/tech/ - Technology

Buffer overflow

Boards | Catalog | Bottom

Check to confirm you're not a robot
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Password
Drawing x size canvas
File(s)

Remember to follow the rules

Max file size: 350.00 MB

Max files: 5

Max message length: 4096


(61.07 KB 520x390 vader_chillin_1024.jpg)
The Ruination of Technology Anonymous 04/15/2018 (Sun) 02:32:10 [Preview] No. 12630 [Reply] [Last 50 Posts]
Howdy friends, it is time for a thread by me, your favorite endchan poster. Hmm, basically this thread will be all about technology. And perhaps I will share some amusing anecdotes and or opinions in the subject, from my lifetime in the destruction of American tech sector. I call it "the destruction of tech" because that is what they did. Weaponizing it, and infiltrating a bunch of rupee caste to take over the tech positions. Now we see India going full on beast money to control their people. We in America allowed this horror to happen.

Essentially, this bespeaks how corporatized (non citizen controlled) tech is actually a device for intl level fuckwads, to ruin the USA power base through their infiltration of their dirtbag "engineer" types who are famous for being total fuckups and makers of shitty code. basically 25 years of kike enabled war on technology, with bitches like Jobs Zuckerberger and Billgatus who bought DOS from the guy across the street. Like also how Disney himself couldn't draw for shit, but he knew how to buy artists and market his stuff (and how to blackmail and make underworld mulholland drive style connections to the deepest of states see also Hugh Hefner grotto full of kompromat).

Here in paragraph three I will make the point that essentially conspiracy is the water the boat of the world floats upon. Our time is when people alternately struggle and ask questions about what rich fuckers might actually get up to, and is "Hostel" descriptive of a certain class of people who delight in murdering and eating others? Eli Roth, hmm, is he part of some Hollywood eviltech to make us all see and believe bullshit horror as fantasy rather than accepting bullshit horror as truth of our lives? If only we knew how little they value us as souls and how much they value themselves as the soulless?

Okay so here in paragraph four I will say that the ability to project sound upon one person and thereby make them hear a voice spoken to them, reminds me of when Valdemort 'speaks' to all the kids in their heads. I wonder that it wouldn't be difficult to hmm in some stadium let us say, project into people's heads, on a seat by seat basis. Imagine if you will, a stadium full of people being delightfully spoken to in their heads/ears by what may as well be a spirit or a ghost, encouraging them to visit concession stands. Would you call that technology? Imagine a lady saying "did you hear that too?" and you didn't hear that which she is referring to. Will you wonder what words were sent to her head and not to yours? In the past 25 years of technology, what has humanity gained and what have we lost?

Finally here we speak to the death of the IP network. I would say again, it's due to us allowing third world shitbags to ruin it. We should have kept it to ourselves, but again, the intl kike scheme is designed to Zucerberger everyone as if we were all cattle. Push the IP into the lousiest places and tech-nable the biggest assholes of the world. Just imagine if we had kept fidon et and the earliest nets private and only allowed higher level citizens to use them. In this way the intl shitbags would have been kept down in their mudpits, and never been given the gifts which we white folks invented. Not being racist, just saying that white people make awesome shit and others can't give us credit for that. Everything we make, they ruin. So in this way again, I ask, if "Hitler Guy" of the future, re invents the IP schema, but keeps it as a national thing, with zero connections to the outside world, would you consider that to be an advancement of tech or a disadvancement of tech? Well anyway thanks for listening and ask any questions you wish. Here we mourn or celebrate the full spectrum war happening to us all.
1 post and 1 image omitted.


Anonymous 04/15/2018 (Sun) 03:16:11 [Preview] No.12632 del
[cont] Europeans might have had a more subtle understanding of gold than did good honorable soldier and officer class as Sherman did. But was he a rube? An unsophisticated dummy? No because he knew iron and steel and alloys and metals. But gold was not an implement of war at that time. In California it wasn't legal tender or money. One then wonders, can some class of people, coin living blood, into gold itself? The blood inside you, animating and making you what you are, is it worth something precious to you? And if so, will we eventually be using blood as money as the last line of "the safety of markets"? Maybe you can see an horrific place in that line of questioning?


