So then if you can see anyone's screen, or any clear photo of it, you can easily join the conference. Seems like very poor security design if that's so
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EnRlaFeWMAQzyIS?format=jpg
The software URL format looks similar to that used by Pexip.com
Maybe this?
https://consiliuminc.com/product/UniVCX-video-customer-exper...
[0]eve-online.com
Someone leaves their doors unlocked it doesn't mean you should be entering.
More importantly, how on bloody earth are defence discussions happening in a situation that can so easily be defeated.
The officials themselves are to blame for blatantly terrible security protocols.
Yea, well, it's a useful function of journalism to poke their head in open doors and say "you're doing _WHAT_ in here?!"
I slot this in alongside the time US nuclear missile officers were found asleep, with the door open waiting for takeout - simultaneously seriously disturbing and quite funny.
https://www.cnn.com/2013/10/23/us/air-force-nuclear-silo-doo...
Add to this that the EU is corrosively fractured, nowhere near as coherent as the US. We're no match, hell (thanks to the Brits) the EU doesn't even have a Foreign Minister, and the effective veto power of even a super tiny nation doesn't make it any easier.
To think DJT has woken up the EU from their decades long slumber is incredible.
At least since Snowden EU leaders probably always assume that someone is listening in. NSA and GHQ had breached Belgacom (Belgian former telecoms monopoly) to listen in on the EU.
Sure word got out, but it need not reach most of the populace.
It will come soon a time (in fact, it's pretty much here already) where China calls the shots over us. "Obey, or no microchips for you. In fact, no manufacturing of any kind." Thoroughly depressing.
Besides, if the EU defence conference had an open URL or weak password that issue would apply regardless of Zoom, Webex, etc.
A EU security conference should use EU software, and as little foreign stuff as possible. Otherwise, it's just theater (and it currently really is just that!).
They may not explicitly desire standing alone, but I wouldn’t bet against them deciding that’s the better option, nor would I bet against them using or threatening to use their manufacturing capability to put pressure on certain policy objectives. It’s not like other countries don’t use economic impact as a carrot/stick to achieve policy objectives.
The U.S. already does that. Why is that any better?
The difference between the US and China's government is that almost nobody likes China. The US, at least before recent political developments, tries to make sure that agreements benefit both sides.
The US is also a democracy that respects freedom of the press and human rights to a degree. China doesn't give a shit about any of that.
Probably the best response you can hope for in the moment.
>The meeting was ended due to the breach, while a Foreign Affairs Council spokesman told RTL: "Such a breach is illegal and will be reported to the authorities."
And the foreign policy chief was laughing, but I bet he was asking himself "who do I send over there to stop them" while trying to maintain the laughing face.
Does not matter as much if you discuss reconstruction of a mountain hut, matters a lot in defence, espionage or diplomacy.
However what Zoom and other conf tools could do is that they could read the password from the URL and then use `history.pushState()` DOM API to replace the URL and erase the password once the meeting is launched.
Downside would be though users wouldn't be able anymore to just copy the URL from browser's URL bar and send to other people to join.
I want to facepalm so hard right now.
