Light

Episode #809 Quiz

Hafnium
Date: 2021-03-09 | Length: 1.5 hrs | Episode page at twit.tv

About this episode

Chrome 89 fixed 47 vulnerabilities, including a zero-day, while Google funded Linux kernel security work. Researchers reverse engineered Intel’s ring interconnect, showing a 4.18 Mbps covert channel leaking EdDSA, RSA, and keystroke timing. Dependency confusion poisoned package managers, and Exchange’s pre-auth RCEs enabled widespread web-shell compromise, demanding patched, administrator-run updates.

Your name and email are stored only in your browser local storage for convenience. They are not retained server-side.

NameEmail

Question 1: According to the episode, what did the Lay's Chrome extension do when it detected the sound of crispy chips being eaten during a YouTube video?

Question 1

According to the episode, what did the Lay's Chrome extension do when it detected the sound of crispy chips being eaten during a YouTube video?

It automatically paused playback until the eating stopped It automatically switched the video to a lower resolution stream It automatically enabled YouTube captions for the current video It automatically muted the video audio to reduce chip noise

Question 2: Which two Linux kernel developers did Google fund full-time for security work in the episode?

Question 2

Which two Linux kernel developers did Google fund full-time for security work in the episode?

Nathan Chancellor and Brian Kernighan Gustavo Silva and David Wheeler Gustavo Silva and Nathan Chancellor David Wheeler and Nathan Chancellor

Question 3: What capacity did the researchers report for their cross-core covert channel over Intel's ring interconnect?

Question 3

What capacity did the researchers report for their cross-core covert channel over Intel's ring interconnect?

4.18 Gbps from multiple threads 1.18 Mbps from a single thread 4.18 Mbps from a single thread 418 Kbps from a shared cache set

Question 4: According to the episode, what specific problem could occur if Exchange security updates were installed manually without running the installer as administrator?

Question 4

According to the episode, what specific problem could occur if Exchange security updates were installed manually without running the installer as administrator?

The update would uninstall Exchange services and require a full reinstall The update would only patch Exchange 2010 and skip newer versions The update would corrupt the mailbox database and force a restore The update could fail silently and leave the server unpatched

Question 5: What did Volexity determine the attacker was exploiting in Microsoft Exchange to steal mailbox contents?

Question 5

What did Volexity determine the attacker was exploiting in Microsoft Exchange to steal mailbox contents?

A credential-stuffing flaw in Outlook Web Access A zero-day server-side request forgery vulnerability A signed update bypass in the Exchange installer A post-authentication directory traversal vulnerability

Cancel

My Data//Security & Privacy//Clear Local Data

© 2026 Ken ArmstrongSecurity Now™ is a trademark of TWiT LLC. All trademarks and copyrights of the Security Now podcast are respected and reserved to their respective holders.
This is a hobby project made with love and admiration for what Steve Gibson and Leo Laporte have built over 20 years.