/g/ - Technology

REDACTED-K---S.jpg
[Hide] (29.2KB, 239x211) Reverse

>>643 (OP) 
Unsafe wherever you go...
https://www.zero-day.cz/database/151/

>>646
This is dated at close to nine years ago and was never demonstrated to be exploited on appropriately hardened kernels.
Linux isn't illumos (descended from OpenSolaris) or OpenBSD, and never will be.
Yet Windows' own track record on exploitable vulnerabilities is absolutely abysmal next to Linux (even without the industrial grade hardening options).

On the topic of security Windows is a non-starter.

1637351306940.gif
[Hide] (1011.5KB, 500x655) Reverse

>>649
>Yet Windows' own track record on exploitable vulnerabilities is absolutely abysmal next to Linux
I don't disagree..WinBlow$ is SHIT
you Can't be unaware of just how compromised everything is down to a hardware level though, can you?
Shirley, you aren't going to say your own machine is running bespoke hardware with NO backdoors and 0 Zeroday exploits?

You have a specific protocol recommendation for n00bs?
Arch seems popular for those without real obligations... or friends, since they spend 25 hours a day tweaking and re-tweaking their shit.

How do you feel about Slackware?

>>650
> just how compromised everything is down to a hardware level
Different set of goal posts another 100 yards down.

> your own machine is running bespoke hardware with NO backdoors
I'm not typing this on x86_64 nor running any binary blobs on a coprocessor. You're the one with the "bespoke" hardware from my point of view.

I also am not vulnerable to CPU backdoors like those demonstrated by Chris Domas. How I have this is based on innovations by prominent members of the free software community as far back as year 2018. I would say more about it but I suspect helping you out specifically would be sinful.

SelfSuckPepe-you.jpg
[Hide] (15.3KB, 250x233) Reverse

>>652
>Different set of goal posts another 100 yards down.
Not at all..
the GOAL POSTS are SECURITY.
It all falls under that umbrella.
you are merely poking at the panels saying" Nuh UHH! THIS is mo' impo'tant"

>You're the one with the "bespoke" hardware from my point of view.
Oh SHIT! you really need to look up bespoke--it's NOT what you think. 
It does NOT mean proprietary to a multinational corpo.
I meant custom chipsets which 95+% of compy's DON'T have.
I was once good friends with a guy who worked at Crane Naval center in central IN, he used to assemble laptops for NSA and, *ahem* "Other Assets"
Funnily enough, He once offered me a decommisioned lappy from his "Burn pile"
I often have wondered if I should have taken him up on the offer.
Still glad I didn't.
>but I suspect helping you out specifically would be sinful.
LEL!
I'm NOT a glownigger, nor a degenerate, if that's what you mean.
What's the fucking point of your apoplectic gyrations if you aren't going to be helpful(not to me specifically, but poor retards like the one you were lambasting on SimpleX for no apparent reason but to self-suck

)

> Arch seems popular for those without real obligations... or friends, since they spend 25 hours a day tweaking and re-tweaking their shit.
About 19 years ago this argument could be plausible.
Today: PewDiePie who a full time married father and youtube personality chose to run Arch on the personal laptop he takes between countries.

Almost any high school kid who can manage to install Steam can also rice out and use Arch Linux full time. We're not in the 2000s anymore.

It's not a stretch to speculate that PewDiePie has richer friendships among a greater number of friends than you do.

>>653
> you really need to look up bespoke
No, I do not.
What I wrote: "from my point of view" was clear enough.

I see x86_64 as something that exists for a specific purpose for a specific jurisdiction separate from mine. I do not live under the same jurisdiction you do. That you are subject to it is indicated by your own viewpoint on x86_64. We have different ODMs and different OEMs.
You and I are not like each other.

> I meant custom chipsets which 95+% of compy's DON'T have.
Ok. Perhaps you thought this was relevant to this thread.
Businesses that want hardware without backdoors can buy it, if they want ; it's neither here nor there.

> I was once good friends with a guy who worked at -- [my dad works at Nintendo]
You're just making shit up.

> you were lambasting on SimpleX
I specifically have not yet posted on any SimpleX channels related to this site.

> I'm NOT a glownigger, nor a degenerate, if that's what you mean.
You post like a fag and your arguments are retarded.

