KLISHDFSDF

joined 3 years ago
[–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 hours ago

Valid complaints. I can see the first and last issue being addressed at some point, not sure what they could do about storage space.

[–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 3 points 23 hours ago (8 children)

They’re actually very bad.

Care to elaborate? They seem to be working great for myself and family.

[–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 days ago

Not offending anyone, just unintentionally misrepresenting reality.

[–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 18 points 2 days ago (3 children)

oh okay it works for you, I guess the developer claiming it will not work as well on Chrome as on Firefox was complete BS 🤡

[–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 days ago

if it was pure theater my friends and family who pay for all their streaming services would be able to share the content without permission from Netflix, Hulu, etc. That this is not the case disproves your claim that it's pure theater. It does exactly what it aims to do and that's raising the barrier to entry for piracy.

[–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

It doesn’t meaningfully impact the rate of cheating at all

So EA and every other anti-cheat software is paying developers to make software that does nothing? I don't follow.

[–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 19 points 2 days ago (1 children)

yeah, someone dumb it down for us plebs

[–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 21 points 2 days ago (5 children)

I believe uBlock will continue to work, just not as well.

[–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

No, it doesn’t. Cheating is still incredibly common on games that install malware

I never claimed it's flawless or that it works in all cases. Think of it like antivirus software. Does it catch every and any malware that has and will ever exist? No. Does it still work to minimize all kinds of "bad shit" for normal end users? Yes.

If people care enough to cheat, they will cheat whether you have kernel access or not.

Lets rephrase that: If people care enough to commit crimes, they will commit crimes whether you have cops in your city or not - Your statements logical conclusion would be to get rid of police and crime investigators. Does that sound reasonable? It shouldn't, and it doesn't make sense against anti-cheat software for the exact same reason.

They use it for the exact same reason they use DRM. Because they can.

They use it because it solves a real-world problem that's unsolvable by other means. There's no real alternative because you have to trust the end-user, who, although may not be very likely to cheat, makes it extremely easy for a bad person to spoil the fun for everyone else.

I would love to live in a fantasy world where we don't need cops, a government, rules, regulations, and anti-cheat software, but there are bad apples that will spoil the fun for everyone.

It also can’t possibly theoretically “reduce harm” when every single installation on every individual computer is many orders of magnitude more harm than all cheating in every game ever made.

I mean "reduce harm" in the strict sense of spoiling the fun in gaming. vulnerabilities happen with all software, this isn't unique to anti-cheat.

[–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 days ago (6 children)

Client side validation cannot possibly provide any actual security

Except it already does.

but even if that wasn’t the case and it was actually flawless

Nobody is claiming its flawless. This is the same anti-seat belt, anti-air bag, anti-mask, anti-vax argument. It "DoEsn'T WoRk iN eVeRy CaSe!" - that was never the intent. It's about harm reduction.

it would still be unconditionally unacceptable for a game to ever have kernel level access.

Anyone with a technical background would agree with you, as do I, but the reality is anti-cheat software with kernel level access already exists and it works specifically because it has kernel level access.

[–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 days ago

Right, but the server is still receiving data from the client. If the client sends a plausible head shot, even though it was actually a miss, how would the server know? You still need client-side "police", AKA anti-cheat software to mitigate a significant type of software-based hacks.

Now that I've typed it out, cops are actually a great analogy to anti-cheat software. Cops play the exact same role. Nobody wants them around until a crime has been committed. Cops/anti-cheat software don't catch everyone, but the threat of being caught mitigates some crime/hacks, and for the cases where criminals/hackers are caught, society/gamers are better off for it.

In closing ACAB - I completely understand why we don't want anti-cheat software on our computers, but there really is no better way; or if there is, I still haven't heard it.

[–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

If this works on Linux this is probably what I'll switch to. I've played it and liked it, the pace is a bit too fast for my taste, but I can get used to it.

