Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ForgottenSeer 58943" data-source="post: 758241">These tests are completely bogus. Also, if he wanted to do this to ANY software, he could. His &#039;constructs&#039; could make any security solution look bad. But as Lockdown says, they&#039;re completely bogus tests for a variety of reasons. The least of which, delivery of his payload wouldn&#039;t likely be possible (to a remote client), and he&#039;s assuming there aren&#039;t any other protections of lockdowns in place.Again, this reminds me of the people picking unpickable locks, then posting videos, then inciting endless arguments over those videos, then referencing other fake videos to keep people quiet. It&#039;s endless entertainment that is absolutely bogus.&nbsp; To do this they remove the shroud, dismantle the lock, study it for weeks, re-assemble it, craft special tools to pick it, then spend days, and dozens upon dozens of attempts to pick it, then declare the unpickable/new/high claim lock to be &#039;garbage&#039;. Then the peanut gallery chimes in and starts saying the lock sucks, the company needs to change their website, and that free locks are just as good.. Sound familiar?[MEDIA=youtube]e3CXlSljfMw[/MEDIA]&quot;Awesome job +bosnianbill!&nbsp; Bi-Lock is going to have to change the claim on their website. &quot;&quot;&quot;Picki proof&quot; they say on their website. Obviously not entirely.. &quot;&quot;So the new locks suck just get free ones at garage sales&quot;PS: Yes Cylance did the best on that targeted attack. Good enough to where he couldn&#039;t demonstrate a bypass for it. But I still think these tests are bogus regardless.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ForgottenSeer 58943, post: 758241"] These tests are completely bogus. Also, if he wanted to do this to ANY software, he could. His 'constructs' could make any security solution look bad. But as Lockdown says, they're completely bogus tests for a variety of reasons. The least of which, delivery of his payload wouldn't likely be possible (to a remote client), and he's assuming there aren't any other protections of lockdowns in place. Again, this reminds me of the people picking unpickable locks, then posting videos, then inciting endless arguments over those videos, then referencing other fake videos to keep people quiet. It's endless entertainment that is absolutely bogus. To do this they remove the shroud, dismantle the lock, study it for weeks, re-assemble it, craft special tools to pick it, then spend days, and dozens upon dozens of attempts to pick it, then declare the unpickable/new/high claim lock to be 'garbage'. Then the peanut gallery chimes in and starts saying the lock sucks, the company needs to change their website, and that free locks are just as good.. Sound familiar? [MEDIA=youtube]e3CXlSljfMw[/MEDIA] "Awesome job +bosnianbill! Bi-Lock is going to have to change the claim on their website. " ""Picki proof" they say on their website. Obviously not entirely.. " "So the new locks suck just get free ones at garage sales" PS: Yes Cylance did the best on that targeted attack. Good enough to where he couldn't demonstrate a bypass for it. But I still think these tests are bogus regardless. [/QUOTE]

Verification