632 karma · joined February 26, 2022
The story that advertisers don't know what users selected and that somehow allows them to track the user is disingenous.
Some time ago Germans tried to tax foreign drivers on their roads, so they introduced toll, nominally for all, but also lowered the same amount another car-related tax that was paid only by Germans. EU bodies saw through the scheme just fine and now they're on hook for returning the toll money to anyone still keeping the invoice/receipt.
If you're in business of selling X.503 certs trusted by browsers, then not being trusted by browsers kinda limits the marketability of your product.
I don't believe the browsers could be coerced to not distrust such a CA. In every root program I know there's a clause that membership to the program is at browser's pleasure. (Those that have public terms, i.e. not msft, but I'd assume those have similar language.)
Re: they can just do it, well, I think they'd be distrusted the same.
In Symantecgate one of the reasons for distrust was that they signed FPKI bridge, so I think no CA in the future will sign a subca that will sign FPKI certs.
> Also for example the USA is famous for installing malware on other countries head of state.
Yeah, exactly. I think they have more targeted ways that risk less detection and less collateral damage.
What would somewhat help would be CAA record with specified ACME account key. The attackers would then have to alter DNS record, would be harder as you describe. (Or pull the key from VM disk image, which would cross another line).
They can MITM the connection between the host and LE (or any other CA resolver, ACME or non-ACME, doesn't matter). This was demonstrated by the attack against jabber.ru, at the time hosted in OVH. I recommend reading the writeup by the admin (second link from the top in TFA).
This worked, because no-one checked CT.
> but again, why a passport?
Passport isn't only for crossing the border, but to identify for the whole duration of the visit. Travellers don't have national ID documents by definition, and the passport serves this purpose.
E.g. I don't know about your country, but if someone is travelling to my country, he or she is required to keep the passport in the pocket at all times and present to authorities on demand if s/he is stopped on street[1].
So when accessing women-only spaces, like applying for international sports tournaments held in other countries, this will be the document checked.
If you'd like an example involving border crossing, again I don't know much about your country, but if one attempts to cross the border of mine, one of the results might be that you'd be interned in a facility for illegal migrants that for some reason won't be getting political asylum, but can't be deported to the home country either. It would then matter if the person is a man or a woman. Just asking the person is not sufficient, because we can't just allow men to identify themselves into women's wing, as that would violate rights of the women kept there and not free to go elsewhere.
[1] this is contrary to citizens, who aren't generally required to have any ID on oneself, and can just say the name and number if stopped)
There are certain rights that are afforded only to people of certain sex, ranging from relatively insignificant to very serious e.g. special arrangements needed for women in times of war (they need to be interned separately, if not part of thei families). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_persons#Women . Unless and until we dispense with sex-based rights, there is a need to accurately record person's sex in the identifying document.
The distinction is less pronounced nowadays, because there is no mondern aircraft designed as gliders-but-not-sailplanes, but historically there were planes that fit this niche, mostly military transport of WW1 and WW2 vintage.
Passenger jets (with engines turned off) are relatively decent gliders, but incapable of soaring. So no, you can't get more that about 20:1 glide ratio no matter how good is the weather (for sailplanes).
If you go back in time just 40 years, the countries you did (and didn't) mention, were all governed by communists. With considerable body count. Right-wing regimes in Europe after WW2 have negligible body counts compared to communists, and if you want to include WW2 and pre-WW2 times, then communists are still worse, even if you count all victims of Germany and/or NSDAP, incl. Holocaust/Shoah, towards right-wing violence.
See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
Just because communism didn't happen in your country doesn't mean in didn't happen elsewhere, and there are still some of us who remember exactly what it was and will protest when someone attributes violence and/or authoritarism only to right wing.
This whole piece reeks „I'm an 1) outsider that 2) couldn't be bothered to get to know local culture so 3) probably has no stake in the affair” and as such is liable to get dismissed after only cursory glance. We know every single enumerated point above is false, but it doesn't matter. That every single word written on the page is right nd warranted, doesn't matter. @Meredith and anyone else writing papers aimed at EU, would you kindly please switch to A4 before exporting the PDF.
I think politicians should not be stupid and isolate their official business from the private one. (That would be ideal, anyway).
But then it begs the question, why politicians feel the need to use public (>50MMAU) chat systems to conduct the protected (official) business?
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Palestine_recognit... (“File History”)
Just browsing history on MediaWiki will probably show the old tex with recenn image. If you want full article, you'd have to use web.archive.org, archive.is or somethinglike that.
ExecStart=/usr/bin/python3 -m http.server
WorkingDirectory=/srv/www
?It essentially creates per-domain units. However, those are timers, not services, because the underlying tool doesn't have long-running daemon, it's designed to run off cron. So I can't depend on them directly, and I also need to add multitude of dropins that will restart or reload services that use certificates (https://github.com/woju/systemd-dehydrated/blob/master/contr...). Coudn't figure out any way that would automate this better.
Where do I sign up to be too big to punish?
Even if it is unpatched upstream, it's perfectly fine to push the fix to master branch only and let distros backport. That's also why the bugs should be filed downstream, and distro maintainers will forward the bug upstream but only if not already fixed (so upstream won't get N duplicate bugs, where N is the number of packages).
At in any case, distro maintainers tend to behave better in upstream bugtrackers.