Anonymous 04/15/2018 (Sun) 05:14:00 [Preview] No.12633 del
>>12630
>>12631
>>12632
So very much concentrated hatred and tension, the sign of one at war with themselves internally, sorrow instilled within them by their own perception of the world and an existence revolving around it. I agree that many events have occurred throughout history as a result of the malicious intentions of those who care not for others, but the very fact you are capable of broadcasting this message to us, the very fact that at the press of a button you can access seemingly endless troves of information that our ancestors would have killed to obtain, is this not evidence of the greatness that is the internet, a medium which contains the information gathered over centuries to be accessed by anyone anywhere in the planet?
Humans are quite foolish creatures, greedy for naturally occurring metals and dominion over others, but never desiring to be dominated themselves. The society which many yearn for is a society which firstly fulfills the basic needs for human life, and only then can one explore themselves and the world to grow themselves and learn.
This is all I shall write for now, I could write a book on such thoughts, but it does not suit me at the moment.


Anonymous 04/15/2018 (Sun) 17:42:47 [Preview] No.12645 del
"This is all I shall write
for now,
I could write a book
on such thoughts,
but it does not suit me
at the moment."

Well said. I parsed it out like meaningful prose. But is the age of books going to last? Amazon has a great used book business going tho, I buy used books there all the time. However, some of my friends do use kindle device. I could write a book on having lady who uses kindle device but there is no need for such a book. Fact is: People had been preconditioned to expect a "Star Trek" world, i.e. tablets we swipe and so forth. AND YET Star Trek itself presumes total nuke war and destruction, for us, by 2100 AD I think. And if you take note of TNG they view people from our time as basically diseased crap. Yes I know it is just a TV show but it is also powerful somnambulist program that makes generations, expect certain things.

If they showed the kindle device, in ST as what it is: just some book reading gadget, enabling someone like Bezos (and his chums), we wouldn't like it. We wanted the Trek thing from 1968 to become a great thing. But the kindle is not well suited for battle, I would only deploy it to rear echelon units.


/thread Anonymous 04/15/2018 (Sun) 17:45:19 [Preview] No.12646 del
TL;DR


Anonymous 04/15/2018 (Sun) 18:18:16 [Preview] No.12647 del
This is an issue that was explored extensively in the anime sci-fi classic, Zero Kara Hajimeru Mahou no Sho.



Cyberwar starts Anonymous 04/14/2018 (Sat) 23:30:59 [Preview] No. 12628 [Reply] [Last 50 Posts]
>Britain would consider launching a cyber attack against Russia in retaliation if Russia targeted British national infrastructure
>Cyber security has become a focal point of the strained relations. On Thursday, a British spy chief said that his GCHQ agency would "continue to expose Russia's unacceptable cyber behaviour", adding there would be increasing demand for its cyber expertise.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-russia-cyber/uk-could-launch-retaliatory-cyber-attack-on-russia-if-infrastructure-targeted-sunday-times-idUSKBN1HL1BT?il=0


Anonymous 04/15/2018 (Sun) 06:38:51 [Preview] No.12636 del
This would mean little to nothing if only Putin would arrange a faster transition away from Windows, Intel, Apple, and the like for its infrastructure. As it stands, he does not seem to take technology seriously enough; but this is a perpetual Russian leadership problem.


Anonymous 04/15/2018 (Sun) 13:40:44 [Preview] No.12639 del
>>12636
A complete transition from x86 would take years to be done. Also, if some bunch of people from internet get to reverse engineer intel's microcode, don't you think military security agency wouldn't have this capability? They do. They probably don't run on x86 anyway, not the stuff that needs to be secure, anyway.



(115.40 KB 1600x900 douglas_rushkoff.jpg)
List of Security and Privacy Best Practices Anonymous 08/16/2017 (Wed) 08:52:20 [Preview] No. 10740 [Reply] [Last 50 Posts]
Following the other thread, here's the first version of the list:
- Tor hidden service: http://hjvx7xg3n4ejezmh.onion/
- 'Clearnet' Mirror (no styles): https://hjvx7xg3n4ejezmh.onion.cab/

If you want to contribute, post here on this thread.
Thanks to "Endwall" to host it.
61 posts and 15 images omitted.


