3 ms·

For making your life living hell in the name of overbearing security measures.

UweSchmidt 12y ago
Ah yes. The occasional click to confirm this or whitelist that, that's definitively "living hell". It's the users' resistance to the slightest inconvenience that makes security so hard.
- fsniper 12y ago
  It's really a hell. Average website over there is using at least 3 - 4 external domains for css, js, fonts and so. Getting a working website without nearly whitelisting many of them is highly improbable right now.
  - UweSchmidt 12y ago
    Yes but you gain a lot of interesting information about what's going on, plus you are back in control. Whitelist places you trust. Keep things blocked that you don't like. If that breaks the experience, walk.
    - fsniper 12y ago
      Sure. I used script blockers for a while. But after having to whitelist a huge number of them and loosing very long and precious time, I gave in. I do not put sensitive and important data on my computer. (Actually I was not doing that for a very long time even before giving in.) I always work on remote hosts. Therefore I treat my desktop as a security research one. Of course I would not do that on my desktop I were really working with crackme binaries ;)
      - UweSchmidt 12y ago
        Additionally to then there's also the various things that track identity and behaviour. Tell me what you search and click, and I'll tell you what you think? (That's not fixed with a simple add-on of course.)
        fsniper 12y ago
        There is also google. But we use them in a way or not. There are some nut-jobs or bad-ass people out there not using google, going with security enhanced phones and ddg. This does not make average or the 95percentile bad behaved. This makes us only low security sensitive and targets.
      - xenophonf 12y ago
        Regarding "I do not put sensitive and important data on my computer" and "I always work on remote hosts", I must respectfully disagree. Never mind the fact that you set a bad example for newbies, being so caviler with your own safety harms the security of the rest of us. Downloading and executing random software off the Internet---the raison d'être of modern web browsers---is a good way to get owned. Just because you don't use your computer for anything important doesn't mean that it cannot be compromised and used to attack me. Plus, if you use your computer to log into other computers to do real work, then your computer is extremely important! A successful compromise would give attackers all the same remote access you have. Admittedly, that's not what your everyday, ordinary malware is after, but it's the principal of the thing that bothers me.
        fsniper 12y ago
        I'm not telling my setup is bullet proof. I'm just saying I gave in on some threats. I do not try to protect against all threats via all possible ways. I try to make my sensitive data to be unattractive and harder to get. Latest part that you edited out was a question I would raise but it seems like you also think that would not hold. Even though this setup is not secure. It's more secure than many everyday usage patterns. In a way at least..
  - josephlord 12y ago
    It isn't generally that bad and if something wants 25 separate route tld's I often browse away.
xenophonf 12y ago
For most people Ghostery and AdBlock Edge are good enough. I'm a pretty conservative, default-deny kind of hacker, so the results of my cost-benefit analysis are a little... different... than most. :)

Ah yes. The occasional click to confirm this or whitelist that, that's definitively "living hell". It's the users' resistance to the slightest inconvenience that makes security so hard.

fsniper 12y ago
It's really a hell. Average website over there is using at least 3 - 4 external domains for css, js, fonts and so. Getting a working website without nearly whitelisting many of them is highly improbable right now.
- UweSchmidt 12y ago
  Yes but you gain a lot of interesting information about what's going on, plus you are back in control. Whitelist places you trust. Keep things blocked that you don't like. If that breaks the experience, walk.
  - fsniper 12y ago
    Sure. I used script blockers for a while. But after having to whitelist a huge number of them and loosing very long and precious time, I gave in. I do not put sensitive and important data on my computer. (Actually I was not doing that for a very long time even before giving in.) I always work on remote hosts. Therefore I treat my desktop as a security research one. Of course I would not do that on my desktop I were really working with crackme binaries ;)
    - UweSchmidt 12y ago
      Additionally to then there's also the various things that track identity and behaviour. Tell me what you search and click, and I'll tell you what you think? (That's not fixed with a simple add-on of course.)
      - fsniper 12y ago
        There is also google. But we use them in a way or not. There are some nut-jobs or bad-ass people out there not using google, going with security enhanced phones and ddg. This does not make average or the 95percentile bad behaved. This makes us only low security sensitive and targets.
    - xenophonf 12y ago
      Regarding "I do not put sensitive and important data on my computer" and "I always work on remote hosts", I must respectfully disagree. Never mind the fact that you set a bad example for newbies, being so caviler with your own safety harms the security of the rest of us. Downloading and executing random software off the Internet---the raison d'être of modern web browsers---is a good way to get owned. Just because you don't use your computer for anything important doesn't mean that it cannot be compromised and used to attack me. Plus, if you use your computer to log into other computers to do real work, then your computer is extremely important! A successful compromise would give attackers all the same remote access you have. Admittedly, that's not what your everyday, ordinary malware is after, but it's the principal of the thing that bothers me.
      - fsniper 12y ago
        I'm not telling my setup is bullet proof. I'm just saying I gave in on some threats. I do not try to protect against all threats via all possible ways. I try to make my sensitive data to be unattractive and harder to get. Latest part that you edited out was a question I would raise but it seems like you also think that would not hold. Even though this setup is not secure. It's more secure than many everyday usage patterns. In a way at least..
- josephlord 12y ago
  It isn't generally that bad and if something wants 25 separate route tld's I often browse away.

xenophonf 12y ago

For most people Ghostery and AdBlock Edge are good enough. I'm a pretty conservative, default-deny kind of hacker, so the results of my cost-benefit analysis are a little... different... than most. :)