A vulnerability in Microsoft Partner Center (partner.microsoft.com) allowed unauthenticated users to access internal resources. Specifically, improperly configured Azure Active Directory (Azure AD) application and service principal permissions enabled unauthorized access to certain Partner Center APIs. This misconfiguration potentially exposed sensitive business information related to Microsoft partners. Microsoft addressed the vulnerability by correcting the Azure AD application and service principal permissions to prevent unauthorized access.
Optical frequency combs are extremely precise tools that measure light frequency, analogous to a ruler for light waves. They consist of millions of precisely spaced laser lines that span a broad spectrum, resembling the teeth of a comb. This structure allows scientists to measure optical frequencies with extraordinary accuracy by comparing them to the known frequencies of the comb's "teeth." This technology has revolutionized numerous fields, including timekeeping, by enabling the creation of more accurate atomic clocks, and astronomy, by facilitating the search for exoplanets and measuring the expansion of the universe. It also has applications in telecommunications, chemical sensing, and distance measurement.
Hacker News users discussed the applications and significance of optical frequency combs. Several commenters highlighted their use in extremely precise clocks and the potential for advancements in GPS technology. Others focused on the broader scientific impact, including applications in astrophysics (detecting exoplanets), chemical sensing, and telecommunications. One commenter even mentioned their surprising use in generating arbitrary waveforms for radar. The overall sentiment reflects appreciation for the technological achievement and its potential for future innovation. Some questioned the practical near-term applications, particularly regarding improved GPS, due to the size and cost of current comb technology.
NIST's Standard Reference Material (SRM) 2387, peanut butter, isn't for spreading on sandwiches. It serves as a calibration standard for laboratories analyzing food composition, ensuring accurate measurements of nutrients and contaminants like aflatoxins. This carefully blended and homogenized peanut butter provides a consistent benchmark, allowing labs to verify the accuracy of their equipment and methods, ultimately contributing to food safety and quality. The SRM ensures that different labs get comparable results when testing foods, promoting reliable and consistent data across the food industry.
Hacker News users discuss NIST's standard reference peanut butter (SRMs 2387 and 2388). Several commenters express amusement and mild surprise that such a standard exists, questioning its necessity. Some delve into the practical applications, highlighting its use for calibrating analytical instruments and ensuring consistency in food manufacturing and testing. A few commenters with experience in analytical chemistry explain the importance of reference materials, emphasizing the difficulty in creating homogenous samples like peanut butter. Others discuss the specific challenges of peanut butter analysis, like fat migration and particle size distribution. The rigorous testing procedures NIST uses, including multiple labs analyzing the same batch, are also mentioned. Finally, some commenters joke about the "dream job" of tasting peanut butter for NIST.
Summary of Comments ( 0 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43266429
HN users discuss the lack of detail in the CVE report for CVE-2024-49035, making it difficult to assess the actual impact. Some speculate about the potential severity, ranging from trivial to highly impactful depending on the specific exposed data and functionality. The vagueness also raises questions about Microsoft's disclosure process and the potential for more serious underlying issues. Several commenters note the irony of a vulnerability on a partner security portal, highlighting the difficulty of maintaining perfect security even for organizations focused on it. One user questions the use of "unauthenticated access" in the title, suggesting it might be misleading without knowing what level of access was granted.
The Hacker News post titled "Vulnerability in partner.microsoft.com allows unauthenticated access" linking to a NIST vulnerability disclosure (CVE-2024-49035) has a modest number of comments, generating a brief discussion around the nature of the vulnerability and its potential impact.
Several commenters focused on the ambiguity surrounding the actual impact of the vulnerability. The NIST disclosure provides limited technical detail, stating only that it allows "unauthenticated access." Commenters questioned what exactly an attacker could do with this unauthenticated access. Could they retrieve sensitive data? Modify information? Or was it simply access to a publicly available area that didn't require authentication in the first place? This lack of clarity was a central theme in the discussion.
One commenter pointed out the apparent irony of a vulnerability existing on a partner portal specifically designed for managing security products. They highlighted the potential reputational damage this could cause Microsoft, especially given its focus on security.
There's also a brief exchange regarding the use of "unauthenticated access" versus "unauthorized access." One commenter suggests the former is a subset of the latter, arguing that all unauthenticated access is unauthorized, but not all unauthorized access is necessarily unauthenticated. This spurred a short discussion about the nuances of these terms in a security context.
Finally, some comments speculated on the root cause of the vulnerability, suggesting possibilities like misconfigured access control lists (ACLs) or an internal tool inadvertently exposed to the public. However, these remained speculations due to the limited information available in the NIST disclosure. No commenter claimed definitive knowledge of the vulnerability's technical details beyond what was publicly disclosed.
Overall, the discussion reflects a cautious interest in the vulnerability, tempered by the lack of detailed information. Commenters clearly recognize the potential seriousness of an unauthenticated access vulnerability on a Microsoft partner portal, but the limited disclosure prevents a deeper analysis of the issue.