refalo

joined 2 years ago
[–] refalo@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Tails is an operating system

Yes, and it comes with Tor Browser, which normally does not spoof your OS when probed via javascript (only the user-agent), that is why I asked if you had a patch to the source code, which is what they would have to be using in order to do what you're saying.

All of them report your operating system to be Windows

As it stands, I am not able to verify your claims, as Tor Browser on Tails 6.7 is still showing the true OS via javascript queries for me:

https://0x0.st/XYZF.png

[–] refalo@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Are you saying Tails has a custom fork of TBB that spoofs the OS? Do you have a link to that patch?

[–] refalo@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Right, even the most secure/private browser cannot help opsec failures... if only one person visits the same website(s) at the same time every day, you are not anonymous. But we all must define our own threat models and apply what's realistic for us individually.

[–] refalo@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I would be very careful about saying Tor/Mullvad/Brave are anywhere near approaching k-anonymity... Tor Browser cannot even hide your real OS when queried from javascript, and there are current ways to detect all of those browsers independently.

I think one problem is that most people's (general non-tech population) browser setups are completely bone-stock, and so by definition "random like everyone else" is likely already excluding all the stock users and placing you in a much smaller box to compare against.

[–] refalo@programming.dev 6 points 1 year ago

How have I never heard about this one?

[–] refalo@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Just FYI You would have to be using the same exact browser configuration you normally browse with, otherwise the fingerprint it has will be different.

[–] refalo@programming.dev 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Have you read the reviews?

[–] refalo@programming.dev 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They ask the push providers (Apple/Google) for data on the push token from e.g. a messaging app. This way they associate the account from an app with an identity.

Very overlooked point. You can find privacy guides online but very few even suggest that FCM etc. might have privacy issues, let alone explain exactly why. It seems this has already been used by law enforcement in the past: https://www.wired.com/story/apple-google-push-notification-surveillance/

The Molly-FOSS fork of Signal (which aims to be even more secure/private) actually supports self-hosted push notifications using UnifiedPush.

I also found this comment:

As far as I know, FCM on Android can be configured to use a notification payload (which is piped through Google's servers). But for a release app this is discouraged, especially if you are privacy conscious. An app would normally use FCM to receive a trigger and look up the received message from the app's own backend. See here for more information.

[–] refalo@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Being a furry is not common

The number of children who identify as a furry in your local grade school would shock you.

[–] refalo@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's also possible the number of people who like it do not outnumber the people who don't like it

[–] refalo@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I use this one and it is definitely much stronger (and louder) than any can of air I've ever used. Stronger as in more volume AND velocity.

On a hot day it literally cools my entire body down.

view more: ‹ prev next ›