armadyl

7 ms·

61.
by armadyl 2mo ago
I agree with you. It’s a nice touch. I also have no issue with the API, people here are definitely overreacting to it’s existence.
62.
by armadyl 2mo ago
A lot of people seem to ignore this point when it comes to Proton’s E2EE of emails at rest. It wasn’t even a year ago when the US government subpoenaed a Pennsylvania man’s entire Gmail inbox because he wrote a letter to a DHS attorney. Thi
63.
by armadyl 2mo ago
> Proton doesn’t encrypt the metadata and unless they’re proton too it’s not E2E To be fair though your emails are E2EE at rest in your inbox, so in the event of seizure or a subpoena they can’t hand over anything usable aside from metad
64.
by armadyl 2mo ago
I agree. I only really watch one or two streamers though both who I’m subscribed to so whatever. It is painful if I check into a random stream though lol
65.
by armadyl 2mo ago
I think they relocated but yes that’s partially why I don’t use it anymore.
66.
by armadyl 2mo ago
Yeah my comment wasn't me trying to say they weren't trustworthy, I've actually purchased both AdGuard and Wipr but I stick with AdGuard since I felt like it was better. And the dev of Wipr seems to be transparent for sure. H
67.
by armadyl 2mo ago
Realistically with the new uBOL you’re just limited to the amount of rules you can use (I think it’s like 300k), no cosmetic filtering in default mode, no script injection in default mode, “limited dynamic filtering capabilities,” and needi
68.
by armadyl 2mo ago
Nice, last time I heard about wblock felt like years ago and I'm not sure why I didn't consider it. These days I don't run on-device adblock, I just do DNS filtering for the most part but I'll check it out, not sure I wa
69.
by armadyl 2mo ago
Regarding the cosmetic filtering and scriptlet injection, are these even relevant? Most uBO users already give full access to the extension, so they'll probably do the same to uBOL to (most permissions + complete filtering mode). So ba
70.
by armadyl 2mo ago
Yes, in practice I have noticed no difference between uBO and uBOL. The only thing I've seen it not block are Twtich ads which the normal uBO doesn't block anyway. There are probably additional things behind the scenes just due to
71.
by armadyl 2mo ago
FYI uBlock Origin Lite on iOS is inferior to AdGuard and (I think) Wipr as it's just a WebExtension, so it'll only block ads within Safari itself. AdGuard and Wipr use both the Web Extension and Content Blocker APIs, so they'
72.
by armadyl 2mo ago
Except normal uBO also failed to block Twitch ads so there’s no difference here.
73.
by armadyl 2mo ago
But you can do this with uBOL? I’m not sure what you mean. I have multiple rules to hide elements on various sites. With HN I hide elements and can give it a custom CSS dark mode through uBOL. Works on both desktop and iOS.
74.
by armadyl 2mo ago
> The issue is that adblocking doesn't work with it Except this is objectively not true… uBlock Origin Lite is nearly as good as uBO and blocks nearly everything except for mostly Twitch ads. Manifest v3 is a big security upgrade an
75.
by armadyl 2mo ago
uBlock Origin Lite is available on iOS/iPadOS for Safari however last time I checked it’s inferior to AdGuard/Wipr due to the API it uses (it only works in Safari but doesn’t provide ad blocking in the web views like the other two
76.
by armadyl 2mo ago
Rather than introducing additional attack surface and privacy risks with yet another extension you can just use archive.is/archive.ph instead of Bypass Paywalls Clean. Or, just pay for journalism since it’s not free to do.
77.
by armadyl 2mo ago
What’s detestable is Firefox’s lack of security and Mozilla’s priorities surrounding it compared to Chromium https://www.reddit.com/r/GrapheneOS/comments/1unhtxu/initial...
78.
by armadyl 2mo ago
I mean you’re right about the awareness of it due to ad blocking but > Nobody knows any other difference unless they are an extension developers or worked on making the Internet a worse place. MV3 comes with a ton of security improvement
79.
by armadyl 2mo ago
Because so-called “trusted” apps that you do give root to have no chance of getting compromised, right?
80.
by armadyl 2mo ago
Counter-evidence: Repos such as AUR That blast radius coupled with (non-Android) Linux's atrocious security is a far worse option
81.
by armadyl 3mo ago
Tap to pay apps, if the developer is trustworthy or if it’s from your bank, are significantly more secure than even carrying a physical card around as your payment is now locked behind biometrics/a pin. Also de-googling isn’t the point
82.
by armadyl 3mo ago
99.9% of people would not intentionally enable ads even if they liked the content this is an insanely unrealistic option.
83.
by armadyl 3mo ago
More like the quality ones get their content ripped and viewed for free with tools like archive.is or people just posting the full text in comments on this forum even. Subs only aren’t viable for publications with full staff imo
84.
by armadyl 4mo ago
> But no one said we have to copy that flawed concept. macOS and Linux already have a good solution, requiring your full unlock password in a privileged dialog to authorize changes. You use operating systems that have significantly worse
85.
by armadyl 4mo ago
You’re right, they just fall for installing updates or CLI tools which install compromised dependencies and run wild on a rooted system before getting caught 24 hours later.
86.
by armadyl 4mo ago
You are free to make your own build of GrapheneOS with root access and have extremely reduced security. Just don’t expect support on the forums and waste everyone’s time when something happens.
87.
by armadyl 4mo ago
All of which have beyond horrific security. GrapheneOS is the only acceptable alternative from mainstream Android.
88.
by armadyl 4mo ago
It's not really about supply chain security it's about the hardware itself. PC manufacturers in general just can't keep up since they don't have full control/integration over the hardware stack like Apple does. Also
89.
by armadyl 4mo ago
Conversely, a Linux system with no verified boot can be easily tampered with without the user detecting it by people lower than the government such as casual hackers. So in a world where your government is going crazy, you're opting fo
90.
by armadyl 4mo ago
This is incorrect macOS is fundamentally more secure than desktop Linux operating systems and it isn't particularly close. No amount of Linux hardening will get a system even close to an M-chip Mac. Software insecurities aside, desktop

More ›