154
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml to c/android@lemdro.id
 

Soooo.... I've never had this issue on any other phone before. Is it normal to get condensation inside the camera lense (wide angle and telephoto)?

it's dried out now, but I can see spots on the inside of the lense now that the water is gone, I can only imagine this getting worse over time, affecting quality. is this worth an RMA?

1
Android 7.6 features (signalupdateinfo.com)
 
  • Group call reactions 🎉
  • Double-tap a message to edit ✍️
  • Link preview images no longer show in the 'Shared Media' section 🏞️
  • Improvements to missed call handling 📞
  • Updated permissions popup UI 🍾
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/10866175

Check out the live demo at https://demo.usememos.com/

 

Check out the live demo at https://demo.usememos.com/

 

I know this works if I have, for example:

movies/
    - movie1 - 1080p.mkv
    - movie1 - 2160p.mkv

but what if I have:

movies/
    - movie1 - 1080p.mkv
movies2/
    - movie1 - 2160p.mkv

Because I'm out of space on the driver under "movies". Do I need to have them in the same parent folder?

5
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml to c/signal@lemmy.ml
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/6601917

Edit Message

Now you can edit a message even after it has been sent! Fix a tpyo, include the missing ingredient in grandma's chocolate chip cookie recipe, or add the punchline to a joke if you hit the send button too quickly. The choice is yours.

Messages will always show when they have been edited, and you can tap on the "Edited" indicator to see the full edit history for any edited messages.

Update the past in the present to prevent future confusion today!

Got this today on Signal beta. Editing is one feature I really wanted in Signal.

Anyone else got it?

 

Why is it that so many companies that rely on monetizing the data of their users seem to be extremely hot on AI? If you ask Signal president Meredith Whittaker (and I did), she’ll tell you it’s simply because “AI is a surveillance technology.”

53
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
 

but before I do, I figured I'd ask if anyone's aware of any tools/software that covers my basic needs of setting something basic that may alert me if there are any intruders in the network?

Needs:

  1. Fake ssh login that can trigger a script so I can take care of the rest.
  2. Fake network share (cifs/samba) that can trigger a script if anything tries to access it.

Would be great if there are any docker images I can just pull, make some minor edits, and run.

Thanks!

 

Just found this today and thought I'd share.


Features:

✅ Beautiful, minimal UI
✅ 8-day forecast
✅ Imperial units support
✅ Dark and light themes
✅ No ads or trackers
 

One feature of apps such as iMessage and WhatsApp is that your texts or voice calls are scrambled and private from everyone.

With end-to-end encrypted technology, no one but you and the intended recipients can know what you wrote or said — not hackers, the app companies or the police.

Except, not everything is end-to-end encrypted in end-to-end encrypted apps.

That could mean what you type in chats are saved on company computers that corporations such as Apple or your phone provider could read. Details such as the timestamps of every text to your boyfriend might not be under lock and key, either.

That’s not necessarily bad. Each end-to-end encryption choice has trade-offs. More privacy and security could also make it harder for you to use an app, or can shield activity of terrorists and child predators.

The mess I’m describing — end-to-end encryption but with certain exceptions — may be a healthy balance of your privacy and our safety.

The problem is it’s confusing to know what is encrypted and secret in communications apps, what is not and why it might matter to you.

To illuminate the nuances, I broke down five questions about end-to-end encryption for five communications apps.

Is the content of every message automatically end-to-end encrypted?

  • WhatsApp: Yes

  • Apple’s Messages: No

  • Messages by Google: No

  • Meta Messenger: No

  • Signal: Yes

The biggest encryption caveat is for the built-in texting apps on iPhones and most Android phones in the United States. Those are Apple’s Messages app, also known as iMessage, and the Messages by Google app.

If you use Apple’s app, texts that you send and receive are only end-to-end encrypted if everyone else in the chat is using that app.

If the text you see is in blue, the contents of messages are end-to-end encrypted for everyone in the chat.

