Lmst

Open Source CSF Profile Assessment Database by Steve McMichael

https://secburg.com/posts/open-source-csf-profile-assessment-database-by-steve-mcmichael-copy/

SecBurg boosted:

New Blog post: How to tunnel WireGuard over TLS using SNI Domain Fronting with socat to egress restricted networks behind a DPI firewall https://lanrat.com/posts/sni-domain-fronting-vpn/

SecBurg boosted:

What with AI assisted code generation?

https://www.businessinsider.com/ai-code-meta-microsoft-google-llamacon-engineers-2025-4
AI now writes a big chunk of code at Microsoft and Google — and it could be coming for even more at Meta

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said AI writes up to 30% of code for some of its projects.
It comes days after Google CEO Sundar Pichai said AI writes over 30% of new code at the company.
Mark Zuckerberg predicts AI could handle half of Meta's developer work within a year.

That poses a large problem for these companies:

If AI is involved in creation of code, and AI output is not copyrightable,
and if prompts are also not sufficient input to make AI output copyrightable,
and if–as is established law–specifications are not copyrightable works, only their implementation is,

then these companies will run into problems with producing copyrightable works.

On top of that: If a problem is so "simple" that an AI can generate code to solve it, is the work of a human that codes a solution to that problem manually still meeting the minimum bar for a copyrightable work? And if that is copyrightable, what makes it so?

Is your organization using AI to generate code that you assume is copyrightable and can be licensed to customers? If so, how do you ensure that the code actually IS copyrightable? How do you prove that?

SecBurg boosted:

AI, Code Generation and Copyright

US: AI Output can't be copyrighted

https://www.skadden.com/insights/publications/2025/02/copyright-office-publishes-report
Copyright Office Publishes Report on Copyrightability of AI-Generated Materials

Human authorship is a bedrock of copyrightability, and thus works entirely generated by AI are not copyrightable.
The mere selection of prompts, even if those prompts are detailed and are the product of some human effort, does not itself yield a copyrightable work, although this determination could change as technology evolves.
Where a work includes both human and AI-generated content, only the human contributions are potentially copyrightable.
The use of AI as a tool to enhance the human creative process (e.g., for ideation or to edit an image) does not render the entire work uncopyrightable.

EU: AI Output can't be copyrighted

https://www.twobirds.com/en/insights/2023/global/the-debate-on-ai-created-art-and-copyright-protection

If a work is entirely automated: Mirroring the US case, an image completely birthed by automation, lacking human input, cannot be protected by copyright under German and European law.
Minor AI adjustments: Copyright protection for the output is very likely to be established in most cases if the AI makes only minor alterations to a pre-existing copyrighted work. For example, if it only corrects typos in copyrighted text used as input for an AI chatbot, the protection for the original input could extend to the output.
Specific prompts: If a prompt largely dictates the result, copyright could theoretically apply in rare cases. For text-to-text tools, if the prompt almost describes a poem and only allows the AI to add minor elements, such as certain rhyming words, protection may be rather likely. However, text-to-image generation is trickier since the AI has more latitude to turn words into visuals. The considerable variability by the AI often makes human contributions minor unless there are further prompts or specific human adjustments.
Interactive processes: The likeliest scenario for copyright protection would be where it involves a “human in the loop”. In this situation, the AI delivers an initial draft, and through multiple prompts or ideally, human revisions, a substantial human contribution surfaces, relegating the AI to a tool of human creativity.

In conclusion, the US and EU appear to currently agree regarding the centrality of human beings in the copyright process. As AI's role in content creation grows, debates about copyright and ownership will undoubtedly increase.

SecBurg boosted:

Announcing: https://justaqrcode.com.

Tired of "free" QR code generators that are full of ads and trackers, that share your data, and that want to sell you something? Me too. Here's my act of resistance: I made a one-page site that works entirely in your browser to generate a simple QR code. And that's all it does. You can download the HTML page and run it locally, even. Read the source; nothing up my sleeves. Just a QR code.

My offer to you -- I will continue to pay for the domain name and web hosting for it, myself. If you find it valuable, you can pay it back by creating your own useful thing for the world and releasing it for free. Let's take back the friendly web, one vexingly-monetized utility at a time!

#QRcode #Free #FriendlyWeb #Resistance

Free Hacking Active Directory Course by Ryan Yager

https://secburg.com/posts/free-hacking-active-directory-course-by-ryan-yager/

#hacking #course #free

TryHackme launches it's first Junior Penetration Tester certificate!

https://tryhackme.com/certification/junior-penetration-tester/details

#tryhackme #certification #redteam #penetrationtesting

https://openwebsearch.eu/ has been announced!

SecBurg boosted:

Those annoying “consent” cookie pop ups that Big Tech has been using as part of their malicious compliance efforts to convince you that data protection law in the EU is a nuisance?

Turns out they’re illegal.

https://www.iccl.ie/digital-data/eu-ruling-tracking-based-advertising-by-google-microsoft-amazon-x-across-europe-has-no-legal-basis/

#TCF #consent #data #privacy #EU #GDPR #BigTech #maliciousCompliance #SiliconValley #adtech #technoFascism