Need to let loose a primal scream without collecting footnotes first? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid: Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.

Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.

If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.

The post Xitter web has spawned soo many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)

Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.

(Credit and/or blame to David Gerard for starting this.)

  • Sailor Sega Saturn@awful.systemsEnglish
    0·
    5 months ago

    The part I hate most about phone security on Android is that the first step is inevitably to buy a new phone (it might be better on iPhone but I don’t want an iPhone)

    The industry talks the talk about security being important, but can never seem to find the means to provide simple security updates for more than a few years. Like I’m not going to turn my phone into e-waste before I have to so I guess I’ll just hope I don’t get hacked!

    • self@awful.systemsEnglish
      0·
      5 months ago

      that’s one of the problems I’ve noticed in almost every online privacy community since I was young: a lot of it is just rich asshole security cosplay, where the point is to show off what you have the privilege to afford and free time to do, even if it doesn’t work.

      I bought a used phone to try GrapheneOS, but it only runs on 6th-9th gen Pixels specifically due to the absolute state of Android security and backported patches. it’s surprisingly ok so far? it’s definitely a lot less painful than expected coming from iOS, and it’s got some interesting options to use even potentially spyware-laden apps more privately and some interesting upcoming virtualization features. but also its core dev team comes off as pretty toxic and some of their userland decisions partially inspired my rant about privacy communities; the other big inspiration was privacyguides.

      and the whole time my brain’s like, “this is seriously the best we’ve got?” cause neither graphene nor privacyguides seem to take the real threats facing vulnerable people particularly seriously — or they’d definitely be making much different recommendations and running much different communities. but online privacy has unfortunately always been like this: it’s privileged people telling the vulnerable they must be wrong about the danger they’re in.

      • BlueMonday1984@awful.systemsOPEnglish
        0·
        5 months ago

        some of their userland decisions partially inspired my rant about privacy communities; the other big inspiration was privacyguides.

        I need to see this rant. If you can link it here, I’d be glad.

        • self@awful.systemsEnglish
          0·
          5 months ago

          oh I meant the rant that started this thread, but fuck it, let’s go, welcome to the awful.systems privacy guide

          grapheneOS review!

          pros:

          • provably highly Cellebrite-resistant due to obsessive amounts of dev attention given to low-level security and practices enforced around phone login
          • almost barebones AOSP! for better or worse
          • sandboxed Google Play Services so you can use the damn phone practically without feeding all your data into Google’s maw
          • buggy but usable support for Android user profiles and private spaces so you can isolate spyware apps to a fairly high degree
          • there’s support coming for some very cool virtualization features for securely using your phone as one of them convertible desktops or for maybe virtualizing graphene under graphene
          • it’s probably the only relatively serious choice for a secure mobile OS? and that’s depressing as fuck actually, how did we get here

          cons:

          • the devs seem toxic
          • the community is toxic
          • almost barebones AOSP! so good fucking luck when the AOSP implementation of something is broken or buggy or missing cause the graphene devs will tell you to fuck off
          • the project has weird priorities and seems to just forget to do parts of their roadmap when their devs lose interest
          • their browser vanadium seems like a good chromium fork and a fine webview implementation but lacks an effective ad blocker, which makes it unsafe to use if your threat model includes, you know, the fucking obvious. the graphene devs will shame you for using anything but it or brave though, and officially recommend using either a VPN with ad blocking or a service like NextDNS since they don’t seem to acknowledge that network-level blocking isn’t sufficient
          • there’s just a lot of userland low hanging fruit it doesn’t have. like, you’re not supposed to root a grapheneOS phone cause that breaks Android’s security model wide open. cool! do they ship any apps to do even the basic shit you’d want root for? of course not.
          • you’ll have 4 different app stores (per profile) and not know which one to use for anything. if you choose wrong the project devs will shame you.
          • the docs are wildly out of date, of course, why wouldn’t they be. presumably I’m supposed to be on Matrix or Discord but I’m not going to do that

          and now the NextDNS rant:

          this is just spyware as a service. why in fuck do privacyguides and the graphene community both recommend a service that uniquely correlates your DNS traffic with your account (even the “try without an account” button on their site generates a 7 day trial account and a DNS instance so your usage can be tracked) and recommend configuring it in such a way that said traffic can be correlated with VPN traffic? this is incredibly valuable data especially when tagged with an individual’s identity, and the only guarantee you have that they don’t do this is a promise from a US-based corporation that will be broken the instant they receive a court order. privacyguides should be ashamed for recommending this unserious clown shit.

          • sinedpick@awful.systemsEnglish
            0·
            5 months ago

            their browser vanadium seems like a good chromium fork and a fine webview implementation but lacks an effective ad blocker, which makes it unsafe to use if your threat model includes, you know, the fucking obvious. the graphene devs will shame you for using anything but it or brave though, and officially recommend using either a VPN with ad blocking or a service like NextDNS since they don’t seem to acknowledge that network-level blocking isn’t sufficient

            No firefox with ublock origin? Seems like that would be the obvious choice here (or maybe not due to Mozilla’s recent antics)

            • self@awful.systemsEnglish
              0·
              5 months ago

              the GrapheneOS developers would like you to know that switching to Ironfox, the only Android Firefox fork (to my knowledge) that implements process sandboxing (and also ships ublock origin for convenience) (also also, the Firefox situation on Android looks so much like intentional Mozilla sabotage, cause they have a perfectly good sandbox sitting there disabled) is utterly unsafe because it doesn’t work with a lesser Android sandbox named isolatedProcess or have the V8 sandbox (because it isn’t V8) and its usage will result in your immediate death

              so anyway I’m currently switching from vanadium to ironfox and it’s a lot better so far

              • nightsky@awful.systemsEnglish
                0·
                5 months ago

                and its usage will result in your immediate death

                This all-or-nothing approach, where compromises are never allowed, is my biggest annoyance with some privacy/security advocates, and also it unfortunately influences many software design choices. Since this is a nice thread for ranting, here’s a few examples:

                • LibreWolf enables by default “resist fingerprinting”. That’s nice. However, that setting also hard-enables “smooth scrolling”, because apparently having non-smooth scrolling can be fingerprinted (that being possible is IMO reason alone to burn down the modern web altogether). Too bad that smooth scrolling sometimes makes me feel dizzy, and then I have to disable it. So I don’t get to have “resist fingerprinting”. Cool.
                • Some of the modern Linux software distribution formats like Snap or Flatpak, which are so super secure that some things just don’t work. After all, the safest software is the one you can’t even run.
                • Locking down permissions on desktop operating systems, because I, the sole user and owner of the machine, should not simply be allowed to do things. Things like using a scanner or a serial port. Which is of course only for my own protection. Also, I should constantly have to prove my identity to the machine by entering credentials, because what if someone broke into my home and was able to type “dmesg” without sudo to view my machine’s kernel log without proving that they are me, that would be horrible. Every desktop machine must be locked down to the highest extent as if it was a high security server.
                • Enforcement of strong password complexity rules in local only devices or services which will never be exposed to potential attackers unless they gain physical access to my home
                • Possibly controversial, but I’ll say it: web browsers being so annoying about self-signed certificates. Please at least give me a checkbox to allow it for hosts with rfc1918 addresses. Doesn’t have to be on by default, but why can’t that be a setting.
                • The entire reality of secure boot on most platforms. The idea is of course great, I want it. But implementations are typically very user-hostile. If you want to have some fun, figure out how to set up a PC with a Linux where you use your own certificate for signing. (I haven’t done it yet, I looked at the documentation and decided there are nicer things in this world.)

                This has gotten pretty long already, I will stop now. To be clear, this is not a rant against security… I treat security of my devices seriously. But I’m annoyed that I am forced to have protections in place against threat models that are irrelevant, or at least sufficiently negligible, for my personal use cases. (IMO one root cause is that too much software these days is written for the needs of enterprise IT environments, because that’s where the real money is, but that’s a different rant altogether.)

                • self@awful.systemsEnglish
                  0·
                  5 months ago

                  also, I forgot to point this out earlier, but it’s worth saying: the only reason why I’m considering GrapheneOS as a viable path forward is because as an AOSP fork, it isn’t all-or-nothing. I can create a private space or profile for Google Play Services and all my spyware shit and keep it isolated, and ending the session kills all the processes those apps might have been running.

                  that’s fantastic! I finally don’t have to switch fully to open source apps and do without working non-janky notifications to have a modicum of privacy on Android! the graphene devs assume I’m not gonna be perfect and they ruggedized their fork against that and put a ton of effort into making even stuff that’s deeply reliant on Google safer! why in fuck aren’t they like that for everything?