• 0 Posts
  • 152 Comments
Joined 5 years ago
cake
Cake day: October 2nd, 2020

help-circle
  • i’m not an expert, but here’s my take.

    personally i question when such movements take power that we should interpret it as consent by the public majority.

    part of the reason the public apparently bestow power to the machinery of government is because the machinery is supposed to protect them from this very thing happening.

    the fact that it is happening, means such a rise in fact did not occur within the correct functioning of that machine.

    therefore we should probably question whether we should interpret it as consent by the majority.


    and if its not consent by the majority, then in some ways the picture is both bleaker and brighter.

    brighter, because you’re not surrounded by quite so many evil fucks as they wanted you to believe

    bleaker, well, probably don’t need to explain that bit


  • ok fair enough, sorry i may have misinterpreted what you meant.

    it sounds like your argument is that if the attacker doesn’t know the service is running then the assertion that this reduces the risk profile is classified as an obscurity control - this argument is correct under these conditions.

    however, certain knocking configurations are not obscurity, because their purpose & value does not depend on the hope that the attacker is unaware of the service’s existence but rather to reduce the attacker’s window of access to the service with a type of out of band whitelisting. by limiting the attacker’s access to the service you are reducing the attack surface.

    you can imagine it like a stack call trace, the deeper into the trace you go, every single instruction represents the attack surface getting larger and larger. the earlier in the trace you limit access to the attacker, you are by definition reducing the attack surface.

    in case i’ve misinterpreted what you meant. susceptibility to a replay attack does not mean something isn’t a security measure. it means it’s a security measure with a vulnerability. ofc replay attacks in knocking is a well known problem addressed long ago.

    perhaps the other source of miscommunication is for us to remember that security is about layers, because no single layer is ever going to be perfect.









  • ganymede@lemmy.mltoMemes@lemmy.mlSelective rage
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    no, that illustration apparently came 12 years later

    anyway as an 1800s fairy tale for children, imo i think it’s fine to view it through the lens of whichever culture you want. the trouble imo begins when trying to ascribe something to the story which it certainly did not contain - even that is probably basically harmless if you’re just confused or something, but it certainly becomes a problem when it’s used to justify unfairly shitting on someone else for a slightly different yet completely harmless alternative depiction.


  • ganymede@lemmy.mltoMemes@lemmy.mlSelective rage
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 month ago

    it’s even worse than that cos the original text never said ariel’s human version race, they just assumed it lol.

    and before anyone says yes but its written by a dane, my response is yes but it’s a fairy tale, anything is possible. why assume and then get angry based on your assumption?




  • anywhere shit gets cliquey it gets toxic real fast - and that goes for ANY and ALL organisations.

    safe-space concepts often inherently deals with an “us/them” dichotomy, which is unfortunately fertile ground for things getting cliquey.

    it’s not that one must lead to the other, its just that the foundation is there so the risk is higher if it’s not managed properly.

    this is why safe-spaces need to be protected from within and without. regardless of whether you’re in the clique or out of it, it hurts everyone in the end.







  • no, they steal everything.

    why do we keep letting them steal

    ‘free speech’ has always been about the freedom of the oppressed to fight upwards against their oppressor with language - but now they stole it & trying to make it mean their freedom to oppress minorities.

    same for ‘woke’ - it used to mean basic human decency, once again they stole it & warped it’s meaning by pretending they’re the victims and it’s preventing their freedom (ie. their freedom to be a bigot).

    same for ‘political correctness’, which was originally a criticism of using fake concern over moral issues for political agenda (sounds familiar), now warped beyond use.

    swastika - used for THOUSANDS of years before the fucking nazis came along & stole it. now the cultures it actually belongs to get hate for practicing their ancient beliefs.

    pepe and many others are a long list of things they steal and ruin.

    why do we keep letting them steal?