chappedafloat

joined 1 month ago
[–] chappedafloat@lemmy.wtf 14 points 1 month ago

It's normal but people don't like it. Just ask the people you know if they are ok with all the mass surveillance, they don't like it. But it's just too difficult for them to do anything about it. They don't like this "small beginner steps" approach to privacy. They want complete privacy without effort or nothing at all and they don't want to pay for it. It's laughable and sad but that's my experience talking about privacy with people. But the point here i guess is that mass surveillance has been forced on us all. They create a new wonderful technology with lots of use case but then they also add in some mass surveillance on it as well as a bonus.

[–] chappedafloat@lemmy.wtf -2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You think i'm intentionally spreading misinformation and I think you are a fed. I won't argue more against you but anyone fair and objective can see that the mistake I made was a simple mistake to make. feds have as a fact been spying on our push notifications in secret and i thought that included signal's push notifications. Simple mistake which I already admitted to being wrong about. You are making this into a bigger deal than it has to be because you are a fed.

You also are intentionally lying (because you are a fed) about that is the only thing the topic is about. For example, if someone is using Signal on Windows OS then I think there's a high chance the conversation isn't private. But I think you already know all this but you pretend not to.

[–] chappedafloat@lemmy.wtf 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

privacy is about making effort to protect it. With your logic you should just use google chrome browser and be signed in to google because it makes an easier experience. Then install alexa in your home and make it a smart home, it also makes life easier.

[–] chappedafloat@lemmy.wtf 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

whonix docs is very good to learn about this stuff

[–] chappedafloat@lemmy.wtf 3 points 1 month ago (16 children)

Do you think it's better to use a VPN if you aren't using TOR Browser?

[–] chappedafloat@lemmy.wtf 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

You can copy the part of the url watch?v=4sfIBRTcRpU and use it in the frontend you prefer.

[–] chappedafloat@lemmy.wtf 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Good suggestion about analyzing network packets. I don't know anything about how to do that except there are tools like wireshark which can help but I still have no knowledge on doing that. And I think you would need to make a script to monitor it for you because it would probably only (talking theoretically now) phone home very quickly on rare occasions, it wouldn't be continous. So your script would have to be able to detect these short and rare anomalies. I don't know anything about how to do any of this though but I will add it to my todo list down the road.

Another problem is you might need to get the NSA's attention first and make yourself a target. You also need to make sure there is no other way for them to spy on you, so they are left with only using intel me as their last resort.

So because I don't know anything about analyzing network packets I can't say if you're right but it does seem convincing. And it would be great for security in general as well, not only for investigating intel ME. I will definitely learn more about this later.

[–] chappedafloat@lemmy.wtf 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I think a big part of it comes down to what threats are there in theory and what threats are there actually. The problem is that the theoretical threats are possible, they're not unrealistic and that's why it doesn't feel good to not be protected against the theoretical threats but we maybe need to try and accept they are too unlikely to be active threats. Trying to protect from theoretical threats is kind of like trying to protect your house from having an airplane fall down from the sky into your house. Or maybe this is just my trying to cope.

And how do we know what threats are theoretical vs active threats? Just have to keep learning and learning, it takes a long time. Talking in privacy and security communities can help speed up the learning.

[–] chappedafloat@lemmy.wtf 1 points 1 month ago

Yeah, i did use words that express feelings in this topic I created and it was intentional because when people have to deal with something that involves uncertainty or something so advanced they don't understand it entirely then they can become uncomfortable and scared even though maybe there isn't something to be scared about or maybe the fear is justified.

My post was intended to be a discussion starter so we can dig into this, get to the truth and help everyone including myself to understand everything better.

 

Convincing people to use apps such as Signal is hard work and most can't be convinced. But with those you manage to convince, do you feel happy to talk to them on Signal?

The problem is these people use Signal on Android/IOS which can't be trusted and IOS has recently been in the news for having a backdoor. And it has also been revealed that american feds are able to read everyone's push notifications and they do this as mass surveillance.

So not only do you have to convince people to use Signal which is an incredibly difficult challenge. You also have to convince them to go into settings to disable message and sender being included in the push notifications. And then there's the big question is the Android and IOS operating systems are doing mass surveillance anyway. And many people find it taking a lot of effort to type on the phone so they install Signal on the computer which is a mac or Windows OS.

So I don't think I feel comfortable sending messages in Signal but it's better than Whatsapp.

These were some thoughts to get the discussion started and set the context.

[–] chappedafloat@lemmy.wtf 4 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Why not is the question and that comes down to guessing. Sheep do what they are told so don't need to guess much there. Those who are not sheep have to go through a long journey to gradually keep increasing their privacy and unlearn the sheep habits we've been conditioned to have.

The end goal is to throw away your phone because you can do everything on your computer instead including buying a phone number, using voip and take and make calls. Phones are unnecessary spy devices used by sheep.

 

When it comes to Intel Management Engine, I actually think it's not a threat if you neutralize it. I mean to just set the HAP bit on it. Because if that isn't enough then that means all computers in the world which use Intel CPU can be accessed by NSA but if NSA had this much power then it seems obvious that they aren't using it and why wouldn't they use it?

There's a github project to neutralize/disbale Intel ME: https://github.com/corna/me_cleaner Disable is overwriting intel ME as much as possible with zeros, leaving only a little remaining to be able to boot the computer. The newer the intel chips are, the less likely it is to be able to disable it. But all chip sets can be neutralized which means to set the HAP bit which is an official feature. In theory we can't actually trust the HAP bit to really disable intel ME permanently. It's more like asking Intel to do what they have promised because it's proprietary. But I think it really does permanently disable it because otherwise NSA would be abusing this power.

That's why I think the newer laptop models are better because it's probably not necessary to disable, it's enough to just neutralize withthe HAP bit. And with a newer modern laptop they can have open source Embedded Controller firmware which is better than proprietary Embedded Controller firmware.

I'm interested to hear what you think as well.

view more: next ›