Anonymous 04/14/2018 (Sat) 09:07:25 [Preview] No.12620 del
>>12616
>firejail is mostly for firefox
u wut m8


Anonymous 04/14/2018 (Sat) 09:59:43 [Preview] No.12621 del
(34.50 KB 400x326 1521060413987.jpg)
>>12616
>>12620
Yeah, I remember Firejail being non-application specific. I'm pretty sure it's a play on words for Firewall and Jail.

>incapable of secure virtualization
Not true.

>firefox itself is not secure
that is true insofar as you use no security enhancing extensions or patches, and it's irrelevant if you put it in a jail.


Anonymous 04/14/2018 (Sat) 19:17:21 [Preview] No.12622 del
Theres some other infos here that may be useful for this list:
http://archive.is/6DPqO

>>12621
>Not true
Explain.


Anonymous 04/15/2018 (Sun) 06:34:45 [Preview] No.12635 del
>>12622
>secure
Define.


Anonymous 04/15/2018 (Sun) 13:37:30 [Preview] No.12638 del
>>12635
>Define
Verifiable separation.



Anonymous 04/13/2018 (Fri) 20:54:02 [Preview] No. 12617 [Reply] [Last 50 Posts]
I know this is old, but have you heard of project ORCHESTRA? This video talks about the NSA creating FOSS vulnerabilities and mitigating encryption on the internet. I think everyone should see this.

https://archive.fosdem.org/2014/schedule/event/nsa_operation_orchestra/


Anonymous 04/14/2018 (Sat) 03:58:57 [Preview] No.12618 del
Haven't head about this, but Bruce Schenider has already said that IPsec was manipulated to be weak. Also, @ioerror said on CCC that SSL and SSH has been broken by NSA already.
Even if they don't, on the best of hypothesis, the processors are already fucked (x86 and ARM, in particular). Nowhere to hide. I ask myself what computing tech will USA military guys use on war with Russia...


Anonymous 04/14/2018 (Sat) 04:36:43 [Preview] No.12619 del
OP here. Posted this on 8tech too. Someone posted this link.
https://boingboing.net/2016/04/07/a-perfect-storm-of-broken-busi.html
Still, the points are valid.
>>12618
Nowhere to hide indeed.



(55.00 KB 550x439 irony.png)
WWW alternatives Anonymous 09/19/2017 (Tue) 19:57:00 [Preview] No. 11206 [Reply] [Last 50 Posts]
With W3C now folding to DRM and the web already being crushed under the weight of JS I think we need a discussion.

What are some alternatives to the web? I remember GNUNET implements something like websites. Basically I think we should ditch web browsers all together. BBS? Gopher?
45 posts and 9 images omitted.


Anonymous 09/27/2017 (Wed) 23:14:12 [Preview] No. 11395 del


Anonymous 09/28/2017 (Thu) 08:48:05 [Preview] No. 11397 del
>>11377
>unless they spread Jammers through the country or remove every single hardware
They could also cut the power. In this case, the device should have a solar powered battery...


Anonymous 09/28/2017 (Thu) 10:05:35 [Preview] No. 11398 del
ardunel dongle


Anonymous 09/28/2017 (Thu) 13:39:36 [Preview] No. 11404 del
Wifi is a really bad idea for a large-scale mesh. High latencies, interference resulting in speed drops, power hog, jewish microwaves. On the other hand, all high-speed wired solutions have no libre firmware or drivers. Everything above 1Gbit or optical is fucking proprietary. But at least optical wires don't radiate shit in all directions so CIA niggers can't find them easily.


