The blog post details a vulnerability in the "todesktop" protocol handler, used by numerous applications and websites to open links directly in desktop applications. By crafting malicious links using this protocol, an attacker can execute arbitrary commands on a victim's machine simply by getting them to click the link. This affects any application that registers a custom todesktop handler without properly sanitizing user-supplied input, including popular chat platforms, email clients, and web browsers. This vulnerability exposes hundreds of millions of users to potential remote code execution attacks. The author demonstrates practical exploits against several popular applications, emphasizing the severity and widespread nature of this issue. They urge developers to immediately review and secure their implementations of the todesktop protocol handler.
ForeverVM allows users to run AI-generated code persistently in isolated, stateful sandboxes called "Forever VMs." These VMs provide a dedicated execution environment that retains data and state between runs, enabling continuous operation and the development of dynamic, long-running AI agents. The platform simplifies the deployment and management of AI agents by abstracting away infrastructure complexities, offering a web interface for control, and providing features like scheduling, background execution, and API access. This allows developers to focus on building and interacting with their agents rather than managing server infrastructure.
HN commenters are generally skeptical of ForeverVM's practicality and security. Several question the feasibility and utility of "forever" VMs, citing the inevitable need for updates, dependency management, and the accumulation of technical debt. Concerns around sandboxing and security vulnerabilities are prevalent, with users pointing to the potential for exploits within the sandboxed environment, especially when dealing with AI-generated code. Others question the target audience and use cases, wondering if the complexity outweighs the benefits compared to existing serverless solutions. Some suggest that ForeverVM's current implementation is too focused on a specific niche and might struggle to gain wider adoption. The claim of VMs running "forever" is met with significant doubt, viewed as more of a marketing gimmick than a realistic feature.
Summary of Comments ( 20 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43210858
Hacker News users discussed the practicality and ethics of the "todesktop" protocol, which allows websites to launch desktop apps. Several commenters pointed out existing similar functionalities like URL schemes and Progressive Web Apps (PWAs), questioning the novelty and necessity of todesktop. Concerns were raised about security implications, particularly the potential for malicious websites to exploit the protocol for unauthorized app launches. Some suggested that proper sandboxing and user confirmation could mitigate these risks, while others remained skeptical about the overall benefit outweighing the security concerns. The discussion also touched upon the potential for abuse by advertisers and the lack of clear benefits compared to existing solutions. A few commenters expressed interest in legitimate use cases, like streamlining workflows, but overall the sentiment leaned towards caution and skepticism due to the potential for malicious exploitation.
The Hacker News post discussing the blog post "How to gain code execution on hundreds of millions of people and popular apps" has generated a significant number of comments, mostly revolving around the security implications of the
todesktopprotocol and its potential for misuse.Several commenters express concern about the ease with which malicious actors could exploit this protocol. They point out that the broad registration of
todesktophandlers by many popular applications creates a large attack surface. One commenter highlights the potential for phishing attacks, where a malicious website could trick users into opening a crafted link that would then execute arbitrary code on their machine via a vulnerable application. Another user emphasizes the danger posed by typosquatting, where a slightly misspelled domain could register atodesktophandler and intercept traffic intended for a legitimate application.The discussion also touches on the responsibility of browser vendors in mitigating this threat. Some commenters argue that browsers should implement stricter security measures for handling
todesktoprequests, such as requiring user confirmation or limiting the types of applications that can register handlers. Others suggest that browsers should provide more prominent warnings about the potential risks associated with this protocol.A few commenters question the practicality of exploiting this vulnerability on a large scale. They point out that while the potential attack surface is large, successfully executing a widespread attack would require significant resources and expertise. However, others counter that the potential rewards of a successful attack, such as gaining access to sensitive data or disrupting critical infrastructure, are substantial enough to incentivize malicious actors.
The lack of a clear solution is also a recurring theme in the comments. While some propose potential mitigation strategies, such as stricter browser security or improved developer awareness, there's no consensus on the best approach. Some commenters express frustration with the current state of web security and the apparent lack of foresight in designing protocols like
todesktop.Some more technically inclined commenters discuss the specifics of the
todesktopprotocol and how it could be improved. They suggest ideas such as using cryptographic signatures to verify the legitimacy oftodesktoprequests or implementing a more granular permission system for applications that want to register handlers.Finally, a few commenters express skepticism about the severity of the issue, arguing that similar vulnerabilities have existed for years without being widely exploited. They suggest that the author of the blog post may be overstating the potential impact of this vulnerability. However, these comments are generally met with disagreement from other users who emphasize the growing reliance on web applications and the potential for significant damage if this vulnerability were to be exploited on a large scale. The overall tone of the discussion is one of concern and a desire for a more secure solution to handle custom URL protocols like
todesktop.