IMG_1525.JPG
[Hide] (1.1MB, 1600x1200) Reverse

>>655
>About 19 years ago this argument could be plausible.
Checked
Fair... but I've heard Arch users themselves say similar,(jokingly,) within the last 6 months.
I could GAF about PewDiePie, last time I looked at any of his content,(one of maybe 10-15 times,) was maybe 2013?
>"BARRELS!!"

>It's not a stretch to speculate that PewDiePie has richer friendships among a greater number of friends than you do.
THAT'S your argument...
Besides, I'd guess you haven't met too many famous or extremely wealthy people--They resoundingly say that they have a (MORE) difficult time with friends and even acquaintances, just due to the fact they never know MOTIVES of said "Friends"

So... you ARE an Arch user. Cool--Whatever.
Any decent tricks or tips for the Lurkers out there?
*(You are in fact aware These 2 threads are being lurked by most of the board RN, right? RIGHT?)

We can back off (at least I can) from the shit slinging, since clearly it's not as productive as just discourse.

>>656
>No, I do not.
What I wrote: "from my point of view" was clear enough
WEW LADS!
>You and I are not like each other.
Nope, Thank GOD! 
>You're just making shit up.
LOLOLOL!!
Okay.
Tell you what, Kid, Believe what you want, but There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio...
>You post like a fag and your arguments are retarded.
You post like a child...
SO?
>I specifically have not yet posted on any SimpleX channels related to this site
Hmm...
You sure do post like that guy...
Okay.IYSS--Case of mistaken ID then.

068063223482627fbdbbc4369921efa8a586a976c0a07c8d989d8043a5b8c688.png
[Hide] (1.3MB, 1920x1080) Reverse

>>657
Personally I would not consider using Arch for anything and I dislike Arch more than a little. But I wouldn't indulge in even mild lies about Arch.

> famous or extremely wealthy people--They resoundingly say that they have a (MORE) difficult time with friends and even acquaintances, just due to the fact they never know MOTIVES of said "Friends"
So we both may have some insight as to why people in this class, or even some strata below, and those who mingle with any of those prioritize privacy and more than a few among those see x86_64 as something foreign and "for the masses".

BlackHat, Chaos Communication Congress, and DEF CON talks showing that Intel ME without AMT can become Intel ME+AMT in a heartbeat weren't pulling up the veil on something that was a mere mistake but something else.

Outside of well-to-do families and communities, getting off the x86_64 plantation onto something like where I am is a not a matter between haves and have-nots but the dos and do-nothings.

PewDiePie's now famous video-post about Linux is more significant for Linux and other freedom software projects much more than those projects are (or may ever be) aware of.

picrel borrowed from http://4jndbnscrvmljnl3vynggebzvi5saz5gllk3iksdskgkmoq5oaqtxrqd.onion/g/thread/592.html

distro.png
[Hide] (159.9KB, 960x768) Reverse

>>653
> the GOAL POSTS are SECURITY.
Even on perfect hardware, Windows is not a viable starting point. Windows can't do, nor will Windows ever do, software supply chain security. With no source code (that is also covered by a copyright that is tenable) there is no starting point for meaningful security.

Windows as a software stack is untenable.

x86_64 and ARM64 chipsets have intentional backdoors. Some "libre" chipsets have unknown intentional CPU backdoors.

Linux can run on things that are chosen specifically for lack of backdoors and major chipset problems.
Windows can not.
Linux can run on a system that skirts the dangers of CPU backdoors.
Windows can not.

Not only can Windows not run on these systems, it never will.

In the world of freedom software encompassing Linux and adjacent systems we have bit-for-bit reproducible binaries and also reproducible computations.

Linux used by some software stacks, "some" as in GrapheneOS has very different standards and ways of running apps than say Ubuntu.

Even if hardware that were perfect existed and were also available for Windows and the comparison was based solely on software (and not hardware), Windows remains light years behind Linux/Redox/BSD/illumos.

https://www.chainguard.dev/
https://reproducible-builds.org/
https://guix.gnu.org/en/blog/2020/reproducible-computations-with-guix/

>>660
Yep. what do you suggest for good hardware?

