181
submitted 10 months ago by kalkulat@lemmy.world to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

"Attackers, Trellix wrote, use the platform’s webhooks to pull data from victims’ computers and drop it into Discord channels run by the attackers."

all 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] paraphrand@lemmy.world 102 points 10 months ago

I always thought it was a bad idea for people to treat Discord as a free CDN.

[-] unique_hemp@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 10 months ago

I mean it worked for long enough 🤷‍♂️

[-] nephs@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

If its going away now, it isn't quite long enough...

[-] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 88 points 10 months ago

This is… annoying. I get the intent for malware, but honestly it’s a BS reason. The content will just be uploaded elsewhere. But what this will do is drastically lower their storage cost under the guise of… not even user safety, more “slightly inconveniencing malware writers.”

[-] LufyCZ@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

Yes, it'll be uploaded elsewhere. That's the whole point.

Discord doesn't want to host any of this data, they don't want to be connected to criminal activity. It makes sense.

Also, while it might slightly lower their storage costs (if the hackers move elsewhere), if you send a file to someone, it'll still stay on Discord's servers. Only difference is the link to said file - it'll only be valid for a day, and then you'll have to use a new one (in a way that's probably transparent to the user)

[-] bear@slrpnk.net 5 points 10 months ago

The goal here is to make it difficult to link to things uploaded to discord from outside of discord. The malware reason is BS. If they wanted to curb malware it would be as easy as making it a nitro feature. What that doesn't fix is all the people piggybacking on discord as a free CDN.

Discord isn't even wrong for doing this. I just resent their dishonesty.

[-] LufyCZ@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Not sure rolling it into Nitro would be worth the effort, I'd consider that quite complex personally

[-] dandroid@dandroid.app 68 points 10 months ago

I wonder if McAfee changing their name to Trellix to escape how much the general public hates them will work better than Comcast rebranding as Xfinity.

[-] SheeEttin@lemmy.world 38 points 10 months ago

The general public doesn't hate McAfee that much, so I'd bet it'll work. Heck, I work in IT and I didn't even know about the rebrand (mostly because I engage with McAfee as little as possible).

[-] TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 21 points 10 months ago

probably about as well as Twitter becoming "X, formerly known as Twitter"

[-] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 14 points 10 months ago

Yeah let's keep that going here. From here on our whenever I see Trelix I will say "Trelix, the brand fomally known as McAfee."

[-] theolodger@feddit.uk 2 points 10 months ago

Or Evri, the brand formerly known as Hermes

[-] Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago

or just call them mcafee, twitter, facebook, etc

[-] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 7 points 10 months ago

Yes, but I like this because it ingrains in people's heads that when they hear Trelix they should think McAfee, to make that connection. Like with Xfinity, they don't want that connection made, they want people thinking "Oh I don't have that crappy Comcast service, I have Xfinity". I'll be saying it this way to show people that they're the same thing

[-] Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago

fair point, maybe I'll do that from now on

[-] justaveg@lemmy.world 52 points 10 months ago

lol@ this. My bet what is actually happening: cost cutting or future nitro feature.

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 48 points 10 months ago

I don't care what you say, Discord is terrible.

[-] nik282000@lemmy.ca 26 points 10 months ago

It's just like IRC but with privacy violations and ads!

[-] uis@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

More like Mumble, but with privacy violations and ads

[-] EngineerGaming@feddit.nl 4 points 10 months ago

And without an ability to host the network yourself!

[-] Chewy7324@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 10 months ago

It's an annoying change for anyone using discord to share files outside of it's closed platform but doesn't affect most people.

I wonder whether bridges for matrix have to be fixed or if they're already editing messages bridged to matrix to the new url.

[-] deadcade@lemmy.deadca.de 7 points 10 months ago

Depends on how it's implemented. Anyone using a "media proxy" will see their discord bridged media probably fail to load (outside of possible caches) after a day. Anyone who has their bridge configured to reupload discord media to their homeserver should see no change.

[-] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

What is this bridge you speak of? I'm intrigued. Does matrix have a functionality that lets you run a mirror of a discord channel?

[-] NorthWestWind@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Yes, but you have to selfhost your own instance. Big servers don't have that, and the ones that have probably require payment.

[-] Rootiest@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Yes, but you have to selfhost your own instance.

You don't.

Here is a free bridge bot that will do it for you

[-] bitwolf@lemmy.one 3 points 10 months ago

Yes exactly. The bridge logs into the discord server as a user. Then it mirrors all chats from your user in matrix to the discord.

Oh matrix, every user on the connected server gets a user whose name is their snowflake. Those virtual users post into the matrix server whatever their respective discord users posts.

[-] uis@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago
[-] ndguardian@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago

Honestly, I'm okay with this at least until they fix the fact that all shared files are accessible without authentication. Granted, you still had to get the link before downloading an uploaded file, but the fact that there was no authentication required to download a file uploaded to Discord was pretty surprising.

[-] computergeek125@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

It's probably also way cheaper to do it that way. As far as I could tell when I checked in on it some time ago, most of the content goes through a Cloudflare proxy straight to a GCP S3-compatible bucket.

[-] uis@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

You still need to know magical numbers to download file.

[-] kalkulat@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

And a LOT risky

[-] LufyCZ@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

What is a password? A string of characters. What is a link? A string of characters.

If you make it long enough, it'll be impossible to guess one.

Your files are safe

[-] Flex@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago

Interesting news but I don't really get how this is self-hosted?

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago

Trying to keep those classified documents on the DL for home grown radical terror.

this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2023
181 points (94.6% liked)

Selfhosted

39150 readers
274 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS