Recent comments in /f/Privacy
abralelie wrote
Reply to comment by Wahaha in everyone is worried about getting a chip implanted by burnerben
Would you consider that the norm?
Wahaha wrote
Reply to comment by abralelie in everyone is worried about getting a chip implanted by burnerben
Yes, I'm not addicted to my phone.
abralelie wrote
Reply to comment by Wahaha in everyone is worried about getting a chip implanted by burnerben
But do you?
Wahaha wrote
Reply to comment by !deleted152 in Privacy-focused search engine DuckDuckGo grew by 62% in 2020 by Rambler
Most suspicious thing about DDG is the marketing push. Where did the money for that come from? That, and it's US based and to my knowledge not completely open source, so one should assume it to be compromised by default.
bolaris wrote
I too am wary of DDG. runnaroo seems like a good option if searx is not working for you.
J0yI9YUX41Wx wrote
Reply to Clearview's Dangerous Misreading of the First Amendment Could Spell the End of Privacy Laws by Rambler
It's nice to see the ACLU doing something sane again like suing companies for invading privacy. An example of the madness they're taking a break from (from Wikipedia):
On June 21, 2018, a leaked memo showed that the ACLU has explicitly endorsed the view that free speech can harm marginalized groups by undermining their civil rights. "Speech that denigrates such groups can inflict serious harms and is intended to and often will impede progress toward equality," the ACLU declared in guidelines governing case selection and "Conflicts Between Competing Values or Priorities."
eeqrhty wrote
Reply to comment by KeeJef in Millions Flock to Telegram and Signal as Fears Grow Over Big Tech by Rambler
Ricochet is an interesting project too. It also doesn't have centralized servers. It routes messages through the tor network.
The developers aren't giving guarantees about it though. From the website:
Ricochet is an experiment. Security and anonymity are difficult topics, and you >should carefully evaluate your risks and exposure with any software.
We’re working on auditing, reviewing, and always improving Ricochet (and we’d >love more help). There will be problems. We hope to do better than most, but >please, don’t risk your safety any more than necessary.
Wahaha wrote (edited )
DDG is pretty much only lying about being privacy focused.
https://www.stoutner.com/new-default-homepage-and-search-engine/
Gabriel Weinberg, the founder of DuckDuckGo, used to run the Names Database.[1] This was a website that aimed to connect people who had lost contact by gathering lots and lots of e-mail addresses. Getting access could be done by either paying money, or submitting lots of e-mail addresses of other people. Since the service revolved around gathering personal information, it is very suspicious for Gabriel Weinberg to start a business that is privacy-oriented. [2]
DuckDuckGo used to set a tracking cookie, even though they claimed they didn't. This was done by a third party they cooperate with, which means that it wasn't necessarily intentional, but if it's unintentional, it shows a worrying lack of care.[3]
DuckDuckGo is based in the US. This makes it really easy for the NSA to compromise it. If it were based in the EU, for example, the NSA wouldn't have the legal power to force them to log everything without telling anyone. This wouldn't guarantee privacy, but it would make it a lot more plausible. Instead, they're based in the US, which means that the NSA can do whatever they want with them. There are secure search engines that are not based in the US.[3]
[1] https://archive.is/9wR4O
[2] https://archive.is/N2qe8
[3] https://archive.is/qntuk
Wingless wrote
Does a pair of similarly-sized tin cans offer any protection, or do the spies subsidize sufficient accelerometers to be able to defeat your puny human tactics over the length of any reasonable car trip? (I assume they do with an Apple phone, but who would spends so much anyway? The spies should be paying YOU.)
J0yI9YUX41Wx wrote
Oh, the authoritarianism is coming, don't you worry.
J0yI9YUX41Wx wrote
Remember when the police found OJ Simpson in the mid '90s during his infamous police chase by tracking which cell towers his phone was connected to? The tech has gotten much better since then.
Wahaha wrote
I can switch my phone out. Or leave it at home.
Rambler wrote
No. Because as you said, most carry one around willingly.
mr4channer wrote
you live under a damn rock
MasterDestroyer wrote
Reply to comment by J0yI9YUX41Wx in Best Email Services For Privacy by Rambler
yea, it's super awesome. the mail in a box seems really legit, as far as i've been able to tell. for a personal server it is super adequate.
J0yI9YUX41Wx wrote
Reply to comment by MasterDestroyer in Best Email Services For Privacy by Rambler
Rad. Lots of affordable VM hosts out there!
Yeah, that there is the timeless conundrum. If you make a complex system easy, you have to make it a black box that you don't actually understand. It's only safe if the black box's engineers did a good job of make sure it's air tight. (The MiiB engineers may well have!) On the other hand, if you let the complex system be complex, you have to do a dang homework assignment to figure out how to do something.
It's nice to see that hosting infrastructure has evolved to the point that VMs are commodified and companies compete and drive prices down and that if you know how to tinker with operating systems you can have quite a powerful machine that you have full control over for, like, dirt cheap.
J0yI9YUX41Wx wrote
Pretty good read. Yeah, there are a thousand ways for your phone to compromise your privacy in spite of everyone's best attempt to do otherwise. (And I'm not suggesting everyone always does try to do otherwise.)
MasterDestroyer wrote (edited )
Reply to comment by J0yI9YUX41Wx in Best Email Services For Privacy by Rambler
nice. i like ramnode, it's 3 bucks for a 1-core, 512mb ram, 160~GB hdd, 2TB bandwidth. 5 bucks gets you double those specs
there's some ssd ones too but for a personal email server i figured hdd is probably plenty fast enough
and man mail in a box was easy to set up. too easy tbh, now it's kind of like a black box that i dont' really know how it works. i set up a mail server with dovecot/postfix etc back in like 2012 and it was .. complex
J0yI9YUX41Wx wrote (edited )
Reply to comment by MasterDestroyer in Best Email Services For Privacy by Rambler
Not a bad idea!
I'm trying not to come across as a VM salesman and just to be thorough and specific about the information I'm sharing. Here I go. Vultr rents out a VM for $2.50/mo., full specs below. That easily out-competes most of the private email services reviewed, price-wise! You just have to figure out how you're going to do backups.
(Message me for a referral code if any of you are interested so we each each get a couple bucks free credit.)
Specs for the cheapo VM:
- 10 GB disk space on an SSD
- 512 MB of RAM
- 500 GB monthly bandwidth
- But... it only does IPv6!
- The pre-configured OSes available to choose from includes Ubuntu, and there are numerous "get Mail-in-a-box installed on Ubuntu" guides available online.
- Note: The $2.50/mo. IPv6-only box is only available in some Server Locations such as New Jersey, USA. Not sure what the rhyme or reason for that is.
If you can handle the fact that you'll only get an IPv6 address, that box is more than sufficient to serve email. It's $3.50 for the same machine but with IPv4.
J0yI9YUX41Wx wrote
Reply to comment by StreetMix in No, you shouldn't use Brave. by Rambler
Near as I can tell, people have no control over the development of their sexual preferences. Some men discover they are only attracted to other men. For those men, faggotry the gateway to some of the deepest and most profound experiences of fulfillment and pleasure available to humans. I want everyone to experience as much joy, pleasure, happiness, and meaning as possible during their short lives. Ergo, faggotry is good.
MasterDestroyer wrote
Reply to Best Email Services For Privacy by Rambler
i just set up a mail-in-a-box on a vps. it was surprisingly easy
boobs wrote
Reply to comment by mr4channer in How Law Enforcement Gets Around Your Smartphone's Encryption by Rambler
phones are not secure by definition
mr4channer wrote
phones are not secure by default
1122332211 wrote
too late all of the NPCs are going along.
burnerben OP wrote
Reply to comment by mr4channer in everyone is worried about getting a chip implanted by burnerben
elaborate