Even if Apple wanted to read your texts, it doesn’t have a key to unscramble those messages. (There’s a caveat in the next section about backup copies.)

But the dreaded green bubbles are Apple’s warning. If you’re in a group chat with three people using Apple’s chat app and one person on an Android phone, no one’s texts are end-to-end encrypted.

Each of your mobile phone providers might save every word of your communications. Those companies could, in theory, read your messages, lose them to thieves or hand them over to police with valid legal orders.

Google’s chat app has the same encryption loophole. (For most people in the United States, Messages by Google is the standard texting app on Android phones.)

Your texts in Google’s chat app are only end-to-end encrypted if everyone else is using that app.

Google shows if your texts are end-to-end encrypted with signs such as a lock icon under texts and another on the send button.

Are backup copies of your messages automatically encrypted, with no option for the app company to unscramble them?

  • WhatsApp: Yes

  • Apple’s Messages: No

  • Messages by Google: Yes*

  • Meta Messenger: No

  • Signal: Yes

WhatsApp and Signal don’t let you save copies of your texts or call logs to the app makers’ computers.

That means they don’t have saved message copies in a cloud that crooks could break into.

But if you buy a new phone and forget your password, WhatsApp and Signal can’t really help you transfer all your old texts.

If you back up copies from Apple’s chat app and Meta Messenger, the companies have the keys to unscramble what’s written in encrypted chat copies. Again, these unscrambled text copies can help in criminal investigations or they could be stolen or misused.

Apple recently introduced a choice to fully end-to-end encrypt backup copies of iCloud accounts, which means not even Apple could unlock your scrambled backup texts.

If you pick that option, Apple can’t help recover your chats if you forget your account password.

This risk is why Apple makes this feature a pain to turn on, and requires you to list a plan B if you forget your password, such as a personal contact who knows your decryption code.

WhatsApp has an option to save backup copies of your messages to Apple’s or Google’s cloud. WhatsApp doesn’t save those backups.

For Messages by Google, the company says chats backed up to the company’s computers are automatically encrypted – as long as your Android phone has a screen that you need to unlock with a password or another method.

Google gets an asterisk because it says it cannot unscramble your backup texts in its cloud. But it can for attachments like photos.

Meta Messenger has been testing an option for people to turn on fully end-to-end encrypted backups.

Does the app save your account details in a way it can access?

  • WhatsApp: Yes

  • Apple’s Messages: Yes

  • Messages by Google: Yes

  • Meta Messenger: Yes

  • Signal: Yes*

Most end-to-end encrypted apps save some “metadata,” or details about you or what you do with the app. They can retrieve the metadata if necessary.

The app companies aren’t necessarily specific about which metadata they save and can unlock. This information can make you less private– and it can help in criminal prosecutions.

WhatsApp, for example, may have your general physical location when you use the app and the names of your group chats. Under legal orders, WhatsApp has the ability to log the phone numbers your number communicates with.

WhatsApp says these details can help identify spammers and aid in investigations of potential criminal activity including people who share images of child sexual abuse.

Signal is a yes with an asterisk because it doesn’t save much the app can retrieve – just a phone number used to set up an account and the last time the account connected to Signal.

Are disappearing messages an option?

  • WhatsApp: Yes

  • Apple’s Messages: No

  • Messages by Google: No

  • Meta Messenger: Yes

  • Signal: Yes

Even with end-to-end encrypted texts, someone on the receiving end could leak them or turn them into the police.

For extra privacy, WhatsApp, Meta Messenger, and Signal have an option to set texts to automatically delete in as little as 24 hours from the phones of everyone in a chat.

This isn’t ironclad, either. Someone could take a photo of your messages before they disappear.

Does the app use the Signal protocol?

  • WhatsApp: Yes

  • Apple’s Messages: No

  • Messages by Google: Yes

  • Meta Messenger: Yes

  • Signal: Yes

The Signal protocol is considered a gold standard. No one yet has found holes in the end-to-end encryption technology.

Read more:

view more: next ›