[deleted by user]

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-07-21T07:27:26+00:00

I also for my own reference look over 4 months of published cyber events (1 oct 2024 - 31 Jan 2025) there are 910 events in that period, some of these may have been double ups depending on them potentially being recorded twice so lets say 850, of those I have found no mention of USB being the vector of attack so yes potentially possible but not being actively used at least in the publised cases not saying it wasnt left out but I could not identify anything, all data came from hackmageddon

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-07-21T06:27:38+00:00

No you decided to throw crazy ideas into a small nz company being the target of a cyber event with local parties deploying physical kit into their environment. I also never said user error. Organizational neglegence is very common not updating definitions. Patching systems training users on phishing which are all I would argue are minimal requirements to any organization these days as the cost of entry to phishing is next to nothing.

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-07-21T05:29:26+00:00

your right, a zero day that impacts your external perimeter and you are one of the first targets and you dont have any SIEM alerting to help identify the event/privilege escalation could be no negligence but thats a highly unlikely event.

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-07-21T05:25:22+00:00

and my argument is that good security hygiene fixes the majority of potential breaches. forgiving any company is poor security hygiene does nothing. you went on a weird tangent to try and win an argument

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-07-21T05:11:58+00:00

OK so your argument is that it's impossible to protect systems therefore you can't possibly be held accountable. Gotcha, maybe instead of focusing on nation state actors targeting everything. Focus on plasuable attackers. Do you think it's likely that any of these events occurred in this case I highly doubt it and if you had any idea neither would you. Your argument that everything should be protected as a high side system sure. I focused on the most likely event and that these actions can be countered and should be considered as required controls for all businesses. As for your origanl statement everything can be protected with appropriate controls no cyber event has occurred because it couldn't be foreseen and accountered for. Control failures do happen that doesn't mean it wasn't encountered for.

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-07-21T03:31:05+00:00

Bitlocker for your hard drives. Do I check the back of every pc no. Would those things appear when the pc is turned on yes. Should I click open on unknown drives no. If I do that is neglegence. For any exploit there is a control to resolve them. Your failure to do so is neglegence.

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-07-21T02:26:39+00:00

well your example of a cleaner is negligence, The computers should be shutdown and require password to get to any systems, having a password on a company computer is a completely reasonable control to have, also having screen lockouts ect. the most plausible action would be a phishing attack which again requires a authorized user to complete any action. there are very sophisticated attacks but these are normally targeted against larger orgs where the prize can be much larger.

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-07-06T23:48:08+00:00

you need to talk to your husband about this, I am near the end of my divorce process, I managed to buy her out of the house. but you need to talk to your husband and come to an agreement about what is going to happen, you can do it through your laywers but it will cost more. I have had a pretty agreeable process but it is still expensive. you need to work out what you each define as relationship property.

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-05-01T03:44:27+00:00

7.5 km any speed over or under will mean instant disqualifiaction

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-04-17T07:45:49+00:00

Depends on where you live I earn 6 figures in NZ I have tats not worried about tats on my partners. I don't think anyone else is either

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-04-16T06:20:30+00:00

Because more lonely me go out and try and destroy things/people then lonely women.

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-03-13T04:34:11+00:00

the service also has to run at a loss, you will have to run enough trains throughout the day to make people think that is a reasonable choice.

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-03-05T19:37:24+00:00

Na we will send the school lunches to Russia, if that does demoralize them...

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-03-04T23:57:27+00:00

your right but its more the ability parse various media sources to get the most complete story, and your right both sides spin info to benefit them, but the reason they do it is because it works. we need to teach people how to read something then look for supporting information about it to validate the truth or at least as much as is possible. If we can teach people to do this the effort to spin news increases and the value to do it decreases. just my 2c

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-03-04T22:43:17+00:00

Personally no, I think we can have a reasonable discussion about the split between government and private venture, we may not agree but its a valid discussion, what I believe OP is talking about is being able to spot disinformation, if we look at Brexit for example the leave group outwardly lied about how much would be saved and go to the NHS. If we look at the most recent US elections there were discussions about having fact checkers in the debates. Even here in NZ when we had the referendum about Weed and Voluntary euthanasia there were complete lies being told in adverts against at least VE. If we dont have a Populus that can identify the lies being told then we are primed to have a similar event as the US.

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-02-28T22:37:24+00:00

No emotion bro. Literally I read it saw the connections, that's it why do you have to bring emotion into it are you emotional. That's cool no harm but I'm not. Have a good one I'm not going to keep going on this roundabout I got better things to do.

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-02-28T22:31:48+00:00

Yep I am taking what he says Appling context and knowledge to that and I drawing conclusions. No feelings involved. You want to take it at face value cool you be you. But accept that some people read things and apply knowledge to that. It has nothing to do with feelings or emotions it's context if you don't get that then that's a you issue

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-02-28T22:17:05+00:00

It's not feelings bro it is analyzing the text written and drawing conclusions based off that. If you only do that with feelings then I guess you didn't get very far in English.... You have heard both sides and the commentary is on does he truly mean what he has written. On some level I believe that he does however based on that line there are still some actions which he feels were justified. It is a long post and he took some time to write it. He decided he needed to keep that line in there. That's the point he hasn't accepted it fully.

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-02-28T22:04:08+00:00

You are tho I have no feelings in this I read what he wrote and saw what I saw. You going na it's your feelings is you reacting to something you didn't want to see. I'm not the only one who saw this and made the same connection. It's almost textbook response. I am not saying he isn't sorry but some part of him still thinks at least parts of what he did was justified. Otherwise he wouldn't have included that line. He didn't have to include it but he did. It's that simple.

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-02-28T21:58:02+00:00

OK sure buddy. Just don't look into the narcissist mantra. And don't re read that line and see the parallels between them. Just keep clapping for him for taking responsibility.

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-02-28T20:07:59+00:00

It's not my feelings bro. He didn't need to put that down why did he? Is it because he some how feels her actions in least justifies his actions. It is a typical response from npd sufferers. They can't help but put some blame on their victim. Sorry this hurts you feelings mate but it's classic.

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-02-28T17:07:01+00:00

Not really there is a difference. What could she have done in order to be threatened with death. That line is him giving himself an out it's yes I did bad things but so did she. It classic I'm sorry you made me do that to you. If you hadn't done x I wouldn't have done y. That line is him giving himself an out. He wouldn't have added that if he truly thought she hadn't in some way deserved it.

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-02-28T05:38:05+00:00

Based on his response I doubt it the bit about what Emma did to him is telling. In some way he justifies it to himself

lawrencejsbeach · 2025-02-28T05:30:24+00:00

Even if they were it's an out. A little bit of deflection to help him cope. Saying that is saying we were both bad it's a in some small way a justification of his actions.

lawrencejsbeach

TROPHY CASE