the market economy (tariffs, immigration controls, and even in some cases state holdings in major companies in return for favours).

In October last year the LSE published a book (see above) edited by Tim Besley & Andrés Velasco (B&V) that attempts to define this new economic consensus. In their introduction these authors outlined five core principles.

  1. The idea that the market does production and the government does any required redistribution, while still often useful, no longer works as a core principle.

  2. The need for an active innovation policy, both to increase growth overall but also to make sure it is evenly spread geographically.

  3. Government is the insurer of last resort. This includes “There is strong justification for an activist fiscal policy that goes far beyond the Keynesian role.”

  4. Economics cannot be separated from politics.

  5. States need to be capable.

It is easy to relate these to Rodrik’s three points. Are both just a reiteration of well known social democratic ideas? In some sense clearly yes, but this is different from the social democracy typically practiced in the UK in the 1960s or 70s, for example. In particular, trade unions do not play a major role, and there is no suggestion that state intervention should involve trying to shift the Phillips curve. Nor is nationalisation seen as desirable for its own sake.

Rodrik’s (1) can be seen as a specific example of B&V’s (4), but I like the emphasis that Rodrik gives on this point. For example A&V, like many economists, tend to discuss wealth taxes in terms of revenue raised (uncertain because of international mobility etc) rather than both fairness and, in particular, political power. The US is the clearest example of the dangers that excessive wealth can bring to politics, as the work of Martin Gilens (Affluence andInfluence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America) and others make clear. It is impossible to ignore this when you live under a plutocratic dictatorship, but the UK is not immune to exactly the same fate, and it would be foolish to think it is. [1]

This raises another question, which is whether discussions of a new economic consensus is relevant at a time when liberal democracy is fighting an existential battle with right wing populism at best, and resurgent fascism at worst. Surely the best way of fighting this battle is through economics that is popular, and whether it works well has to be a secondary consideration.

The obvious response to this is that for liberal democratic governments in power what works matters, because in part they will be judged on how far what they have improved the welfare of the electorate. Trying to assess what works matters. To put this point most bluntly, in many ways pursuing a neoliberal conception of what economic policy should be has got us into the position where the threat from right wing populism is so grave, so it would be foolhardy indeed to carry on pursuing policies based on that old consensus.

This new consensus is very relevant to the current UK government, for example. I suspect it would sign up to points (2) and (3) on Rodrik’s list, but in my view their implementation on both fronts has been tentative in the extreme. Rodrick’s (1) is also the area where I am most pessimistic, both in the UK and elsewhere. In the UK the power of the populist press has gone unchallenged, as has GB news, as has the BBC preferring to both sides events where the evidence is clear. The government continues to use X rather than BlueSky, and appears to have conceded that social media should be a propaganda weapon for the populist right in the same way they have conceded it for the press. Little has been done to curb the influence of money on politics, even though this money (often from the US) clearly encourages and favours the populist right, often in its most extreme form.

Can you reasonably argue that, in the battle to defeat right wing populism, it is better to keep potentially sympathetic elements of the wealthy elite onside by not pursuing Rodrik’s point (1)? Elements within Labour in the UK and the Democrats in the US often act as if they believe there is a strong argument along these lines, but I would like to see it clearly spelt out. The counterargument is very strong. As long as concentrations of extreme wealth exist, and its influence on politics is unchecked, then the battle between liberal democracy and right wing populism is in danger of being never ending.

While it is important to lay out what the successor to neoliberalism within liberal democracies should look like, there remains a tension between these ideals of best practice and the battle between liberal democracy and right wing populism, particularly when right wing populism is in power. Whether all the the proposals put forward by Zohran Mamdani in his victory in the New York City mayoral election, or the platform of any other social liberal successfully fighting right wing populists for that matter, would find favour with the London Consensus may seem beside the point as long as they win.

As Martin Sandbu notes, the London Consensus is more of a handbook than a left wing version of the Washington Consensus, and it would take many more blog posts to cover its contents. That is something I hope to do in future posts. But I think it and Rodrik’s article are correct in identifying two ways in which neoliberalism is no longer the intellectual force it once was. The first is a recognition that, on political grounds alone, it is no longer politically feasible to ignore issues of distribution on a regional or personal level in the pursuit of aggregate growth or prosperity. The second is that markets fail in many ways, and a capable state is vital in managing markets when this happens. This was something most economists always knew, of course, and it is also something that economists know rather a lot about.

