> which is deplorable. But
There is always a but
167 karma · joined April 13, 2019
There is always a but
This doesn't state that it won't be used to profile you on Google. Dose it?
Is Incognito Mode real privacy browsing? Doesn't it just don't save history abs cookies after all tabs are closed ?
I know for sure every major application/game on every device/platform will also hijack DNS queries with their own DoH client and redirect them to their own DNS resolver.
I know for sure that by the time OS implementations are here every application will already have their DoH client built-in up and running for so long nobody will no care anymore.
I know IPSs are just being lazy. I know they will bypass DoH in a couple of months by filtering IPs or deep package inspection or something else.
But is good to see them pissed of once in a while.
Ads maybe but phones are personal as much as your contacts list and metadata leaks.
> I'd like to think that alternatives to advertising finance are on the horizon,
It will never happened because alternatives wont scale.
> Not all personal data processed by Microsoft can be accessed or controlled via the tools above. If you want to access or control personal data processed by Microsoft that is not available via the tools above or directly through the Microsoft products you use, you can always contact Microsoft at the address in the How to contact us section or by using our web form.
Same source.
Developers usualy argue that opt-out is necessary because otherwise people would not opt-in. But IMO this is just disrespecting peoples choice.
Features can be useful, developers can be trustworthy and by not opting-in people may be not using some feature that they would be missing. But still people have their reasons that should be respected even if it's: I will not opt-in because I don't feel comfortable enough or don't understand enough how it works or the consequences of opting-in
Without uBO, Forbes loads 151 cookies.
> Identification of well known legitimate bots;
> Hand written rules for simple bots that, however simple, get used day in, day out;
> Our Bot Activity Detector model that spots the behavior of bots based on past traffic and blocks them; and
> Our Trusted Client model that spots whether an HTTP User-Agent is what it says it is.
My question is, what if you are starting an alternative search engine or something legit?
Edit: my point is, the rules than make a legit or not bot, crawler, scrapper etc. are not clear at all.
> With systemd-homed access to the home directory is simply impossible unless the luks keyphrase (aka "user password") is specified (i.e. tje user logged in) since the data store is after all fully encrypted unless the user logs in. Thats a good thing btw: the user's data should be protected from the system unless the user is actually logged in. Now, ssh public key auth doesnt deal with passwords hence just using ssh pk auth means we couldnt unlock the luks volume simply because we have no keyphrase to unlock things with. So the PAM module that unlocks homed volumes actually enquires the client for the password explicitly if this happens. Unfortunately this is not sufficient for this to work with openssh since its pam hook-up doesnt support asking questions via pam after authentication.
> That said people suggested we maybe should provide a stub account you can log into with a fixed password that instead of a shell just spawns a program that queries you for username and password and then allows you to unlock the specified home directory.
I get that GNU is not Unix but why do this guy hates Unix so much?
Again, thank you for your time and work.
Edit: telegram had hacking news this year, search for "Telegram voicemail account hijacking"
My point is, we will never have privacy from tech because tech's most valuable field is ourselves. So we all respect others people privacy but we need to harvest every data point we can because otherwise what will we do, kernels and drivers?