Comment by dmurray
Great post and great attitude. Little bit of a mixed message from this:
> Within the aims of the module this is fine - this is an introuction to security module so if you can exploit it like this, you're not really the target audience and you've already achieved the aims of the module.
> This isn't going to save me any time - I still need to do the assignments because they're assignments for a University module, which is supposed to teach me things. If I don't do the assignments and effectively cheat by submitting tokens I recover this way, I personally will suffer and not know what I'm doing in enough detail when it comes to the final exam and just generally will lack this knowledge that might be useful in future.
Which is it? This introduction to security module couldn't possibly have anything to teach someone who already has this level of ability, or it could?
I see the contradiction there!
The bit about the "aims of the module" comes from its aims to get people thinking in a certain way about security, something I definitely already had. But that doesn't mean it had nothing to teach me - it was quite a while ago that I took it, but one exercise about the nuances of the setuid bit and how misconfigurations could be exploited stands out as something I doubt I'd have come across otherwise. There was also plenty of content on cryptography and basic binary reverse engineering/attacks that I'd not seen before.
My level of ability and knowledge isn't consistent - some places I'd dug into more, and some less. With tech, there's always a more detail to be explored and more learning to be done, even in areas I'm familiar with.
(I wrote the article)