RL_Quine

53 ms·

541.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
Is the application bundle > 100MB for no reason? If so, it's electron.
542.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
The intended use of this is "maintaining" internet of things devices. So it's not really meant to be a secure system, think of it as a botnet CnC and this makes a lot more sense. It's why the system is supposed to be run
543.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
Yes. You can always make an emergency call, without service from your actual provided, and without a SIM card.
544.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
So, a captcha :)
545.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
The only people really promoting Lightning are those who haven't used it.
546.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
Problem is, things like this will never be used. Everybody wants to have their own application chrome, so these sort of features end up buried and forgotten.
547.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
Don’t confuse the security levels here. Keybase for the most part is not forward secure which has significantly different properties.
548.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
Easier, just exfiltrate through DNS which is always whitelisted.
549.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
Basically nothing for wireguard itself. I've run it on some seriously underpowered hardware and it seems to have basically no performance impact to speak of. I probably have it set up on around 30 machines presently and have used it in
550.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
For most people it's dynamic. Mine is dynamic with the PPPoE fibre session.
551.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
I've honestly not had a lot of issues with that up until now. Real world it doesn't seem to be blocked by a whole lot of things, except where you only have port 80 and 443 anyway. I've actually seen it work in a lot of places
552.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
The variance month to month is far higher than that for most pools. Nobody would ever notice, trust me.
553.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
Yes. The response time to that will be much less than the time to perform an attack with that hash rate though. We’ve seen people mine for literally 4 months on a broken pool that produced no income before they noticed.
554.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
You can probably assume that most pools are skimming or cheating in some way, they'd never be caught.
555.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
Replace GPU with CPU in my answer. It applies to all of the algorithms in one way or another. ASIC resistant is an oxymoron.
556.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
You're fundamentally missing the point somehow. When you connect to a pool, you give them absolute trust over what you're mining using your hardware with the expectation that they will pay you for it later. In a route hijack, an a
557.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
> No idea if mining pools or the stratum protocol has added countermeasures to prevent such an attack in the future. Not really. There's some discussion about Stratum2 having stronger authentication, and systems like BetterHash to t
558.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
This is exactly how it works! Most miners are connected to pools like slushpool, f2pool, etc over unencrypted an unauthenticated links. If you can modify this traffic you can steal the hashrate, because you can modify the work being sent t
559.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
AWS and Azure would be using CPUs, GPUs, and FPGAs, which have nowhere near the sort of speeds as dedicated hardware. It's something in the order of a trillion desktop CPUs to equal the same hashrate as the bitcoin network is currently
560.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
All miners connect to pools using a protocol called stratum. This is JSON piped over TCP with newline terminations. There is no authentication for this protocol and no encryption. You can simply intercept the communication here and have all
561.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
A GPU is an ASIC, which can mine RandomX. The idea that you could make something that's able to only be computed by a general purpose GPU, and not something more specialized, is just absurd. Even if that's just removing the unnece
562.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
> Computational power is not a good proof of anything. It devours energy and disproportionately rewards weird market actors (like people with custom mines ASICs). It's literally what it says it is, proof of work. Consumption of elec
563.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
Why are you assuming that hashrate would be obtained legally? If you're already assuming criminality, go all out! BGP route hijack the unencrypted, unauthenticated mining traffic and call it your own. Cost is basically nothing to do so
564.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
If you’re injecting into the browser you don’t need to worry about SSL- that’s handled for you.
565.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
I can’t work out if you’re attempting to be a dramatization of the problem or not. Low latency developing “incurring build times” in particular doesn’t make a lot of sense. It just takes considered design, nothing about the result is necess
566.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
Lets be realistic, no "apps", front end websites etc are hitting sub-second latencies for anything. Hacker News, and the linked article are stark exceptions where the page load itself was under 200ms for me. Posting this comment o
567.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
When your device is trying to find networks its seen previously, it for some reason broadcasts the ESSID, the human readable name of the networks it knows about. A lot of these are globally unique, as many routers come with a default name w
568.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
Right. We're just moving the DMZ, and that's for a lot of cases totally fine. Rather than how people would assume it works like this. CPU -> LTE Modem || DMZ || Cellphone Provider We have this for the Pinephone.
569.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
There's not really any meaningful encryption in LTE in the real world, that there is is vulnerable to all sorts of nasty downgrade attacks. You're better forgetting there is any and assuming that it's all in cleartext. Any th
570.
by RL_Quine 7y ago
There's still commercial products that will track your wifi/bluetooth MAC, and probably ISMI as well. You're not preventing this sort of thing with that sort of behavior and just making things awkward for yourself. If I can f

More ›