ddnomad

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 year ago

Until next time they try to push through something similarly stupid. Now it’s EU’s turn to make their mind too.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Tbh I’d not be surprised if that’s the case. Last time I had enough time to spare to rice me some arches was all the way back when I was in uni :(

I barely have enough time to hotfix my dotfiles nowadays :/

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Open the link and read the thread, the author is not aware of this “collection” being shared publicly.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

My point is that you should not excuse big corporations for clearly overstepping their bounds when it comes to moderation (as in “minority report” style moderation).

For Google, it would probably be even cheaper to only check URLs in collections that were shared with anybody, at a point the owner attempts to share them. Instead, they preemptively hide them from you, because “this set of characters offends us”.

This is something people should be angry about, not find an excuse for.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Scary illigal content here

I guess we test and see whether I get banned.

Also, it’s not the same. A link to a website is not “pirated content”. A link to a website in a “collection” not shared with anybody is not publicly available pirated content.

Why would Google preemptively ban a set of characters that does not constitute a slur and is perfectly legal to exist?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (8 children)

I’d not expect the private booth to have the club’s employee sitting there and waiting for me to do something that is against the rules preemptively.

We mostly argue about semantics, but in this instance you are trying to excuse some very questionable behaviour by companies by saying something along the lines of “well you better go and live in a forest then”. And I don’t think that’s a good take.

For example, how many Lemmy instances are fine with you direct linking to piracy torrents?

Irrelevant, as all content on Lemmy is public in a proper sense of this word.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (10 children)

Words used to have meaning, you know. Like, for example, the word “private”.

[–] [email protected] 61 points 1 year ago (4 children)

And the cringe inducing lttstore and “no sponsored fragment” plugs. Like somehow it sounds like your typical apology.jpeg and “haha funny-funny jokesies” at the same time.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

For MFA apps, Google Authenticator seems to be the norm.

I personally use OTPAuth with sync disabled and regular backups. Mostly because it is easier to organise and back up.

Regarding hardware security keys as part of MFA, you can either get yourself dual USB-C / Lightning or USB-C / USB-A keys from Yubikey. Then just buy a USB-A to USB-C dongle (or vice versa) and keep it on your key chain. That’s mostly what I do, not ideal but does the job.

I also use OnlyKey for some passwords, especially encryption passphrases on some servers and laptops. I usually need to enter them on boot, and it just takes too long to do that manually and I’m lazy.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I agree with you on most of the points. Some security is better than nothing. More security is better than less, layers and all.

Regarding data breaches and malware, and threat models in general. We should not forget phishing too. People voluntarily entering their credentials on a website masquerading as their bank etc.

With all of that, having your credentials split over multiple applications and devices actually saves you from an endpoint compromise and evil maid attacks, at least in a sense of limiting the fallout.

Regarding VeraCrypt and “FREE”. While it is, again, better than nothing, VeraCrypt is fiddly, not always works consistently on all operating systems (I look at you, MacOS), and is susceptible to key logging. I prefer actual certified hardware with physical keypads instead. It is not free and has its own downsides, but it is just something I find more appealing.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (11 children)

As a rule of thumb, do not put all your eggs into one basket. No software is infallible and vulnerabilities can be uncovered and exploited in both open and closed sourced applications.

That’s being said, as long as you don’t store all information necessary for a successful login in your password manager, you should be fine.

So storing credentials for your bank account is fine, as long as it is also protected by MFA and you do not use the same password manager for handling that.

You can store PIN codes from your debit cards in the password manager as long as you do not store card number / expiration / CVV2 there too.

Personally, I keep passwords in a password manager, MFA tokens in a separate authenticator, MFA recovery codes go to FIPS 140-2 certified encrypted USB sticks (3 separate copies). I do store debit card PIN codes in my password manager, but only alongside the last 4 digits of the card number.

view more: ‹ prev next ›