I’m the administrator of kbin.life, a general purpose/tech orientated kbin instance.

  • 0 Posts
  • 382 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 29th, 2023

help-circle








  • Way way back. I was given a 486 (when pentium 90/100s were normal) at work to run the experimental internet connection on (the head of the company at the time didn’t think this internet fad would last). So I installed some magazine coverdisk linux and connected the office to the internet via a single modem.

    I think it had a peak uptime of 550 days before it was replaced.



  • However, my understanding is that this could be exploited only by authenticated users with permission to add new media. Not like that’s a risk to ignore, but it’s not like it could be exploited by anyone on the Internet.

    I wonder if that’s the reason for setting the default live TV management permission to false. Since that permission might well the the route to adding your own malicious m3u link for that second change.


  • From a cursory look at just the security commits. Looks like the following:

    • GHSA-j2hf-x4q5-47j3: Checks if a media shortcut is empty, and checks if it is remote and stores the remote protocol if so. Also prevent strm files (these are meant to contain links to a stream) from referencing local files. Indeed this might have been used to reference files jellyfin couldn’t usually see?
    • GHSA-8fw7-f233-ffr8: Seems to be similar, except for M3U file link validation and limiting allowed protocols. It also changes the default permissions for live TV management to false.
    • GHSA-v2jv-54xj-h76w: When creating a structure there should be a limit of 200 characters for a string which was not enforced.
    • GHSA-jh22-fw8w-2v9x: Not really completely sure here. They change regex to regexstr in a lot of places and it looks like some extra validation around choosing transcoding settings.

    I’m not really sure how serious any of these are, or how they could be exploited however. Well aside from the local file in stream files one.








  • So, I’m going to put it this way. I entirely agree. But I’ll be slightly more open minded and say it’s extremely unlikely. I mean 0.many zeroes point 1 percent likely. Winning the lottery every day for your entire life likely.

    However, when it comes to physics. We only ever have an understanding through the narrow windows with which we can see the universe. We have a set of rules that seem to very well tally with the universe we observe and they’re very likely all or almost all correct.

    But our understanding does change all the time, it’s not outside the realms of possibility we’ll prove it is possible and not feasible or even possible. I will not hold my breath though.

    I’d also argue that causality doesn’t need to be a problem. It all depends on how we imagine traveling through time would work. If we imagine that one experienced time line is an closed loop. Then you could effect the future without destroying the entire universe on another timeline. It would just be like reversing down the track and flipping points. Now you cannot access that other track. But it still exists, and everything on that track still exists.

    In that way, if I went back in time and changed some significant event in history then went into the future, I would see a different future, according to the change I effected. But my personal timeline would still include the time I spent in the time before I changed it. Therefore I’ve not changed my own past. Only my own future.

    My point being that while time travel will never be a thing we see, the causality issue is just a lack of imagination problem :P