f2n

what happens if you go to https://1.1.1.1 in a browser? It should have a valid TLS cert and have a big banner that says, among other things, "Introducing 1.1.1.1". If your ISP's CPE or anything else is fucking with traffic to that IP, it wont load/display that

Perhaps they've changed it since last time I looked a few years ago. You're right, I can't find the tor-specific anything anymore. I ditched Cloudflare years ago and haven't checked back in a while. I rather distinctly remember a default setting that explicitly talked about how it treated Tor users. I don't see that setting anymore.

They also went out of their way to automatically treat them as more questionable by default. Unless the website operator explicitly whitelists tor, tor users are given a worse experience.

EDIT: Maybe not anymore? See replies

there are IP blacklists... that's about it. https://www.spamhaus.org is an example of such a blacklist service.

I'm confused... what does drugs have to do with this?

Good, I hope we see a sleeping giants-style shaming of advertisers who financially support Facebook

>I can't remember them all

I can't remember most of my passwords, if I could that would be a serious security issue. Password managers are a must in this day and age.

Github maybe... I've been more hesitant to use them, as they control a significant portion of open source project's infrastructure, and could generally make a lot of headaches for me. If you don't have a simple email-based signup I'm going to be hesitant to use your site.

>And the decentralized video sharing network whose name I can’t remember.

perhaps https://d.tube ? it was on HN somewhat recently

I am unlikely to use your site if it requires me to use a Google or Facebook login. Those companies already have too much power to fuck my life up, I have no interest in giving them any more.

The list does not appear without allowing 3rd party javascript (and presumably tracking) by Google :/

Yes, the shit they ship on their phone is horrible. I would never use or recommend one of their horrible phones.

How do I request such a zip for myself?

I think it would be expected for local access, on the device where the data was originally stored. It is wholly unacceptable for them to upload that data. If someone has my name and phone number and installs Facebook, they have just given Facebook all of my personal information.

That is not true. Only Android phones from the absolutely shittiest manufacturers have malware pre-installed.

All of the linked files there 404. Anyone who has it wanna make a torrent and post the magnet link?

Holy shit that's amazing. I've been wanting this service for a while, so badly that I've actually been building something similar for the last few weeks. I'll probably continue, since mine is slightly different in a couple of ways and its an interesting learning experience, but glad this is becoming more of a thing.

Please fix this to point to the original article, not this blogspam.

https://about.gitlab.com/features/github/

I mean, it's hard to judge, but things like [1] generally suggest that to some degree, yes

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/21/technology/users-abandon-...

Mastadon

No, Americans will continue to give zero fucks. A few more people will be outraged, but business as usual will continue. Maybe Facebook will claim they "fixed" the problem that created this "breach" (as it's being called), but nothing will change

But Microsoft is saying that they wont push updates without user's consent.

So it's okay to have a fingerprint reader as long as you claim to do something to the effect of hashing the fingerprint?

PSA: Don't do this. Secrets don't belong in docker images, they belong in proper secret management tools.

I would love to see an open source meetup alternative, maybe one that I can host myself for my meetup.

My .io (finn.io if you want to look it up) says:

  Owner Addr    : Obfuscated whois Gandi-63-65 boulevard Massena
  Owner Addr    : Obfuscated whois Gandi-Paris
  Owner Addr    : WA
  Owner Addr    : FR

and my full name. Seems obfuscated enough, especially since the name was not remotely validated.

Meh, I prefer something I can operate/monitor. The guy who runs that is very secretive about all of his setup, to "prevent abuse" (unclear what sort of abuse he's afraid of), but highly opposed to others building their own.

Interesting. I have a DID that routes to nowhere on all my domain's whois, maybe I should route it somewhere and see what happens.

Where? I went to https://www.symantec.com/ in Chrome Stable 63.0.3239.140 and didn't see any entries in the dev console about the CA being untrusted or anything like that.

EDIT: I'm an idiot, it didn't occur to me that Symantec didn't sign their own cert. But they don't, it's from DigiCert. Can anyone link to a site that uses Symantec certs?

Yes, but it hasn't made sense in a long time