The voting system (first-past-the-post) + electoral college (DEI for conservatives who are easily manipulated by the upper class) + gerrymandering (REDMAP) make it nearly impossible for a third party to win. See Duverger's law.
Americans have the right to bear arms just as much as they have the right to shout fire in a crowded theatre — it's a right that can be regulated and both already are, one needs more regulation, but people don't seem to understand.
So I upgraded and tested not adding a trusted proxy (using Traefik in front of Jellyfin) and nothing broke. Was it supposed to break or is it just that its insecure? Am I less secure by not adding it as a trusted proxy?
to add even more to what's already been said, even if Signal's infrastructure was compromised and they could see messages traveling through their servers, each one is encrypted, the keys are rotated with every message (cracking one, which is nearly impossible, doesn't give you access to previous or future messages), and thanks to Sealed Sender, only the recipient knows who a message came from. There are many other layers that they've engineered to ensure they can't know anything about you, like private contact discovery, using secure enclaves, remote attestation, etc.
Signal is a publicly available app that provides encrypted communications, but it can be hacked.
This is misleading statement that will only confuse people who want to use a secure messenger.
To clear things up with anyone who's not technically inclined: Anything can be theoretically hacked. Signal has not been hacked and has no history of being compromised.
The Signal "hacks" that linked people's Signal client to devices that aren't theirs were sophisticated phishing/spoofing attacks. The equivalent of getting someone to click a malicious link via email because it looked like the real thing.
A reminder that you still need to do your due diligence even when using a secure service. Technology alone cannot completely protect you.
anyone know how this compares to Cryptpad? I think it's developed out of France, also open source, self-host-able, collaborative and end-to-end encrypted!
H.265 is patent encumbered. Blame the 2 or 3(?) patent pool holders (for-profit corporations, unlike non-profit -and-slowly-losing-market-share Mozilla) for not making it free to use for everyone.
This is why AV1 is preferred, it saves bandwidth and there's no threat of being sued into oblivion.
But then you're indirectly giving the enemy (Google) power by increasing their browser market share, which in turn lets them dictate the future of the web.
The “ArcaneChat/DeltaChat servers” are just normal email servers with some default configurations and tweaks for privacy/security and speed
I know what the servers do. My question is direct, because it would answer an important detail that has been left unanswered. Can the chat clients work with any email provider or only Delta/Arcane configured email servers? Because if they work with any email provider, people are going to shoot themselves in the foot by allowing insecure servers. If its the latter, then at least the clients enforce some safeguards.
this needs to be done 👍
And until its done, its leaking metadata.
This is a pretty theoretical situation [...]
A lot of security is based on theoretical attack vectors. This is why security is hard, you have to invest time and effort to secure areas that could be exploited at some point in the future, not just what we know today. It's why Signal and Apple have developed and enabled quantum-resistant encryption in their messaging platforms (Source).
first the attacker needs to get control of your chatmail provider/server and start collecting your messages,
Considering people get hacked left and right all the time and the constant barrage of breaches, not the highest bar set.
Yog-Sothoth @ Supernova1051 @sh.itjust.works Posts 1Comments 86Joined 2 yr. ago
The voting system (first-past-the-post) + electoral college (DEI for conservatives who are easily manipulated by the upper class) + gerrymandering (REDMAP) make it nearly impossible for a third party to win. See Duverger's law.