New Browser? Nope. Anonymous 04/13/2018 (Fri) 08:18:06 [Preview] No.12615 del
(16.40 KB 318x480 1477471677902.jpg)
>>11226
Well the issue is more like the standards of the web have gotten out of hand. New standards need to be spread and upheld. Imagine it like this: we could either fork existing browsers or webengines and add more functionality, like supporting FLIF and animated SVGs and other goodies they currently don't deem necessary, or we remove and replace functionality, like taking out Javascript support and only allowed for scripting using LISP dialects. But you need webpages and websites that are going to conform to that new standard, and the only way that's going to happen is if it's small fansites or homepages that can leverage an alternative search index besides Google (who is heavily biased toward big-name websites that can pay for positioning).

It's not a problem that can be solved just by introducing new web browsers. It'd be better to just support a fork that already exists.



GNU OS Anonymous 09/14/2017 (Thu) 15:13:36 [Preview] No. 11081 [Reply] [Last 50 Posts]
Anyone else excited about the coming full realisation of the GNU OS? Soon GuixSD will ship with Hurd and the original GNU vision will be a usable system.

After that all they need is all the software using GNU licenses and RMS can die fulfilled. If they then rewrite everything in scheme RMS will become a saint in heaven.
23 posts and 6 images omitted.


Anonymous 10/22/2017 (Sun) 11:01:07 [Preview] No. 11594 del
>>11592
>inane questions
yeah i see you guys just solved the mystery of hurd with your superior questions

>Great job bumping an old thread
every thread here is ancient
>You're real /g/ material.
Great anon, thanks

>>11593
yeah, i am so used to linux i mix that stuff


Anonymous 11/20/2017 (Mon) 22:47:48 [Preview] No.11776 del
Make USE flags a thing on GuixSD NOW!


Anonymous 11/24/2017 (Fri) 21:03:04 [Preview] No.11797 del
(29.95 KB 633x758 image.png)
>>11115
>You and I and everyone else in the world could burn to a crisp in a fucking inferno for all he cares as long as he has access to the code he wants.
>There's nothing altruistic about the man. He has the self-centeredness common among the autistic. You're not a real person to him. Deal with it.

Ah fuck this is too close to home. Does this mean I'm an autist?


Anonymous 11/24/2017 (Fri) 21:19:05 [Preview] No.11798 del
(56.35 KB 1000x800 aa.jpg)


GNU+HURD Won't Win Anonymous 04/13/2018 (Fri) 07:48:26 [Preview] No.12612 del
(741.29 KB 1800x2744 1472346805869.jpg)
(148.54 KB 939x626 1472329388420.jpg)
(77.70 KB 441x495 14703126398730.png)
(43.51 KB 661x716 1466517784610.png)
>>11081
I'm very sceptical that HURD is developed enough to be released by the end of this year. Does GuixSD even have a newbie-friendly installer yet, like the major distributions?

Anyway, let's assume that the world is perfect. HURD is completed by the end of the year. Then what? Now you have Linux and GNU as two distinct entities, distinct operating systems. Now third party developers might have to develop for one additional system; lots of developers don't even port their software to BSD, as far as I've seen. How would they deal with the threat of incompatibility with software originally designed to run with the Linux kernel? Maybe that so many developers use glibc will mean that this is not a big issue at all. I don't know.

Okay, what if it wasn't an issue? What incentive would people have to adopt the GNU operating system, instead of or in addition to Linux? The BSDs already operate according to a centralized development model that is its prime distinction from Linux. GNU would be either be moving toward that model or it could be like Linux and allow for distributions of the GNU operating system built upon HURD. But what would GNU have to offer? Obviously, completely, 100% free software. Ideologically, that's a big win, but this wouldn't translate necessarily to practical benefits for the user. The driver support would be worse, the software repository smaller. The only way it could grow would be to convince would be Linux users, and even would be BSD users, to develop for GNU; but aside from the free software philosophy, which is not exclusive to but only purer in the GNU OS, what would be the draw?

With that question in mind, I just don't see HURD ever taking off even if it finally makes it out of the hangar and unto the airstrip.



(4.98 MB 800x608 75367242737363.gif)
Imagining a future for vectors Anonymous 04/11/2018 (Wed) 16:50:52 [Preview] No. 12598 [Reply] [Last 50 Posts]
I have some hope that there could be a return to restart developing computing for vector graphics. It seems a bit counterintuitive how kids these days got 30 years of raster display tech development only to complain that VR doesn't work because they can still see the pixels in anything under a gorillion-k displays.

