Lumo - Lessed censored on the cybersecurity themes and subjects
I'm using Lumo while working in cybersecurity (blue/red team, sometimes in challenges and CTFs)
Right now, a lot of the time Lumo won’t answer questions that could be useful for us because the system assumes the info might be used maliciously. I get the intention behind that safeguard, but it ends up being a real pain when we’re trying to do legitimate security research, hardening, or authorized testing.
As the saying goes, “knowledge is power.” When that knowledge is unnecessarily censored, it slows down our ability to protect systems and to understand threats.
--LG--Exegol
shared this idea
-
Riva Manella commented
Low-key, the censorship stuff is definitely a real concern, but honestly I think the bigger issue is that a lot of the security tools we're running just aren't built to catch threats that don't look like your textbook attack patterns. A buddy of mine who does AppSec was saying that most of the sketchy activity happens at runtime when the code is actually live, not during static scans or policy checks, and that's where most platforms totally drop the ball. He mentioned that https://raven.io/runtime-adr is one of the few things that actually gives you visibility into what's going down while things are executing, which is exactly where those sneaky exploits like to hide. No silver bullet, but it definitely seems like the kind of direction more tools should be heading, especially with all the censorship noise making it harder to trust what's legit and what's not. Worth keeping on your radar for sure
-
Devil Scheme commented
But if we want stronger security, we need more open, honest dialogue about risks, failures, and solutions. That’s why I respect companies like Clearnetwork https://www.clearnetwork.com/choosing-the-right-soc-software/ . Founded in 1996, they’ve been focused on delivering managed cybersecurity solutions that actually make sense — practical, affordable, and tailored for both public and private organizations.