How do you sell what you did as “it just worked”? Rightaway? You lied to them. You have your coworkers on an unmanaged machine with a foreign OS on the guest WiFi with custom networking. Don’t oversell a workaround as a solution.
Simplifying the problem to “Windows” seems unfair, given how many problems you found. All of them still require a long-term solution for regular operation.
Telegram is not just IM. Open the search and search for channels. Get creative, they have keyword filters. City name is always a good start. Check the channels with ❄️ and 🍄 emojis. This is where people are scammed for drugs. Maybe sometimes not scams.
A lot happens on Telegram, and it’s right behind that little search icon.
Reddit is free. Other people paying for your free service is a very weak argument to bring up. If Lemmy dies today, nobody but hobbyists and amateurs will care. Just like with LE.
I’ve been there. Not every CA is equal. Those kind of CAs were removed. LE is convenient. There are more options though.
I actually agree. For the majority of sites and/or use cases, it probably is sufficient.
Explaining properly why LE is generally problematic, takes considerable depth of information, that I’m just not able to relay easily right now. But consider this:
LE is mostly a convenience. They save an operator $1 per month per certificate. For everyone with hosting costs beyond $1000, this is laughable savings. People who take TLS seriously often have more demands than “padlock in the browser UI”. If a free service decides they no longer want to use OCSP, that’s an annoying disruption that was entirely not worth the $1 https://www.abetterinternet.org/post/replacing-ocsp-with-crls/
LE has no SLA. You have no guarantee to be able to ever renew your certificate again. A risk not anyone should take.
Who is paying for LE? If you’re not paying, how can you rely on the service to exist tomorrow?
It’s not too long ago that people said “only some sites need HTTPS, HTTP is fine for most”. It never was, and people should not build anything relevant on “free” security today either.
People who have actually relevant use cases with the need for a reliable partner would never use LE. It’s a gimmick for hobbyists and people who suck at their job.
If you have never revoked a certificate, you don’t really know what you’re doing. If you have never run into rate-limiting issues with LE that block a rollout, you don’t know what you’re doing.
LE works until it doesn’t, and then it’s like every other free service on the internet: no guarantees If your setup relies on the goodwill of a single entity handing out removed for free, it’s not a robust setup. If you rely on that entity to keep an OCSP responder alive for free so all your consumers can verify the validity of your certificate, that’s not great. And people do this to save their company $1 a month for the real thing? Even running the removedty certbot in compute has a larger cost. People are so blindly in love with this “free” garbage. The fanboys will never die off
I can’t answer this with confidence, but I was thinking the link in the email opened in the default browser, which wasn’t Tor in their case. Or something in the email client perhaps. Ultimately, I have no idea what happened and I was just speculating
Agreed. There are countermeasures to take against everything I mentioned. You just have to be aware and ideally not be a criminal in the first place.
There are many ways your real IP can leak, even if you are currently using Tor somehow. If I control the DNS infrastructure of a domain, I can create an arbitrary name in that domain. Like artemis.phishinsite.org, nobody in the world will know that this name exists, the DNS service has never seen a query asking for the IP of that name. Now I send you any link including that domain. You click the link and your OS will query that name through it’s network stack. If your network stack is not configured to handle DNS anonymously, this query will leak your real IP, or that of your DNS resolver, which might be your ISP.
Going further, don’t deliver an A record on that name. Only deliver a AAAA to force the client down an IPv6 path, revealing a potentially local address.
Just some thoughts. Not sure any of this was applicable to the case.
There are many ways to set up something that could lead to information leakage and people are rarely prepared for it.
I feel like the time to hide information behind YouTube links is over. Feels like a link to a paywall article at this point.
5 nines imply a downtime of 6 minutes a year, or every 100,000th operation failing. That’s not great for a file system. I assume you picked the number arbitrarily, but still think about it.
And has been for so long, they already went through it once
Numbers give the wrong impression that one version follows another. Debian release channels exit alongside each other individually. Giving the release channels names helps to make that distinction. It also makes for an easy layout of packages in APT repositories.
Sid is and always has been Sid. If you were to assign numbers, what number should replace that name? There are perfectly working labels for release channels and there is no reasonable replacement.
Google already has a fleet of “Hello Google” enabled devices that do listen all the time. Some phones surely also support always-on for this. My TV supports it. Users are already deliberately enabling this. There is no need for shady tactics.
I remember this mindset in myself. Today I consider it a waste of time.
If you rely on any tool for this, the tool will make mistakes you cannot accept. If you do it manually, you will make mistakes as well and that also does not work. Also, the information your consider worthy for removal might be key to understanding the problem.
Like, you remove your name, but a certain character in your name is what is actually tripping up the program.
Ultimately, don’t post your logs publicly. In the past years, I was always able to email logs to devs. I have no reason not to trust them with my log. If they want data from me, they could easily exfiltrate it through their actual application.
If you are already familiar with one package manager, pick a distro that also uses that package manager.
When deciding on the release track, the harder it is to recover the system, the more stable the track should be. Stable does not imply secure.
As you move up through virtualization layers, the less stable the track needs to be, allowing access to more recent features.
Steer clear of distros that pride themselves on using musl. It’s historically slow and incomplete. Don’t buy into the marketing.
Think about IaC. Remote management is a lot more comfortable if you can consider your server ephemeral. You’ll appreciate the work on the day you need to upgrade to a new major release of the distro.
Thank you
Before Google Drive and Syncthing I relied on such a USB device. Today, no matter what I put on the stick, it’s outdated or entirely not what I need when I need something.
Having any stick on hand, and being able to flash an image from your phone, that’s nice
Are you aware of Nvidia recently releasing different versions of their kernel modules? There’s an open-source and a proprietary flavor. Make sure you have the right one selected for your hardware and fallback to nuvoueau if need be.
Maybe I’m just old, but I thought a distribution is literally just a package delivery basically, just like you speculated. Making software work together nicely is actually already hard enough IMO. I don’t think anything is wrong. Valid question though