atoponce

13 ms·

91.
by atoponce 12y ago
DNT is the product of "technology by committee". It was a disaster out the gate from the start.
92.
by atoponce 12y ago
Curious, I checked out the Task Manager for my Chromium install. Privacy Badger, although based on ABP code, is using substantially less memory than uBlock. Less than 1/2, actually. https://imgur.com/ScBfmjS
93.
by atoponce 12y ago
Most people who use Ghostery aren't aware of the double standard.
94.
by atoponce 12y ago
I already mentioned that it's opt-in, and disabled by default.
95.
by atoponce 12y ago
Privacy Badger isn't a recommendation to reduce CPU and memory usage. It's a recommendation to use in place of Ghostery. Because it is based on ABP, it may certainly have some of the bloat issues uBlock is trying to address.
96.
by atoponce 12y ago
There's no uncertainty or doubt about it. Ghostrank reports back about how it has disabled tracking in your browser. It may be "anonymous", but Ghostrank tracks your web usage, and sells it to advertisers. http://l
97.
by atoponce 12y ago
Oh, also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghostery#Criticism
98.
by atoponce 12y ago
I would prefer that ad companies learn to create non-intrusive ads. I've been hoping for this for the past 15 years. Sadly, no progress is being made here.
99.
by atoponce 12y ago
Ghostery is proprietary software, and it's reporting your usage back to trackers if you enable Ghostrank. You would be better protected running Privacy Badger by the EFF. It's Free Software, and it doesn't track you. https:&
100.
by atoponce 12y ago
I don't have data on Ghostery memory/CPU usage, but I would offer this warning: Ghostery is proprietary software, and is "calling home" on your usage when you enable Ghostrank. Ghostrank is used to build profiles on who
101.
by atoponce 12y ago
It's nice, but it seems to be a bit overly aggressive. As an example, it's removing the "Share to Twitter" button on my TT-RSS install.
102.
by atoponce 12y ago
This isn't surprising, actually. If you want to prove data is coming from a human, then you need to involve a proof of work system, like the guided tour puzzle or a Hashcash-like implementation, or both.
103.
by atoponce 12y ago
So lack of deep financial pockets means incompetently designed systems? If a busy system can't handle bcrypt, it's incompetently designed?
104.
by atoponce 12y ago
CREATE USER 'tptacek'@'db.example.com' IDENTIFIED BY 'su3rl337P@$sw0rd'; Let me know when MySQL supports bcrypt/scrypt.
105.
by atoponce 12y ago
MySQL for bcrypt and/or scrypt.
106.
by atoponce 12y ago
I work for a local ISP that does shared web, email, and database hosting, among other things. I am one of the core system administrators. I am deeply familiar with hardware performance as it relates to software libraries, authentication, an
107.
by atoponce 12y ago
You're overlooking the entropy behind the hash though. If entropy is sufficient for creating the password (120-bits or so), no matter of brute force speed will recover the text that created the hash. You'll instead need to break t
108.
by atoponce 12y ago
Software library support for bcrypt and scrypt is still light (although there is admittedly more support for the former than the latter). Which would could cause you to roll your own in-house solution. This is less optimal. There is ubiquit
109.
by atoponce 12y ago
Are you offering to upgrade my hardware infrastructure for me?
110.
by atoponce 12y ago
Security margins here (IE: bcrypt versus SHA-2) are estimated with entropy, which is also completely missing in the article. A weak password is a weak password, bcrypt or not. If there is sufficient entropy behind the password, 500,000 rota
111.
by atoponce 12y ago
Of course bcrypt is supposed to be slow. However, the "fastest" bcrypt can operate, might be a local DDoS for your sever, if the authentication app is a busy one. Key stretching cryptographic hashing algorithms gives you more gran
112.
by atoponce 12y ago
Overall, the article is solid. It is only missing key stretching with fast cryptographic hashing algorithms like SHA-1 or SHA-2. Instead, it jumps right into PBKDF2 and bcrypt. That's fine, but it's not the full story, and as such
113.
by atoponce 12y ago
Well, in the case of SSDs, every byte counts. But no, that's not my concern. My concern is installing a binary I have no intention of using. It's solid security best practices to only install what you need, and leave the rest out.
114.
by atoponce 12y ago
If Ntimed separates out the client from the daemon, so I can install just the client package only, IMO that will be a big win for computer time synchronization. One thing that has always bothered me with the NTP project, is the lack of a se
115.
by atoponce 12y ago
His opening sentence makes it pretty clear that he's executed Ctrl-C enough that he's familiar with it, likely executed it more than once, and expected it to work in Systemd.
116.
by atoponce 12y ago
No. You missed it. The OP stops filesystem checks happening fairly regularly. The great thing about computers, is identifying when you are repeating a behavior, to either have the computer automate your behavior for you, or to change your b
117.
by atoponce 12y ago
Time travel? Huh? I'm only stating that if the OP does not want his filesystem checks taking place on boot, rather than Ctrl-C them on every boot, to just disable them completely. Who said anything about time travel?
118.
by atoponce 12y ago
Offline filesystem integrety checks should not be stopped.There is a reason they take place to begin with. From the OP, it sounds like Eduardo takes every opportunity to stop filesystems checks from happening when booting. So long as he has
119.
by atoponce 12y ago
https://pthree.org/2012/04/17/install-zfs-on-debian-gnulinux...
120.
by atoponce 12y ago
It's not my misconception- it's that of the developers I support. I am told to install Oracle JVM, not OpenJDK. When I push back, I'm told they don't want it. I am not a Java developer. I am a system administrator.

More ›