trulyrandom

An important caveat with Krypton is that while it is open source, the published source is essentially useless because it is not licensed under a free license.

Why do you expect it to get ads? The vast majority of Google products are ad-free, apart from Search and YouTube.

These sorts of macro tricks are cute, but they quickly become a pain when using an FFI.

Ah, right. Those allow applying small patches to a running kernel, but don't do a full kernel swap.

Interesting. I only know about kexec. What are some other examples?

I disagree. Users may not care about security in the same way that technical people do, but they do expect the data on their phones to be private (nudes, in particular). I think the reason why the current situation is generally accepted, is because nobody has exploited one of these vulnerabilities to extract user data on a large scale, yet.

> Most important isn't really the release date, but the date it was last sold to the public.

Agreed. I picked mine up 2 years ago and am now forced to upgrade to a newer model or install a third-party version of Android like LineageOS.

It's kind of ridiculous that my Google Nexus 5X, which was released just over 3 years ago, will not receive updates to patch vulnerabilities like this anymore.

I really enjoy Drew DeVault's blog: https://drewdevault.com

Extra tip: place the screenshot in the Git repository itself and link to it from the README.

Which DuckDuckGo features, other than bangs, do you miss in Google Search?

Fair enough. I agree that HTTPS is valuable here. I was just being overly pedantic, my bad.

With HTTP an attacker still has to MITM the connection between you and the mirror operator. So, definitely not "everyone".

My most used alias would be:

  alias fuck='sudo $(history -p !!)'

It runs the previous command as root.

They do exist. Here's one for Discord: https://github.com/reactiflux/discord-irc

Syncthing is great. I use it to sync my password database and some other stuff across my devices and have not run into a single issue. I set it up 3 years ago and haven't had to touch it since. I had no idea it was technically in "beta" all this time.

> YouTube is essentially "free file storage", just for a very specific file format.

Right. A platform for audio/video or in this case extremely inefficient file storage.

> Some software for the ZX Spectrum was distributed in a similar fashion, by being broadcast in audio format:

That's fascinating, thanks for sharing!

I'm very happy with my ThinkPad. A T470s, to be precise. It's light but sturdy, has a great keyboard and has a decent amount of ports for such a small laptop. All of the hardware is well supported under Linux, except for the fingerprint reader. The only gripe I have with it is the fact that the screen is a little dim (only 250 nits).

Hah, cool! This reminds me of an old 4chan thread where people were trying to get free file storage on YouTube by uploading video's of QR code sequences with files encoded into them. Much less useful than Txqr, but fun nonetheless.

I don't think developers would be eligible for bounties for vulnerabilities found in their own projects.

My entire browser froze for 10 seconds while trying to load this page. 323 requests and 5.9 MB later, I get a broken page where 90% of the content appears to be missing.

Edit: Oh lord, all of those text portions are iframes.

Yes, but I haven't noticed much of a different in my life as I wasn't using it obsessively anyway. The only thing I used Facebook for was to follow and sign up for events/parties. I do feel like I'm missing out on some of those ever since I deleted my account.

The site is a little light on details, but I assume my notes will be stored in a distributed way? What are some key advantages of this over something like Standard Notes (https://standardnotes.org), which allows backing up notes to multiple different cloud storage providers.

> It can usually already write all over your system and perform all sorts of other attacks

Not necessarily. Properly sandboxed applications like Chromium have a seccomp filter, separate pid/user/etc namespaces and bind mounts setup to isolate themselves from the rest of the system as much as possible.

> Anyway, if a typical user's browser is compromised, they're already completely screwed

It really depends on which part of the browser is compromised. Again, Chromium has some pretty good isolation. Having one malicious website exploit a vulnerability does not necessarily mean the attacker gets access to any of the other browser data.

Right, if you already have malware running on your system, all bets are off. However, I'm sure you're aware that large applications like Chromium have tons of vulnerabilities, which is why they come with a sandbox to protect against exploitation. X11 is one of the biggest holes in these sandbox solutions. Replacing X11 with Wayland would plug this hole. I'd argue that security is something the average user cares about.

That's interesting, because I've had tearing issues with all major GPU brands (Intel, AMD and Nvidia), in particular when multiple monitors are involved. What's your setup like?

With regards to security, the main issue is that X11 provides no isolation between applications, allowing them to listen to keystrokes and the clipboard at all times. With Wayland, only focused applications have this access.

I have never been able to get a tearing-free experience with X11, and I've tried everything to fix it. Meanwhile Wayland is butter smooth out of the box on the same hardware. Security is another obvious advantage of Wayland.

> They serve a sole real purpose, open door to proprietary software on GNU/Linux destroying it's community model.

I agree. Especially Flatpak and AppImage facilitate this goal.

I do run some software that communicates with the internet in a bubblewrap sandbox, like Chromium and Transmission, but other than that I shouldn't have to run every piece of software in a container to be safe.

That's the thing, it looks like they are listening externally: https://www.shodan.io/search?query=Server%3A%20Custom%2F1.0%.... I tried a couple of those IPs and can reach all of them on 5431.

I must be missing something, but why are all these routers publicly listening on port 5431?