Agreguesi i feed

"Enterprises may soon be paying as much for their developers' AI token usage as they do for their salaries," writes InfoWorld: According to Gartner, these costs will meet, or even exceed, the typical software engineer's monthly salary within the next two years. This is not only because developers are increasingly adopting generative AI and agentic tools, it reflects a trend toward consumption-based licensing models as vendors balance infrastructure investments with profitability... Gartner senior principal analyst Nitish Tyagi explained that it's important to note that Gartner's prediction is based on a global average salary of $2,000 per month; it doesn't mean AI token usage will exceed all salaries. For instance, in the US, yearly pay rates can be six digits or more. However, that kind of spend is not out of the realm of possibility, Tyagi emphasized. "I have heard scary numbers like 'My developer consumed $20K last month,' or 'A business user consumed $32K'." If these amounts sound shocking, that's the point. "The goal is to alarm the industry about the impact of token cost if it is not governed and controlled," he said... AI coding vendors have yet to deliver "mature, built-in cost optimization capabilities," Tyagi said, and prices will likely only continue to rise as vendors further build out their models while at the same time trying to remain profitable. Thus, enterprises struggle to forecast and control costs, and, because AI is moving so fast, many organizations lack the "maturity and frameworks" to determine ROI, he noted. Agent-driven workflows are difficult to govern, context windows become bloated, budgets are wiped out earlier than anticipated, and token spend becomes hard to justify.... "Without a governed engineering operating model, costs can escalate faster than the productivity gains these tools are designed to deliver," Tyagi said.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Jack Nekhala had a business selling on Amazon — and in December he received an unusual offer, reports Bloomberg. A woman said she could bribe an Amazon employee "to help him retrieve $90,000 in funds that the e-commerce giant had frozen after suspending him over an alleged violation of review policy." Hoping to ingratiate himself with the company and restart his business, Nekhala offered to provide evidence, including recorded conversations and screen shots, that he said proved Amazon personnel were peddling inside information and influence. The smoking gun, Nekhala told the representative: information about his seller account. Only certain Amazon employees are supposed to have access to such details, but Nekhala had received them from the woman on WeChat, the Chinese messaging app. Nekhala's experience, which he documented and shared with Bloomberg, provides a rare glimpse into an international black market that has been a persistent scourge of Amazon's online store. On one side are sellers looking for a variety of favors: a competitive edge over their rivals, information on how to boost sales, a way to get themselves unsuspended. On the other are middlemen who lurk on message apps like Telegram, WeChat and WhatsApp offering access to people inside Amazon who can get things done for a price... It's impossible to determine the scope of the illicit activity, but it's an open secret among Amazon sellers and consultants, who are frequently approached on social-media platforms and messaging apps. "The message is always the same: 'I'm going to show you screenshots to prove I have inside access,'" said Chris McCabe, a former Amazon employee who runs a seller consulting firm... In 2020, federal prosecutors exposed an international bribery scheme involving Amazon sellers and employees. The ring allegedly extracted about $100 million in unfair advantages by bribing Amazon employees in Asia to help them sell more products and sabotage their competitors. Five people in the US were convicted and received jail terms or probation. Last year, law enforcement officials in India began investigating more than 20 former Amazon employees suspected of accepting bribes from trucking companies in exchange for routes, according to The Times of India. After Nekhala reported his own experience to Amazon, the representative committed to "do some digging" and to email him instructions on how his evidence could be shared, according to a recording of the conversation. But Nekhala said he never heard back. The employee who leaked his personal information had already been fired for unrelated misconduct, according to Amazon. Amazon told Bloomberg employee involvement was "very rare," and that "We invest heavily in this area and have dedicated teams and systems in place to prevent all types of fraud, including by our own employees."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Version:7.1.2 (stable) Released:2026-06-27 Source:linux-7.1.2.tar.xz PGP Signature:linux-7.1.2.tar.sign Patch:full (incremental) ChangeLog:ChangeLog-7.1.2

Version:7.0.14 (EOL) (stable) Released:2026-06-27 Source:linux-7.0.14.tar.xz PGP Signature:linux-7.0.14.tar.sign Patch:full (incremental) ChangeLog:ChangeLog-7.0.14

Version:6.18.37 (longterm) Released:2026-06-27 Source:linux-6.18.37.tar.xz PGP Signature:linux-6.18.37.tar.sign Patch:full (incremental) ChangeLog:ChangeLog-6.18.37

A process with a stable workload shouldn't keep growing its resident memory. When it does, the first question isn't how much RAM is available. It's where the allocations stopped being released. On Linux, that answer isn't always obvious because the kernel, allocator, and application all influence what memory usage looks like from the outside.

AI is beginning to reshape how penetration testing workflows are organized. For years, the penetration tester’s workflow has been a labor-intensive ritual: scan, enumerate, research, exploit, and report. But new frameworks like Dark Moon are attempting to codify that intuition, turning the "human-in-the-loop" process into a machine-coordinated workflow. But is this a genuine evolution in how we secure Linux environments, or just a sophisticated wrapper around the same old tools?

SSH persistence usually does not look malicious at first. The login succeeds normally, the session opens cleanly, and the account already exists on the server, which is exactly why attackers continue using SSH keys after gaining a foothold on Linux systems.