Natanael_L

13 ms·

91.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
What you're linking has now literally been edited with an update to suggest the tool age. The idea that "AES is enough" is like saying you don't need better winter clothes to go skiing because you have a good helmet. The
92.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
Getting my comment flagged doesn't make you right, just so you know. Just see my list of links below. It's undeniable that the very reason why people use the term MAGA is to voice support for hypernationalism, as a way to justify
93.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
Also, funny how my comments got flagged and downvoted. Is the truth so painful?
94.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
I'm bringing it up because it's relevant because other people do that. What you personally believe isn't relevant to this argument, because this argument of mine is about the worst content which your proposed rules would
95.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
We also purposefully do not extend that protection to literally everything distinct about a person. Even stuff like California's laws only protect employees from their employers when engaging in political action. There's no univer
96.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
No it's not. It's literally any faction with hardline dogmatic views. An extremist faction that manage to kill all their opponents doesn't suddenly become non-extremist when they're the new majority. I have seen the argu
97.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
The evidence is literally all over his Twitter account. Like considering people murdering others by hitting with cars to be fine people. Promoting "false flag" conspiracy theories when his supporters attack people, claiming democr
98.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
There's a very wide range of sleazy but not illegal behavior as well as hard to prove illegal acts which also might affect the equation. For a conference organizer, the primary question is how to make it a positive experience for as ma
99.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
And what makes you believe that? Literally the people who introduced and promotes it are the people who promote its use by extremists. I've told you so already. What makes you believe the term still don't carry such meanings? Indi
100.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
Not really. It would be quite illegal in most places, sure, but I simply wouldn't want to go there in the first place if you banned people like me. Of course that becomes a problem is a large part of society does the same. Which is why
101.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
* whatever. Didn't say I consider myself as some benevolent dictator. It just means it doesn't seem bad enough on its own to require proactive intervention. * see above * your misinterpretation of my comment almost seems deliberat
102.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
So you would let yourself be treated by a doctor that is open with wanting people like you to die? You want police that have stated they hate people like you? You'd trust a cleaner that despise you? I will let you state your opinion, b
103.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
Why is this question even being asked? The answer is everybody , in their own respective spaces. It's not me but not others. It's me AND all others. If I run a bar, I get to kick out customers who voice despicable opinions. Exa
104.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
SHOULD does not equal MAY
105.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
For sensitive files with known names, you should be able to set that the cache is only valid for requests from the same host website (as the server might decide to send another response when the host is different). That would fix the sidech
106.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
All browsers on iOS are Safari wrappers
107.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
Password authenticated key exchange algorithms (PAKE) solves the dictionary of secrets problem, by hiding the password from the server.
108.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
We could call it a Supreme Court
109.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
Declaring them absolute also don't solve these problems, because sometimes you can end up with conflicts between absolute rights, where you are not able to protect both rights at once.
110.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
They can host their own if it's legal, can't they? So sure, kick them off if they're disruptive and hateful. They don't deserve a megaphone.
111.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
Signal won't validate the session key via that mechanism, each pair of communicating users have to do that themselves
112.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
By that logic we shouldn't recommend cars with high safety ratings, because we can always train users to drive motorized unicycles at 200 MPH. Clearly there's no fault with the unicycle regardless of how many people crash, it beha
113.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
But you can't trivially define your own scopes wherein each has their own independent set of trusted CA:s. That's part of what's missing. But default it's universal or per program. Just look at every kind of umbrella org
114.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
With "Johnny you're fired", it's clear that many clients don't correctly validate PGP signatures
115.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
Still under active development, nothing is really ready to use yet
116.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
The problem with this is that a tool that is too generic is itself dangerous, because it creates cross protocol attacks and confusion attacks like in https://efail.de for PGP email. I think that a better approach is to bind iden
117.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
As I've mentioned in another thread, I think we're more likely to get there via the route of E2EE documents collaboration tools. Something that cleanly breaks away from the email model, and adds enough value to make the switch wor
118.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
The problem is nobody uses this right
119.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
I think we're more likely to "accidentally" end up there via E2EE document collaboration tools that are in development now. One day, a while after they become usable and common, people will just realize they've been shar
120.
by Natanael_L 7y ago
You're thinking of PGP web of trust, Signal doesn't have that

More ›