maqp

38 ms·

361.
by maqp 5y ago
Plus here in Finland the city owned apartments etc. are distributed around the city (not the Manhattans but the rest). Thus there are no slums in Finland and thus there's practically zero gang problems: there's exactly two city di
362.
by maqp 5y ago
What's the actual percentage of homeless people with severe substance abuse problem (i.e. one where its ~daily and they wouldn't agree to treatment)? This comment makes it sound like it applies to something like 50% of SF homeless
363.
by maqp 5y ago
"You cannot secure your means of support with benefits paid by the society." See more info under "income requirement" under https://migri.fi/en/residence-permit-on-other-grounds Sure, you can apply
364.
by maqp 5y ago
You need both, like here in Finland. E.g. see info on housing under https://www.espoo.fi/en-US/Social_and_health_services/Health...
365.
by maqp 5y ago
The thing is, countries with vast intellectual property base have more to lose in the game, thus they should favor defense over offense. Like Schneier says, we must choose between security for everyone, or security for no-one.
366.
by maqp 5y ago
If the governments can't ban exploits, perhaps they can ban writing commercial programs in memory unsafe languages? Countries could agree on setting a goal, e.g. that by 2040 all OSs etc. need to use a memory safe language.
367.
by maqp 5y ago
I like what tptacek wrote in the sibling comment. IIUC Rust keeps getting mentioned as "the" memory-safe language because it's generally equally fast compared to C programs. And it's mainly C and C++ that are memory-unsa
368.
by maqp 5y ago
>many people are fine trusting Telegram and with the security it provides. So here's my concern: They would not be fine with waking up one morning with their entire message history out in the open after a massive hack. Surely you ca
369.
by maqp 5y ago
> What I don't want is everyone in the school parents group to know my personal phone number thank you very much. The usernames are in the works. >I don't care if the chat is encrypted or not, if some malicious actor interce
370.
by maqp 5y ago
>Whats so hard to understand about having a choice? It's absolutely not hard. Literally my point :D I want choice but there is no choice. I can't enable secret chats on desktop clients. I can't enable secret chats for grou
371.
by maqp 5y ago
"Secret chats are e2e-encrypted chats that never under any circumstances get backed up. Cloud chats are encrypted in the same way, but also have a built-in cloud backup. " https://telegra.ph/Why-Isnt-Telegram-End-t
372.
by maqp 5y ago
Yeah I'm familiar with Riot being called Element now, and you don't need to look further than this chat for me to state that. "It's not a quality guarantee for clients in practice since you can't control Client Side
373.
by maqp 5y ago
"They gave people the choice though" There is no choice for opting in for E2EE group chats, exccept using another application. "You just think what's great for everyone." ... Obviously? "Also, they explain in t
374.
by maqp 5y ago
I was wrong about the CVE numbers not being there at all, the original article did state Telegram didn't prioritize them but here we go https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-36769
375.
by maqp 5y ago
Well, a colleague of mine got a job offer from Google a few years ago. I was with them when they replied the recruitment email with literally nothing else than "no" :D
376.
by maqp 5y ago
So Telegram's ToS conveniently forbids end-to-end encryption plugins. :D That's amazing security design!
377.
by maqp 5y ago
>You seem to have a chip on your shoulder regarding telegram. You need to understand I don't see messaging apps as living things. I see muscles, bones, nerves and veins. I have no grudge toward any app. That would be silly. My probl
378.
by maqp 5y ago
>Now, if you changed your mind, and want instead to argue that they are incompetent because they did not implement e2ee by default, it's a totally different discussion and has no relation at all with my original post, nor with the a
379.
by maqp 5y ago
Reproducible builds help here. Not all clients are supported yet I give you that, but perhaps you can see how far injecting backdoored clients on mass scale is from "user's sending plaintext copy to server every time". Both a
380.
by maqp 5y ago
Telegram already has two different group categories: Normal, an super groups. Telegram bumps 200 member groups to super groups. Signal's group E2EE scales up to 1000 members (hard limit). It's both doable, and scalable far beyond
381.
by maqp 5y ago
>Even in normal groups the default is that any user can add someone so the new user would need to get the decryption key on invite. Signal has group invite links. >Then you have bots that need to be able to read messages so they need
382.
by maqp 5y ago
Signal choosing not to federate isn't in the scope of this thread. IMO not federating is a guarantee of client quality. The last time I had a look at Matrix E2EE implementations, only Riot was barely usable. There was a ton of clients
383.
by maqp 5y ago
This is quite disingenuous, as with hash functions there's infinite preimages that map to each digest.
384.
by maqp 5y ago
"You would be a fool and a poor spook if you created Signal as a honeypot and made it insecure from the get go to anyone looking. It would be made insecure either later on or by an extremely hard to find "bug". We know from S
385.
by maqp 5y ago
There is nothing to break when the cloud chats are a backdoor by design. Imagine a vendor selling bullet proof glass. They're arguing the glass itself is extremely durable. These jabs at Telegram protocol are like attempts to break the
386.
by maqp 5y ago
Calling Telegram unencrypted isn't practically wrong when the key is stored right next to the data.
387.
by maqp 5y ago
>I strongly disagree with this claim. Can you back your claim with some evidence? Absolutely. Telegram isn't end-to-end encrypted by default. The author admits so here: https://telegra.ph/Why-Isnt-Telegram-End-to-End
388.
by maqp 5y ago
>The other apps just shove possibly backdoored E2E down people's throats with no choice at all. You can check e.g. Signal is not backdoored by reading the source code. You can find it here https://github.com/signalap
389.
by maqp 5y ago
What are you talking about :D This isn't about who's basket you'd dump your eggs into. The point is, Telegram isn't deploying end-to-end encryption, therefore there is a basket in the first place. Had they used E2EE, it
390.
by maqp 5y ago
>then they are doing an insanely amazing job since such few vulnerabilities were found. If they are doing amazing job, then 1. Why isn't desktop chats end-to-end encrypted? 2. Why aren't group chats end-to-end encrypted? 3. Why

More ›