Malware analysis is such an interesting field to get into (casually for now, don't want to focus on it too much since I want to be flexible as I am still a student).

But since malware analysis is essentially reverse engineering targeted for malware, and with the introduction of tools like REA + AI models getting extremely advanced to the point where any person can just prompt the AI with basic terminologies (and knows how to bypass its guardrails) are plausible, then is there any point in me learning its fundamentals and advanced stuff at this point in time, or do I just gain experience with how AI does it and be familiar with how it operates instead?

Although my gut feeling assumes malware analysis and its adjacent fields will be getting significantly harder but I somehow don't know why; just intuition?

It would be best appreciated if actual professional malware analysts or those with experience in Incident Response / Threat Hunting answer, thank you!

Hii This is Raksha, I'm starting my journey into cybersecurity.

As a BCA graduate, my goal is clear - I want to build a career as a SOC Analyst.

It's been 10 days since I started learning fundamentals on TryHackMe, and I'm taking it slow, on purpose.

So far I've covered the basics - what cybersecurity really is, offensive vs defensive, how computers actually work, client-server, cloud & virtualization, Windows fundamentals, command line (Linux & Windows), OS security, data encoding, and the basics of Python, JavaScript, and SQL.

I know these are beginner topics. But I'm learning that you can't skip fundamentals if you want to do well in the real stuff like Networking, Wireshark, SIEM, and Incident Response.

I'll be documenting everything here - what I learn, what I get wrong, the labs I complete, and the small wins.

Not trying to rush it. Just trying to get genuinely good at it, one step at a time.

#CyberSecurity #SOCAnalyst #BCA #informationSecurity

Hey everyone,

When studying for certs like Security+ or just trying to wrap your head around cryptocurrency, reading about decentralized ledgers and Proof-of-Work can be dry.

I teach cybersecurity, and I just published "Blockchain in a Box" (iCSI Coin)—a completely free, open-source lab environment where students can spin up crypto nodes and work with the concepts. (Lesson plan docs for students are linked below if you are interested!)

Quick Install: A one-shot installer is on the right-hand side of the webpage linked below. You will need a Kali Linux or Ubuntu VM to run it.

🔗 Project & Installer: crypto.cyberlessons101.com

This one took me a while and is, at its core, a port of the Litecoin blockchain.

Hope someone out there finds this useful!

Hi all — I'm pivoting into cybersecurity and kept hearing "you need experience, not just certs." So I built a home lab of 5 working projects and open-sourced everything (MIT):

• Mini-SOC on AWS — Terraform-deployed detection stack (VPC → CloudTrail → S3 → GuardDuty → SecurityHub), 3 adversary-emulation scenarios with Stratus Red Team, triage guides + blank incident report templates
• CloudTrail IOC analyzer — Python CLI that parses CloudTrail JSON, flags anomalous logins / brute-force spikes / risky IAM changes, enriches IPs via AbuseIPDB, passing pytest suite
• Phishing analysis lab — full walkthrough of a reconstructed phish: header forensics, SPF/DKIM/DMARC, URL deobfuscation, blank analysis template, GoPhish self-test guide (own mailbox only)
• ELF binary triage — one-command static triage CLI: section-entropy packing heuristics, W^X detection, suspicious-import watchlist, score-based verdict + analyst report
• SOC agent skills — 5 MIT-licensed agent skills distilled from the projects above (alert triage, incident report, cloudtrail-ioc, phishing-analysis, binary-triage)

Everything runs on synthetic training data (clearly labeled — no real logs or real phishes). I did all the hands-on work myself: ran my own attacks, wrote my own detections and reports.

Repo: https://github.com/szzxli/soc-home-lab

If you're also building a portfolio for SOC analyst roles, happy to compare notes. And if you spot something I did wrong, tell me — that's the point of putting it in public.