[1] Like the US, the populist right in the UK has a core base that brings it close to a majority. A mistake that is consistently made is to equate the populist base in the UK with the Reform vote, but the Conservative party under its current and likely future leader are much the same. It was Boris Johnson who greatly increased the influence of private wealth on government decisions.

Read the whole story
sarcozona
2 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

The Closeted Athlete I Once Was

1 Comment and 2 Shares

I am facing my open locker, fumbling with my cleats. The guy to my right stands naked, face obscured by the blue metal door. I can sense the shape of him through my peripheral vision. But I have seen him many times. I know his shape. His size.

To my left, there is a row of urinals; around the corner, a rectangular, group shower. After games, my teammates lather their bodies and careen across the floor tiles like a slip-and-slide, prancing and showing off. They want to be seen. They want to be desired.

I was a closeted collegiate soccer player in the early 2000’s, at a Division III school called Trinity University. I had been the best player in my high school and had played on select teams. I was good enough to be on a good D-III college team (which won the NCAA championship my junior year), though I can’t say I was a prominent player.

Watching Heated Rivalry—yes, this is a post about that show—has reminded me of the person I was there, then, and the unrelenting homophobia, sometimes external, sometimes internal, of that moment. I was a closeted collegiate athlete in a time and place where there were no out athletes, and the show has reminded me not of how much shame I felt, but of how much I would have wanted to have been able to not feel so alone.

Playing for Trinity University, ca. 2005.

Before Trinity, I had been part of the Olympic Development Program, a system devised to help identify talented soccer players. I played on the South Texas select team for 3 years (Texas had 2 teams, North Texas and South Texas). We would meet during the summer to train, and every year we would also attend a week-long camp in Alabama, where the other state-level teams would meet and train and play each other—in hopes of being identified by higher level coaches and invited to the regional or national team.

I am 17 years old in a moldy dorm in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. A tall guy from West Africa is smiling as he walks down the hallway, naked, swinging his thick, languid dick. There is no reason for him to be naked, except to be seen. The exhibitionism of it all.

And there is a stuck up white guy from Austin, blue eyes and long eyelashes, talking about how many girls had given him blow jobs as he sits naked on his bed, touching himself.

I am crushed. My world implodes. I cannot breathe.

I remember sharing a dorm room with a guy named Stuart. We were talking and talking at night, about our future plans, about what we wanted to do in college, and I could not imagine not kissing him. But I could not fathom reaching out across the dark room to touch him either. I could feel the redness of my neck and could not admit it was desire.


At Trinity there were guys from all over the US and some international players. It was early morning training, and weigh ins, and weigh outs, sweating your ass off every day in the San Antonio heat, winning game after game. I played my part, getting faster, being more decisive, more direct, more technically sound. Fitter, smarter. I was a creative player, but sometimes lazy. I had vision, but could not always manage to pull off what I saw in my head.

In my freshman year, in our dorm, one of my teammates had a gay roommate. Or at least, he was rumored to be gay. The way they said it wasn’t hateful, more like intrigued. One night I found myself alone with him. Without talking, without convincing, he took my hand and led me to his car. It was as if he could see inside of me. And all of a sudden, I was in the back seat of a Lexus parked on the top level of the campus parking lot, kissing him, touching his chest, his face, his thighs.

It would take me three more years to come out.

I was playing soccer and closeted, and though I would swear otherwise, deep down, I knew it. I knew it in how I had to prevent my eyes from wandering. And in how I resented how the other guys flaunted their naked bodies in the locker room. I knew the shape of every body, every curve, whose was thick, thin, long, cut, uncut. We all did. That is the thing no one says out loud. We all knew.

Homoeroticism was inconceivable, and omnipresent. It was the thing that made their taunting and exhibitionism have meaning, it made their erotic play make sense.

The captain of the team would pull out his balls and show everyone how much skin he had, the bat-wing he called it. Others would join in. Not as big, not as much—he always won.


When I was watching Heated Rivalry, what I most understood, what I knew in my core, was the slow burn and the ecstatic encounter, the desire that cannot be contained or expressed, and how the crushing shame of that moment, that place, that homoeroticism, sticks to your pores, sticks to the roof of your mouth, lingers in the everyday impossibility of touching the body next to you.

What I knew as I watched was that this show delivers something unspeakable.


