313
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2023
313 points (99.1% liked)
Technology
59080 readers
3320 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Then they could recreate their own input field by recreating their own "totally-not-an-input-field" with a canvas element and a bit of JS. Or, if that also gets blocked, just straight up redirect the user to a phishing site by replacing the login button or some other means. Plenty of people probably wouldn't notice in time.
That's a whole lot of effort compared to how they are able to phish now, which is launder their code by paying some (perhaps unsuspecting) extension developer to include an external dependency in their well-established extension.
Such effort as you're describing would be harder to pull off, easier to spot and limit the victim pool significantly all at the same time.
The methods they described are very common hacking techniques once a site is compromised. They are not difficult nor more work than you'd expect, not out of the realm of normal work for a hacker with a site they can tweak.