Perhaps in the future a mobile device could project laser-based optically scalable graphics on any wall, while a secondary monitor may simulate it in rasters when needed, but I'm more interested in how we can possibly get there from the current state of the industry where raster screens are so ubiquitous. Can anything as mildly dangerous as early CRTs even legally make it into the market this day and age? Can a dedicated vector graphics card survive the russian scalpers, if such a device is even possible without it's own OS?
2 posts and 1 image omitted.


Anonymous 04/12/2018 (Thu) 07:50:39 [Preview] No.12601 del
Even if it's vector they would still see the pixels, because all the technology was build in this concept, a matrix of square dots. We would need to rebuild the display tech to fit the "meta-model" of vector graphics first and I have no idea how we could do that. Maybe holographic, as the other anon said, but that's too futuristic for our primitive society. Also, holographics would have density issues, as external light would not offer enough contrast for the human vision.
Maybe look into bioengeneering would be better, like a brain-computer interface that can send signals to human optics or something.
Again, too futuristic, and there's no research investiments enough for that. Maybe there's some guys on Cambridge, Berkeley or Stanford, for meh, not really.


Anonymous 04/12/2018 (Thu) 18:12:44 [Preview] No.12603 del
>Going backwards in technology is not an option.
>too futuristic
I'm happy to see "too big to fail" ideology coming from the consumer rather than the government, it only shows that culture is being cohesive and bailouts have the blessing of the public. Going by the success of 3DS and Shovel Knight, some of those allegations are patently false, however. The amount of fun is clearly scalable to the reach of the production, while lowering prices are much more heavily influenced by increasing the reach to secondary and tertiary markets. To put it short, first people to buy Shovel Knight were happy to pay $100 in Kickstarter, the second people $20 in early adoption and now $30 on Nintendo Switch. Calling this "unaccepatble" is clearly ideological and false in real world terms.

A game as much fun as Shovel Knight is produceable in primitive technology that resembles the early Vectrex, with the addition of modern computing power. On the other hand, such a device is liable to crash and burn as well like the Virtual Boy. These are however mere indicators and not gospel. A viable new vector technology would need a few bottom lines fulfilled, one is to be able to mimic raster graphics in an inferior way the same way raster graphics are able to mimic vectors in an inferior way, where they get pixelated but are not unuseable. One other is to support an universal standard of vectorization so that any method of greating a vector algorithm is transferable directly into the device without going through the process of re-encoding the same collection of shapes in a different way to no further benefit.

I do not imagine to pointlessly throw out raster graphics just to accommodate vectors. What would need to happen is to introduce another element of interface next to raster visuals and audio, which are already succesfully merged into one experience, so we can enjoy an effective use of vectors, rasters and audio. This is not an unforeseen concept, as Apple did introduce a touch interface even though we already have a good touch interface in mouse and keyboard, and Wii was succesfully sold on motion controls despite being clearly inferior to the single-plane motion control found on the mouse.


Anonymous 04/12/2018 (Thu) 18:32:08 [Preview] No.12604 del
While it's important to first discover a viabilty for pure vector displays, or else well never get to the point where the following is possible, I imagine there comes a point where a screen monitor can display both vector graphics and raster graphics. How I imagine this to work is that there should be a layer of screen that can produce rasters, and onto that a vectorized line can be projected, from a board that is flat but can mimic tubular monitors. Similar technology already exists where touch screens can receive input in analog shapes and digitize it in raster form. Also rasters in see-through materials already exist in a primitive form, that's another thing that is absolutely a step "backwards" yet plenty of hard money sees potential in it.

The way I imagine it it might be something that recognizes which colors are intended as lines and which are intended as solid colors, and the graphics controller chip within the monitor itself would know what lines to produce in scalable rasters while the rest of the colors would get as pixelated as the definition allows, but perhaps be written over by any vector lines drawn over the jagged edges. It's highly hypothetical until the early forms of flat vector displays exist to start indicating what direction the technology can possibly go to, depending on the exact workings.