This isn’t so much about what the show is, but how it has made me remember myself.

I want to sit with the yearning. The knowing glances. The touching of feet. The smiles. The sweaty fucking. The perfect, glowing light on naked bodies in bed. The love that is impossible, and yet...

I could not have imagined acting on what I knew I wanted when I was in college. And perhaps, for me, that is where the show reaches into my past and reminds me of how drastically, dramatically, the display of homoeroticism was at that time, and yet, how impossible it was to pull back the curtain, to name what everyone was doing.


What I mean to say is that there is a sincerity in how the characters in this show (Ilya and Shane; Scott and Kip) fall inevitably in love, and that sincerity resonates with me as something I wanted, desperately, but could not name, could not articulate.

And sure, the plot of these romances relies heavily on melodramatic tropes—star crossed lovers, and the like—but like all melodramatic tropes, they reveal the codes and proscriptions of a society. And what happens, or what is promised in the show, is an upending of those codes, a rewriting of the shame and the impossible romance. It gives hope, I mean to say.

They are fulfilling the romantic fantasy that many gay men have had. My own fantasy. Perhaps the show pries open the moment (the repeating, unending moment) when I wanted to have been able to reach out, knowing full well that I would have been rejected. The show constructs the drive, the compulsion, almost the destiny, that these characters continue across the chasm between bodies. They touch.

And to me, that is where the show is magical. It shows not just what it is like to be a closeted athlete, but how much desire is actually required to push beyond the limits of queer shame.

I am tending to that memory, that shame, today. I am tending to the possibilities of my past self. I wanted to write this at the end of the year, not to leave it behind, but to care for that past, the complicated, unnerving past, and hope for its future. I don’t think my 20-year-old self could have imagined the life I am living now. The love I feel around me. And that is what, at least for me, the show offers. Not an endless cycle of repression, but the possibility of tending to the wounds of the past.

Read the whole story
rocketo
12 days ago
reply
“And to me, that is where the show is magical. It shows not just what it is like to be a closeted athlete, but how much desire is actually required to push beyond the limits of queer shame.”
seattle, wa
sarcozona
13 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

JPow Fights

1 Share

I have been tied up with curling and running errands, and so I might be a bit behind on the news flow. Last night, Jerome Powell put out a YouTube video (!) saying he was being charged by the Administration as means to intimidate his policy rate setting. As of writing, stocks are down.

As a MMTer, I am not ideologically committed to central bank independence. At the same, right wing strongmen messing up their economies by overstimulating them is a fairly common occurrence. More importantly, the market participants who matter in the bond market do care about central bank independence.

Any sycophant Fed committee (they need to get enough votes to set policy, not just one guy — and yes, with this White House, it will be a guy) is going to slash rates to near 0% to please the strongman. (Maybe 1% for the cosmetics.) Although short maturities will stick near the overnight rate, the long end is going to be pricing in an inflationary accident (whether or not there is one). To achieve objectives, the Fed would have to buy up pretty much all the long duration supply. It is extremely likely that something in the financial markets (the dollar, equities) will break before that plays out.

Thanks for reading The BondEconomics Newsletter! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

My gut reaction remains that Trump will chicken out before anything too exciting (on a long-term chart) happens, but his behaviour is increasingly losing any semblance of restraint. I certainly would not put any money into U.S. markets as a foreign investor at this time just based on legal uncertainty.

Read the whole story
sarcozona
13 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

Fine-mapping a genome-wide meta-analysis of 98,374 migraine cases identifies 181 sets of candidate causal variants

1 Comment
Read the whole story
sarcozona
20 hours ago
reply
Extremely cool to see the NGF result since we already have some causal understanding there and it's already being targeted in drug development.
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

rapidashpatronus: kitfistovevo: “Bisexuals don’t belong in the LGBT community” ohhh ok I guess the B...

1 Share

rapidashpatronus:

kitfistovevo:

“Bisexuals don’t belong in the LGBT community” ohhh ok I guess the B stands for ‘bitch’ and that’s where you fit in, gotcha

I was explaining bi and trans erasure/phobia in the gay community to my mum and she was outraged and burst out “WHAT DO THEY THINK IT STANDS FOR? LESBIANS, GAYS, BICYCLES AND TRICYCLES?!” and I don’t think I’ll forget that until my dying day.

Read the whole story
sarcozona
20 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories