RTed on here, and Twitter. Hope it helps

For local roles, I am also a USCCA certified firearms instructor. With Christmas coming and kids waiting for Santa, referrals and introductions are deeply appreciated. Sharing this thread helps increase visibility during a very difficult time.
#Hiring #CyberJobs #JobHunt

I can support Sales and Sales Engineering teams as a subject matter expert when needed, providing technical depth and threat context without limiting my role as a practitioner. I also write white papers and blogs, create podcast content, and speak on security topics.
#InfoSec #Tech

Gotta love the osint skills 💯

If you use WhatsApp, assume your number is already in someone's database.
Source: www.wired.com/story/a-simp...

What you can do NOW: Go to WhatsApp Settings > Privacy and set your profile photo, about info, and status to "My Contacts" or "Nobody." This won't hide your number, but it limits what strangers can see. This is recommended as well for platforms like Telegram & Signal.

Meta's response? They thanked the researchers and called it "basic publicly available information." They fixed rate limiting in October 2024, but provided no evidence they stopped malicious actors from doing the same scraping over the years...

Who's at risk? Scammers of course have a goldmine. But worse: researchers found 2.3M WhatsApp numbers in China & 1.6M in Myanmar...countries where the app is banned. Governments could hunt down users. People in China have been detained just for having WhatsApp installed.

Not only numbers were exposed. 57% of accounts had profile photos, 29% had public bio text. In India, 62% had exposed photos. In Brazil, 61% had photos exposed. Most users don't enable privacy settings (More on this soon...)

A researcher warned WhatsApp about this exact vulnerability in 2017. Meta dismissed it, saying privacy settings were "working as designed" Fast forward 8 years later, still vulnerable until October 2024 😅

Here's how simple it was: WhatsApp lets you check if a phone number is registered. Researchers automated this for every possible number combination at ~100 million checks per hour. Meta had ZERO effective rate limiting in place (because why would anyone want that?)

Did he say that? Where did he say that?