3 ms·

Yeah, the author seems to confuse "security" and "privacy". They are not always interchangeable. Certainly not in the case of email - "private" email services a

Yeah, the author seems to confuse "security" and "privacy". They are not always interchangeable. Certainly not in the case of email - "private" email services are almost always far easier to crack into than gmail. Author also seems to think reinstalling the OS somehow makes you less vulnerable. And that compiling source code magically makes the resulting binary safer. And just a giant LOL at the suggestion to upload files to virustotal at the end of that wall of paranoia-driven privacy tips. Contrast, man.

viraptor 10y ago
> Author also seems to think reinstalling the OS somehow makes you less vulnerable. Depends on the context you're working in. I wouldn't recommend anyone actually do that, but it sounds like a poor-man's readonly-system solution. If you want to ensure that your system doesn't (for example) preserve rootkits across system restarts, you've got a few good and bad choices: r/o system r/w (or no) data, restarting from golden image, wiping machine clean, file integrity checkers.
- scrollaway 10y ago
  But the point is that wiping the OS isn't preventative. Wiping a clean system is pointless, and wiping an infected one without knowing how it was infected isn't just a recipe for getting infected again, it also gives a completely false sense of security and can get you to start skipping actual preventative measures because "the system will be gone in a couple of weeks anyway".
  - viraptor 10y ago
    (for the record, I'm not saying this is a good idea for personal desktops, just discussing the theory) No, it's not preventative. But wiping an infected one is not pointless either. Especially if you can upgrade all the relevant applications after each reinstall, potentially closing previous issues. In some contexts (small town library without IT staff, shared computer, no knowledge how to do stateless terminals), it would be an improvement over what's currently happening.
    - scrollaway 10y ago
      Agreed, it's not a bad idea for shared desktops.

viraptor 10y ago

> Author also seems to think reinstalling the OS somehow makes you less vulnerable. Depends on the context you're working in. I wouldn't recommend anyone actually do that, but it sounds like a poor-man's readonly-system solution. If you want to ensure that your system doesn't (for example) preserve rootkits across system restarts, you've got a few good and bad choices: r/o system r/w (or no) data, restarting from golden image, wiping machine clean, file integrity checkers.

scrollaway 10y ago
But the point is that wiping the OS isn't preventative. Wiping a clean system is pointless, and wiping an infected one without knowing how it was infected isn't just a recipe for getting infected again, it also gives a completely false sense of security and can get you to start skipping actual preventative measures because "the system will be gone in a couple of weeks anyway".
- viraptor 10y ago
  (for the record, I'm not saying this is a good idea for personal desktops, just discussing the theory) No, it's not preventative. But wiping an infected one is not pointless either. Especially if you can upgrade all the relevant applications after each reinstall, potentially closing previous issues. In some contexts (small town library without IT staff, shared computer, no knowledge how to do stateless terminals), it would be an improvement over what's currently happening.
  - scrollaway 10y ago
    Agreed, it's not a bad idea for shared desktops.