¡Hola a todos!Estoy terminando Ingeniería en Informática y estoy desarrollando un proyecto académico llamado SecureCode.Es una herramienta que busca automatizar la evaluación de controles de seguridad en repositorios de GitHub, identificando cumplimientos e incumplimientos y generando evidencia para facilitar las revisiones.Para complementar el proyecto, necesito conocer la opinión de estudiantes, desarrolladores y profesionales del área TI sobre la utilidad de este tipo de soluciones.No necesitan ser expertos en ciberseguridad ni haber utilizado SecureCode. La encuesta incluye una explicación del proyecto.⏱️ Duración: 5–7 minutos.

🔒 Anónima y voluntaria.

🎓 Finalidad exclusivamente académica.

💻 Dirigida a estudiantes y profesionales del área informática.Enlace a la encuesta: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeiHEDD-ZIwY7WvqOXYJi8dAmAR4E44sejHmlwhqCa3JkExFg/viewform?usp=header

usp=header ayudarían muchísimo respondiendo. También agradecería cualquier comentario o sugerencia sobre el proyecto.¡Muchas gracias por su tiempo!

I want to share my recent experience with the PortSwigger BSCP (Burp Suite Certified Practitioner) exam, specifically regarding severe platform instability, their misleading claims about exam proctoring, and their refusal to provide a refund.

Candidate Background

• Completed all 273 labs on the PortSwigger Web Security Academy.
• Reached global ranking #266 on the Hall of Fame.
• Deeply familiar with the Burp Suite ecosystem and the platform's exploit methodologies.

1. The "Proctoring" Illusion vs. Reality

PortSwigger markets this exam as an actively monitored, strictly proctored certification environment. Candidates are told that their session, screen, and test windows are strictly tracked and under surveillance:

• No Active Live Proctoring: In reality, there is zero real-time human proctoring. Nobody is actually watching or monitoring your test execution live.
• No Real-Time Technical Recourse: When platform errors or browser crashes happen, there is no proctor to log the incident, freeze the exam timer, or verify that the infrastructure failed.
• Shifting the Blame: Because they don't perform genuine live monitoring, when the environment crashes, they simply claim that "your test window was closed" or that the failure was strictly an exploit error on your side. They won't even review screen or session telemetry to verify the truth.

2. Infrastructure Breakdown During the Exam

• First application: Fully solved and completed in under 30 minutes.
• Second application: Catastrophic backend failure. The remote instance started throwing backend server errors, recurrent timeouts, and the testing browser repeatedly crashed.
• I correctly targeted the password reset flow and the Host Header family, but the broken lab instance could not reliably process payloads or return tokens.

3. Forensic Evidence vs. Support Dismissal

To ensure complete transparency, I gathered approximately 50 forensic artifacts:

• Full disk-based Burp project files (.burp)
• Custom exploit and automation scripts (reset_poison.py, desync.py, etc.)
• Raw HTTP logs and terminal outputs showing backend timeouts

Despite this extensive proof, support summarily claimed that I merely failed to construct the specific Host Header bypass filter and refused to admit the environment crash. They refused any refund or further retake.

1. Current Status

• Management (Director of Intelligent Support) reviewed the ticket and upheld the refusal to refund.
• When I raised factual feedback regarding support communication in the official Discord community, my access was restricted and I was removed from the channel.
• A statutory complaint has been filed with the UK International Consumer Centre (Ticket: #91462) under the UK Consumer Rights Act 2015.
• Formal claims for both exam charges ($198.00 USD total) are currently active on PayPal.

Takeaway for Prospective Candidates

Do not rely on their claims of a "proctored" environment. If your lab instance freezes, drops packets, or crashes, there is no proctor to verify it, and support may simply blame you, take your money, and refuse to remediate. Be extremely cautious before paying for this exam.

Has anyone else faced silent container crashes or complete lack of proctor oversight during the BSCP?

Note: What they call a proctored exam is supposed to monitor your screen, but no such thing actually exists; they cannot even review the exam to verify that what I am saying is true.