A Karen and a cop can’t put someone in jail. It takes a prosecutor, a judge and a jury of her peers.
This is not factual. A cop can bring anyone into jail that they have just about any made up reason to.
It takes all those extra individual to put you in prison.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/jail-vs-prison-difference
and will just pop off fast solutions to things like the deep human need for connection like “use zoom, duh.”
There are other needs as well. Like not being imprisoned. And thinking about why you fled from the country in the first place and searched for additional citizenship might have helped make such a decision to not find yourself in such a situation.
I love that you glossed over the actual argument though! All while assuming that you were right. You don't know why she was there... But assuming that telecommunication wouldn't have been sufficient in order to maintain her freedom... That's just silly.
Stopping processes is actually a user space action.
Now you backpedal and say
Pretty much all code is making requests to the kernel.
But I don't know what I'm talking about? Sure. We'll go with that if it makes you feel good. I only literally taught it at a post-grad level at an R1 institution, but what do I know.
It’s side stepping the kernel. That’s the whole point.
You're getting it! Kind of at least. The anti-cheat actually modifies the kernel (in an extension kind of way, like drivers do). That's the point though. Which seems to have repeatedly whooshed over your head. But I can only say it in so many ways and be ignored. Good luck. Hope I don't run into your code.
Stopping processes is actually a user space action. You can do it without admin rights btw. Even if it popped the admin screen that’s still not a kernel level action.
Absolutely not. Task management is the job of the operating system/kernel. You can request to end a job/task. The kernel will do it on it's own time. UAP prompts are attempts to elevate permissions so that you can access higher kernel calls.
https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/111625/how-does-linux-kill-a-process
You can make requests the to the kernel. If you have permission/ownership to the process the kernel will work through the sigterm/sigkill to meet your request. It is not a user space action at all to kill a process, you make requests to the kernel to do it. Hell in linux it's even more obvious as you can instruct the kernel on HOW you would like to kill the task and even then it may not follow your direction. https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man1/kill.1.html with kill being a kernel tool. If you spawned the process, then you have permission/ownership to the process. But my point in the previous post was that anti-cheats can reach into the system, reading dlls and such that are absolutely NOT user space to begin with, require elevation beyond user space to install.
Yeah that it’s considered malware. I did Google it and there’s nothing saying that.
Seriously? You can't find anything? You sure about that? Cause I can literally pull up thousands of articles and forum threads by literally typing "is vanguard anti-cheat malware?" or "is easy anti-cheat malware?"
https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topic/288793-easy-anti-cheat-launcher-detection/
Heuristics detect these things for what they are. Anti-virus software have to whitelist them because people choose to play the games anyway.
https://www.techguy.org/threads/is-valorant-vanguard-a-malicious-rootkit-or-not.1267682/
https://www.pcgamer.com/the-controversy-over-riots-vanguard-anti-cheat-software-explained/
The name is appropriate, because Vanguard doesn't just sniff around for cheats when Valorant is running: It starts up with Windows and keeps an eye on other processes whether or not you're playing Valorant at the time. [...] Vanguard detects software with vulnerabilities which could be exploited by cheat makers, and blocks some of it.
https://www.sp-cy.com/article/is-valorants-anticheat-spyware/
Vanguard cannot be easily fully disabled since after manually quitting the process, a system reboot will be required to be able to open Valorant again.
The EULA prevents any legal recourse against Riot Games.
Valorant/Vanguard sends encrypted data to Riot. Which is Chinese owned by a giant corporation called Tencent.
Let's attack this question from another perspective. Do you trust a games developer to properly develop kernel code? Most people BARELY trust Microsoft to do it these days. And you can't review/evaluate it yourself at all. You have no fucking clue what they're doing and never will. We've seen what happens when random companies inject shit into the kernel like crowdstrike did. You think that these anti-cheat softwares are acting in your interest when they're being implemented and paid by a corporation? How can you look at these anti-cheats that have made backdoors on systems, cause people everywhere unstable kernels/BSODs, send data about your system without permission, interacts with software on your system that isn't their code, etc... and say they're not malicious?
Visiting family perhaps? Oh well then I guess she deserves it for having the audacious stupidity to visit her parents in a shitty country where shitty things happen?
Honestly... Yes. You left the country. Obtained a second citizenship. And donated to the opposing side of an active war. If you have something in between your ears you stay out of the country. I'm not here to victim blame at all. If you need to see family, I get it... but Zoom exists. You can't argue
There are also family, professional opportunities, and cultural ties to consider.
While in the very next sentence identifying that she did exactly that and moved anyway.
but so far at least I’m happy with the bandwidth.
Oh for sure, it's boatloads and I love it... but I'm in the market for a /28. I want to hand them like $40 extra a month. LET ME PAY YOU QUANTUM/LUMEN/CENTURYLINK/LEVEL3. It's effectively free money as once it's setup there's nothing that changes or goes down. There's so little maintenance/upkeep cost to it that I just don't understand why they don't want to print free money.