What exists now is at least QR codes, which can mimic vector equations if being put up to task. I can hardly imagine a QR code reader doing 10 000 calculations every second, though, if they were to perform the task of a vector display controller chip.


Anonymous 04/13/2018 (Fri) 00:50:38 [Preview] No.12606 del
>>12603
I don't quite get how your Shovel Knight example ties into the ideas of your first paragraph. Are you accusing us of preferring the status quo; are you suggesting that older technology actually does have a place in the contemporary world, and that it is not true that the only direction possible to go in is strictly forward? I'm having trouble understanding your post, but don't feel obliged to spell it out.

>>12604
I would have an easier time getting it if you had an illustration/diagram of what you're talking about.


Anonymous 04/13/2018 (Fri) 02:09:19 [Preview] No.12609 del
>>12606
Probably a bot, I don't know. I don't understand what he's writing too.



(318.16 KB 1024x1400 1468989659852-2.jpg)
Essential Software Thread Anonymous 03/24/2018 (Sat) 20:24:11 [Preview] No. 12520 [Reply] [Last 50 Posts]
Can we get a /software/ thread going? Preferably something better than pic related, which is total bullshit.
>vivaldi
>lastpass
>cloudstorage
25 posts and 1 image omitted.


Anonymous 04/10/2018 (Tue) 23:38:03 [Preview] No.12595 del
>>12592
quick response for now: I'm not talking about those cases where no https version exists.


Anonymous 04/10/2018 (Tue) 23:48:44 [Preview] No.12596 del
>>12594
The more security you have, the more layers of obfuscation you have, the more points of failure, the more maintenance required. Some security is necessary for some privacy at a certain layer to deliver certain private information to other systems or people using the same protocols, but it's just to assure a certain level of communication that one trusts and feels that it is necessary to hide private information from those that look for it. Online privacy is information that's to be separated from the public that you don't want to be accessed by the public but only a secure connection between one or more people that nobody else knows about. If those that you privately contact chose to betray you, they can leak confidential private information to the public or to others privately. One can use a secure channel but say nothing of private confidential information. The front end of a website is what's publicly accessible which should never have private confidential information that shouldn't be publicly accessed. Security is a means for privacy but is not privacy in and of itself. Using a VPN for example hides what you do from your ISP but it doesn't hide what you from the ISP of what the VPN uses, so even securing the VPN connection doesn't mean privacy, just a layer of security. Let's say the FBI goes to your home and asks you to decrypt your hard drive or else they'll break your bones. You are the ultimate key to all of your data that's at least accessible by you. Multi signing is a higher level of security, but if some secret or public organization gets the private keys of all of the people responsible for its creation, it's compromised. Privacy deals with trust management which uses security but is not merely security. True anonymity probably doesn't truly exist online, only obfuscation of identity is real.

>>12595
Just because some websites have https doesn't mean it's properly implemented https and so doesn't redirect its users to its https site but instead its http site because that's what the people running the site wants you to use their site the way they want you to. If you refuse, go complain to the people running that website without accessing it's http website somehow. Poorly implemented https sites are all over the place, and if they really properly set up https, they will redirect all http requests to https because most people that set up https tend to also care about SEO scores.


Anonymous 04/13/2018 (Fri) 00:40:51 [Preview] No.12605 del
(407.08 KB 1000x625 1521318969907.jpg)
>>12592
>>12593
>>12596
Yeah, I stand by my response here >>12595

I'm not saying never share or visit HTTP links. I'm saying that HTTPS is better than HTTP when available (and that means, taking into account also your countercase, you aren't just being redirected away from the HTTPS site). Your response doesn't say anything against that.

On using a VPN, you need to distinguish between using a home VPN and commercial VPN. Commercial VPN is better for privacy than a home VPN when you trust the provider, because they give you an IP Address that isn't your own.
HTTPS is better than HTTP because the data is encrypted, can't be easily snooped on.

So, obviously, HTTPS with VPN would be best from a privacy and security standpoint, but this isn't what I was talking about.