Screenshot_2025-05-29_at_09-59-05_Gentoo_OpenBSD_-_Gentoo_wiki.png
[Hide] (128.3KB, 1300x844) Reverse

Screenshot_2025-05-29_at_10-08-38_Reproducible_computations_with_Guix_—_2020_—_Blog_—_GNU_Guix.png
[Hide] (15.6KB, 835x299) Reverse

>>659
>So we both may have some insight...
Sure, but very few of them get in-depth with learning about how they work--They hire professionals to set up their systems,(generally,) so they are automatic.
Kek! Then again, some of these A+ list stars who we've seen lose their shit may have done so do to their OS's
>getting off the x86_64 plantation onto something like where I am is a not a matter between haves and have-nots but the dos and do-nothings.
This is VERY true, and is applicable to all aspects of life.
Right now, in the US, there are 8 digit net-worth faggots who eat goyslop every day, and suck up HOURS of screentime ((( Entertainment )))--
and on the other side of things, there are those relegated to 5 figures who look into things deeply without being "Fed the info", make their own things and food, instead of buying everything they own and use.
It truly isn't about money, "Success" or fame-- It's about the DRIVE to fed one's intellectual curiosity.
Truth be told, you'll NEVER be able to fully secure your machine from agencies who want in. I mean agencies and Bureaus, not individual actors. that is known.
Keeping your system secure from the rando Troon with stripey socks from cracking your box and waging a campaign against you is absolutely the point.
Not to mention, willfully rejecting the push by corpos to make you into a commodity.
>>660
TY anon.. I appreciate your straightforward candor here with this topic.
>Gentoo OpenBSD
diggit. I like the spikes--reads semiotically as hardened
Just out of curiosity, how far back do you suppose one would have to go to buy consumer computer parts/laptops/etc. to be able to More safely run on say...an older but modified Stinkpad(Thinkpad)

>pic 1
Do you find many issues with an unsupported fork? (I kind of have to assume you code your own patches and whatnot)
>pic 2
LOL!
<"It's No USE! It's dependencies ALL the way down!"

>>662
> It's about the DRIVE to fed one's intellectual curiosity.
*FEED
Weird Freudian Slit...

> some of these A+ list stars who we've seen lose their shit may have done so do to their OS's
Every iPhone user is a few clicks by someone sitting in some building somewhere from total chaos introduced to their personal and public-facing lives.
Software, the operating system, matters.

> there are 8 digit net-worth faggots who eat goyslop every day
Spiritual poverty is a thing.

> you'll NEVER be able to fully secure your machine from agencies who want in.
This is a (you) problem.
Both I and my colleagues view and post on this site on machines that are not realistically going to be digitally compromised. CIA, Mossad, Santa Claus, whatever NGO Blackrock hires, can't do shit.

> Keeping your system secure from the rando Troon with stripey socks from cracking your box and waging a campaign against you is absolutely the point.
Yeah there are indeed too many actual faggots in the government.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nsa-investigates-secret-sex-chats-dei-agency-message-board

> how far back do you suppose one would have to go to buy
> run on say...an older but modified Stinkpad(Thinkpad)
This is an outdated paradigm. Within this outdated paradigm the platitudes like "you can't prevent CIA from hacking you" or "you need to buy ancient hardware to be secure" are valid. The (you) problem you're having will persist as long as you are in this paradigm.

> Do you find many issues with an unsupported fork?
Gentoo and OpenBSD are not just distributions of software but are mindsets. A Gentoo userland on an OpenBSD kernel is a branch that one or more people can use, if they want to.

> [Guix on GCC supply chain dependencies]
Every collection of software, such as distributions of Linux or BSD, are standing on top of this software supply chain tree or similar (maybe LLVM or something else instead of GCC).
Guix stands different from other distributions by accounting for the software supply chain integrity in the most elegant way any project has done so far.
Guix has a working "seed binary" that can bootstrap from ancient GCC to modern GCC.
Guix is more than a distribution, Guix is a mindset.

Diversity of thought is sometimes a good thing.

I ran Arch on my work laptop for 2 years now just for the memes. I didn't believe it would hold but apart from a couple updoot issues (that only broke a single AUR program that I didn't want to manually compile...and Postgresql fucking major versions), which didn't affect bootability and other things, there was no issue. To my surprise, actually. I never actually believe it would hold this long

t. btw user for 3 years now