This is already a risk whether via the existing thumbnail storage
Not anymore. You can opt out of it for the most part.
# Leave images unchanged, don't generate any local thumbnails for post urls. Instead the the
# Opengraph image is directly returned as thumbnail
"None"
Yeah that was 19.4. It's doesn't proxy everything unless explicitly set to. Just thumbnails I believe. But I could be wrong. And many instance owners would be allergic to that as it leaves them on the hook for storing content. For example... someone posts CSAM... a copy of that is now on your server. You get police raided and you're fucked.
Actually going over it briefly looks like it has a few available options for what it will cache...
I refuse to enable it myself for the above reason. I would venture 99% of instances out there would also refuse for liability and bandwidth costs.
Can you see which communities I follow?
Wouldn't need to see it directly. If someone was to tag enough posts they could deduce it over time. Eg, I could post on every community on every lemmy in the fediverse and over time I can be reasonably sure which communities you follow as you'd see these post in your feed and tracking images would populate your view of them as you scrolled. Would take very little automation to do it.
Which feeds I watch (and when I do that)?
Yes.. because it's possible to use "normal" images to track who's downloading those images, what addresses/user agent/referrers over time is powerful. After enough time, it's entirely possible to deduce which feeds/communities you're watching. Eg, if I post 10 different items, and 3 of them come back to your specific IP address, I would have a really good estimate on which feeds you're likely on. Do this at scale and I bet you could deduce it completely and probably with much less time and hassle than you're thinking. Hell because of my reverse proxy I can see EVERYONE who loads my profile picture. I see ALL the users to run into my posts on complete fucking accident. Lemmy loads /inbox to pull that data.
Hell this is the core reason why everyone pushes back on 3rd party cookies these days. It made this tracking trivial. Tagging every page with some image or asset that forces a connection is effectively the same thing.
Who I interact with through DMs?
I've already stated clearly that this would be the hardest thing. Just because there's one or 2 things that would be hard or impossible to obtain (even over time) passively or as a complete outsider doesn't make the rest of the argument wrong. All it would take is either site operator to leak the data, any type of MITM, etc... to leak the plaintext content of your DMs. Hell federation leaks where it sends data outside of the expected subscribers has happened. Then you have to also realize that many instances use services like Cloudflare or other WAF solutions to stop DDOS's and such.... Those nodes can read the plaintext DMs and all federation data. Any malicious actor that manages to break any single part of the chain has access to it all... and it can be quite trivial in many instances to do so.
The Lemmy system is not "secure". It's not meant to be. Everything on the fediverse is public and all of your actions here are trackable by many parties in many ways even outside of the operators of both ends of the federation action itself. Including how you're connecting and using the system.
DMs alone, and actual hashed passwords are not really needed for a third party threat to act malicious and get all of the aggregated data they'd ever want. You pointed out specifics, I answered those specifics. Then you pivoted to other shit that I ALREADY outlined. This argument is super disingenuous.
Source for what in specific?
That stopping processes is a kernel action? Go ahead. Open powershell and ask it to close some other system process... The UAP prompt (if you're on windows, linux will just fail silently most of the time unless you sudo or are root) that shows up is the kernel validating that you even have permissions to do that. The kernel handles ALL task scheduling/management. When you close something you're asking the kernel to do it. The kernel also handles ALL file management and driver management (drivers being extensions of the kernel). So the fact that it can read other active DLLs and such hooked into other processes (say your graphics drivers) is literally proof.
That industry agrees that it's malware? Depends on which part of industry I suppose. But if it's able to do all these actions at the kernel level, and attached itself it to other software to install, often doesn't uninstall when you remove the game it was attached to, AND gets flagged by anti-viruses that don't have it whitelisted yet... It's definitionally malware. Go search for "Is malware". Very few people will argue that they're not.
Hell it's possible for anti-cheats to write to UEFI if they really wanted to. There's no legitimate reason for that level of access, 0, none.
I've addressed the points you've brought up. I run my own instance. I can collect just about everything in the DB tables I've seen without being logged into the instance with some external work.
Are you trying to get my point? If you have a specific item that you believe is stored on a lemmy server that you think isn't possible to obtain. I'm all ears. otherwise I think this conversation is done. This kind of response is pointless and I'm not interested in continuing if you're going to act like that.
The hardest thing to collect would be private messages, and login information (which is hashed btw, so even your server operator doesn't really know it). But messages are plaintext and openly federated. All the other information is really really easy to collect through other means.
TOTP is cheaper.
SMS is actually expensive at scale. An example would be Signal, the messenger app that doesn't use SMS. They have overhead for sending backup codes/new account creation/Verification/etc... https://www.wired.com/story/signal-operating-costs/ 6 million a year. API integrations for SMS messages/codes are still like 1-5 cents per message.
TOTP's requirements? A reasonably accurate clock on the server, and storing the shared secret in a database.