>>12594
Alright, alright. Going off your conception of this then, let's look again at your setup.
>>12587
>I use HTTPS everywhere, noscript (manually re-configured for my browsing habits), Random Agent Spoofer, Tin Foil (well some of the options, not in full mode), disabled most chromium vulnerabilities with about:config and also use a private VPN (w/ encryption), and I use a Linux OS... am I safe at this point?
I'll need to break it down.

Message too long. Click here to view full text.



Anonymous 04/13/2018 (Fri) 00:51:50 [Preview] No.12607 del
>>12520
"cloud"
syncthing


Anonymous 04/13/2018 (Fri) 01:55:05 [Preview] No.12608 del
>>12605
There's some websites that improperly loads from a http site into the https front end, not truly secure, AKA: mixed content. Websites that are slower when using https instead of it's regular http site has more often than not mixed content not from same origin.

Your so called argument has to take into multiple variables, it was a loaded question and so there's no simple yes or no answer to it and so there's no definitive "yes" or "no", it must consider all of the variables, while your loaded question was used in response to my previous points like how the ISP (any ISP) will know what links you've clicked and the various concerns in using a third party between you, the web host, and the domain host (if they're not one and the same) that can at any moment revoke certificates willingly or unwillingly from the web browser side or the certificate issuers which sometimes try to mess with the certificates used by the web browser, making certain websites inaccessible that way.

If an https site has the locked green padlock it's safer than https site without the padlock. https://www.whynopadlock.com/

Even assuming a website has some A+ score on observatory.mozilla.org (which mind you, my own personal website has an A+ score), absolutely any layer of security isn't guaranteed privacy. Your nit picking on about me not specifying specific types of VPNs is avoiding the core failure of you needing to trust protocols upon protocols yet my point is that any layer of security opens up more variable points of failure that you merely assume that you can circumvent before it is exploited when really that can't be done, nobody knows the future. Securing the most direct path from point A to B is better than securing point A-Z, while there's more trust in the information the less filters it has to go through. Have you ever played telephone or chinese whispers? The more people that have to pass the message verbally, the more distorted the original message becomes until it's totally indecipherable at the end of the chain.

All I'm saying is that no single protocol should ever gain 100% of your trust, neither one or the other, so everyone is wrong if they answer yes or no to the whole trusting https over http thing because that's not how it works in real life. I would trust a letter with a tamper evident seal on the envelope more than I trust any protocol that connects me to the internet.



(55.85 KB 468x384 saved thumb.jpg)
define "app" Anonymous 03/21/2018 (Wed) 15:40:25 [Preview] No. 12507 [Reply] [Last 50 Posts]
Is app or even application a term that has a standardized definition, if so then what? Meaning that whatever platform I use to run "an app", I can trust that means the task being run has certain universal qualities that define it from other executables. My understanding of computing is a very poor outdated mix of dad logic and grandma logic and all this marketing shit doesn't do me any favors. When an "app" can be nothing more than a glorified interface to a program that's already always running, even on top of programs that are already only being run on an OS, I wouldn't want to be one to explain this shit straight to a next generation who have to unlearn all this training wheels garbage.


Anonymous 03/21/2018 (Wed) 17:23:12 [Preview] No.12508 del
As i understand that term came with smartphones and popularization of mobile apps. An app on a smartphone is basically a webpage adjusted for mobile use (twitter, google docs, ebay). And since we started to call all of those services "apps" - because of smartphones - we now call everything an "app". So today you can't go wrong with saying something's an app, be it a webpage, executable, mobile app or something else.

And acording to wikipedia, that's not wrong:
-Mobile app, software designed to run on smartphones and other mobile devices
-Application, software that causes a computer to perform tasks for computer users
-Web application or web app, software designed to run inside a web browser

IT'S ALL AN APP ALFER ALL


Anonymous 03/21/2018 (Wed) 20:13:14 [Preview] No.12509 del
>>12507
I'VE GOT AN APP FOR THAT!


Anonymous 04/12/2018 (Thu) 17:48:01 [Preview] No.12602 del
>>12508
>As i understand that term came with smartphones and popularization of mobile apps.
People were saying things like "desktop app" long before smartphones existed