Kajika

joined 2 years ago
[–] Kajika@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 weeks ago (7 children)

I had the idea that moderation is instance based in Lemmy, mods only moderate people on their instance.

[–] Kajika@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

I must be missing something (I can see the community is not from lemmy.world but the guy is)

[–] Kajika@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

OK I got it, you are completely out of the loop here.

You do not grasp the idea of NoScript and other JS filtering extension. This is not about server code, your all arguments is baseless here.

By the way JS refered to Javascript and not NodeJS.

Anyway I got you whole company/business talk about "keeping the service available, secure, performant" and "GDPR [...] bankrupting fine"... yeah lemmy.world.

[–] Kajika@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Thanks for your answer.

First I don't even grasp what a "service owner" is.

Second, for JS front-end openness there are already a bunch of app (web, android) that are open-source and secured. Everything has dependencies nowadays, this doesn't prevent good security. Think all the python app and their dependencies, rust, android... even c\c++ packages are built with dependencies and security updates are necessary (bash had security issues).

I think with JS scripts it's actually even easier to have good security because the app is ran in our web browser so the only possible attacker is the website we are visiting itself. If they are malicious then the close-sourced JS script is even worse. Unless you count 3rd party scripts embedded that bad dev uses in their website without even thinking about trusting them. That is also awful in both open or close source environment.

So even having imperfect security (which happens regardless to openness), who is the attacker here? I would rather run js script on my end if the code can be checked.

[–] Kajika@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

I believe you missed the point, I am not in defense of Security through obscurity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_through_obscurity), quiet the opposite.

The point: "[...] risk for the service owner as it gives an easily parsable way for an attacker to check [...]" is well known and not the discussion here. You can choose close source for 'security' this is opensource community so I am wondering about such a tool.

 

I am a long-time NoScript extension (https://noscript.net/) user. For those who don't know this automatically blocks any javascript and let you accept them (temporarily or permanently) based on the scripts' origin domain.

NoScript as some quality-of-life option like 'accepting script from current page's domain by default' so only 3rd parties would be blocked (usefull in mobile where it is tedious to go to the menu).

When I saw LibreJS (https://www.gnu.org/software/librejs/) I though that would be a better version of NoScript but it is quiet different in usage and cares about license and not open-source code (maybe it can't).

Am I the only one who thought about checking for open-source JS scripts filtering (at least by default)? This would require reproducibility of 'compilation'/packaging. I think with lock files (npm, yarn, etc) this could be doable and we could have some automatic checks for code.

Maybe the trust system for who checks could be a problem. I wanted to discuss this matter for a while.

[–] Kajika@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

There's no "open source" centralized website. You can't know what the server is effectively running unless you have access to it. To me this makes no sense.

[–] Kajika@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago
[–] Kajika@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

And C++, just checked the wiki and the 2 example of openssh's heartbleed and sudo, both in C. Not C++. As expected.

[–] Kajika@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I'm not sure why people keep pushing that myth on C++. It's been a decade we have smart pointers. There's no memory management to be done ever.

Using the old 'new' is like typing 'unsafe' in rust. Even arrays/vectors have safe accessor.

Am I missing something?

[–] Kajika@lemmy.ml 34 points 3 months ago (10 children)

Are we codeberg yet?

[–] Kajika@lemmy.ml -2 points 3 months ago (3 children)

They won't go to jail, period. No company owners never go to jail, kinda ever. This phrase is out of proportion. At worse they would have a fine.

Also still in the blog everything is words and very opaque like " We do this not only through technology and advocacy (Proton has contributed over $500,000 toward defending these values around the world)" : like where, what, when?

"There was no legal possibility to resist or fight this particular request." : I doubt very much unless Switzerland is a dictatorship in disguise.

"Switzerland generally will not assist prosecutions from countries without fair justice systems." : clearly not.

 

Just wanted to share for the 10 people like me who has with an Nvidia + dual screen setup on ArchLinux (btw) with KDE Plasma desktop that since the new plasma 6 update I can finally use the Wayland session option!

The wayland should work has been around for the last 5 years and 5 years ago it was not even close, then 1 or 2 years ago it started not crashing but multi-screen was not OK (I tried all the kernel and driver parameters).

Now for me and my 5+ years-old setup (probably a lot of legacy plasma settings in my .config) it was finally seamless.

From previous tries I already knew that the desktop feels WAY smoother (true 60 fps everywhere, specially for the video players in web browser).

Feels great so far, discord screen-sharing is not there but can be done from Firefox if needed so OK for me.

I hope this post will be informative for some like me who tried several time over the years and didn't had much hope.

PS : the cursor has a weirdly strong outline (too shiny to my taste) feels like unintended but not a big problem. I spent 30 mins in the options but couldn't find anything about that.

 
view more: next ›