Yup. A variation of the quote (basically capitalists instead of American businessmen) is commonly attributed to Lenin instead of Khrushchev. But that, too, can’t be verified and is said to be fake.
Yup. A variation of the quote (basically capitalists instead of American businessmen) is commonly attributed to Lenin instead of Khrushchev. But that, too, can’t be verified and is said to be fake.
Buying a domain. There might be some free services that, similar to DuckDNS in the beginning, work reliably for now. But IMHO they are not worth the potential headaches.
DuckDNS pretty often has problems and fails to propagate properly. It’s not very good, especially with frequent IP changes.
Random guy with no affiliation to crypto and only a vague understanding of monero from another instance here, who saw the post on /all.
Most people stumbling over posts like this probably see yet another shady cryptocurrency and aren’t interested or even actively dislike it, resulting in downvotes. Calling people “grudgeful bitfags” and “overly-sensitive leftist fediverse dwellers” probably doesn’t help all that much either, neither do comments that attribute a general disinterest to a “very successful psyop by the CIA to make crypto look like a scam”.
Damn, that’s wild. Cheers for sharing!
I have an understanding of the underlying concepts. I’m mostly interested in the war driving. War driving, at least in my understanding, implies that someone, a state agency in this case, physically went to the very specific location of the suspect, penetrated their (wireless) network and therefore executed a successful traffic correlation attack.
I’m interested in how they got their suspects narrowed down that drastically in the first place. Traffic correlation attacks, at least in my experience, usually happen in a WAN context, not LAN, for example with the help of ISPs.
Sounds interesting, got any links for further reading on that?
I can’t quite connect the dots between wifi/internet traffic spikes when IRC is so light on traffic that it’s basically background noise and war driving.
Windows, as any operating system, is best run in a context most useful to the user and appropriate for the user’s technical level.
Why do you keep stating blatantly false info as facts when it is obvious that you’re knowledge of the topic at hand is superficial at best?
In this comment thread alone you’ve stated that:
Genuinely not trying to stir up shit, I’m curious. Why?
15-20 years ago, I’d have agreed with you. But apart from a select few news sites and exceedingly rare static sites, what percentage of websites most users use day to day actually function even minimally without JavaScript?
I’m convinced that in practice, most users would be conditioned to whitelist pretty much every site they visit due to all the breakage. Still a privacy and security improvement, but a massive one? I’m not sure.
Very happy to be convinced otherwise.
I wrote a simple, locally running Webapp some time ago, that targets the Lemmy Import-/Export-API and supports transferring only specific userdata between accounts, as demonstrated in this corresponding Wiki Entry.
The import functionality in Lemmy is additive in nature, meaning anything you import gets added on top of existing settings instead of replacing it.
Does the same thing as these manual instructions for this usecase, may be helpful to some.
str(float("100.0")) + "%"
Because this repo is going viral from time to time to developers, I’m open for discussion if you want to promote a product/service in this README file. Just mail me at XXXX
Ew.
Oh I’m fully aware. I personally don’t care, but one could add a capable VPS and deploy the Wireguard Host Container + two Client Containers, one for the LAN and one for the commercial VPN (like so), if the internet connection of the LAN in question isn’t sufficient.
Oh, neat! Never noticed that option in the Wireguard app before. That’s very helpful already. Regarding your opnsense setup:
I’ve dabbled in some (simple) routing before, but I’m far from anything one could call competent in that regard and even if I’d read up properly before writing my own routes/rules, I’d probably still wouldn’t trust that I hadn’t forgotten something to e.g. prevent IP/DNS leaks.
I’m mainly relying on a Docker and was hoping for pointers on how to configure a Wireguard host container to route only internet traffic through another Wireguard Client container.
I found this example, which is pretty close to my ideal setup. I’ll read up on that.
To add to this:
We have to differentiate between physical and cybersecurity.
Are you more likely to physically lose your smartphone you carry around with you all day than your full ATX desktop standing in your office? Yeah.
But let’s consider the consequences for a moment.
If someone physically stole your desktop, chances are that at least a part of your data isn’t encrypted, the boot sequence probably isn’t (at least completely) verified, and your OS is wide open. There is little to no real isolation in most desktop setups. Once somebody managed to gain access to your system, it is outright trivial to steal your browser sessions, modify commands or run some code, at least in userland.
Physically stealing your smartphone is easy. But a modern smartphone is usually protected by verified boot and a password+fingerprint/Face ID combo. Unless you take active steps to compromise the security of the phone like rooting/jailbreaking it, disabling verified boot or disabling the passcode, it’s pretty hard if not near impossible to gain access to your data or modify it in a harmful way. If you visit an infected site or install an infected app, the damage is usually confined to that app’s data and the data accessible to it by permissions you probably had to allow to be set in the first place.
Now that’s speaking to your usual bad actors and usual setups. Exceptions, as always, make the rule. As soon as a sufficiently motivated and technically able actor with access to 0-day exploits, like a state actor, targets you for some reason, all bets are off. But even in this case, due to the advanced verified boot chain on most modern smartphones, those exploits rarely have the ability to survive beyond a reboot.
That’s the joke.
Indeed it does, I was talking about adding a checkbox tagged “Only transfer blocked users” instead of having to click through some menus.
Great points.
Regular solar cells with better efficiency are already are thing, even in a compact travel format or as a novelty part of some electric cars. Those are cheap to produce, but still aren’t practical at all, unless we’re talking about something like a 2m² solar panel to charge a phone in a somewhat reasonable time on a very sunny day in an off-grid situation.
Using transparent solar cells additionally to regular ones in buildings instead of windows is pretty much the only reasonable application I can think of right now, but with a visible transmittance of 20% that’s kinda farfetched as well.