News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by rightbyte on Friday November 26, 2021 @07:30PM (#29355853)
> My expensive TV has banner ads in the menus (well, it did until I blocked about two dozen domains)

Just wait until Google has pushed everyone into encrypted DNS like they did with HTTP ...

Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by matt123456789 on Friday November 26, 2021 @08:43PM (#29356365)
HTTPS can be implemented in a decentralized way without a single party having access to your sites visited. DNS-over-HTTPS is by its nature centralized. So is DNS. Your DNS provider has a list of all sites they’ve resolved for you, whether it’s encrypted over using TLS or not. Maybe that doesn’t go against your point, but I wanted to clarify that the two technologies have very different privacy implications.
Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by perryizgr8 on Friday November 26, 2021 @09:00PM (#29356507)
> HTTPS can be implemented in a decentralized way

How does that work? AFAIK there is always a root authority.

Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by erikerikson on Friday November 26, 2021 @11:23PM (#29357386)
No. There are roots and you can install any root you like including one you create. Is that some amount of centralization? I don't think so though convenience and efficiency encourage it on a single and not very important dimension. Once a CA signs a cert they are no longer involved in the HTTPS protocol and really that's the bulk of the use case. As GP noted, it certainly includes "without a single party having access to your sites visited".
Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by soraminazuki on Saturday November 27, 2021 @01:53AM (#29358149)
You can install any root you like as long as your device lets you. TVs are less likely to let you install your own root.
Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by nicce on Friday November 26, 2021 @09:14PM (#29356608)
Keys can be exchanged without root authority. Root authority is only required for identifying that website owner is who he claims to be.
Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by xyzzyz on Friday November 26, 2021 @10:18PM (#29357038)
Yes, and without verifying that the owner is who he claims to be, exchanging keys is not of much value.
Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by c22 on Friday November 26, 2021 @11:17PM (#29357350)
I dunno, knowing the owner hasn't changed since last time seems almost as good.
Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by post-it on Friday November 26, 2021 @07:55PM (#29356012)
The TV will still need to update its certificates and work on corporate wifi, so there should always be a way to feed it your own certificate and MITM DNS. I think, anyway.
Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by krisrm on Friday November 26, 2021 @08:00PM (#29356043)
You'll have to pay extra for the "enterprise" TV ;)
Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by Spivak on Friday November 26, 2021 @08:41PM (#29356352)
I mean fine, I’ll gladly pay more just give me the option.
Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by anonymousab on Friday November 26, 2021 @10:54PM (#29357238)
Unfortunately, the "extra" will probably be another 0 on the end of the cost, alongside a minimum order requirement and needing to get the procurement through someone with connections.
Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by mananaysiempre on Saturday November 27, 2021 @10:04AM (#29360673)
This is more or less what happened with Windows 10 editions, as far as I can tell from reading the list.
Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by freeflight on Friday November 26, 2021 @09:35PM (#29356735)
You just fell for the con!
Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by Spivak on Friday November 26, 2021 @11:02PM (#29357287)
But why is it a con though?

Marginal cost of TV is $600, amortized business cost for projected sales is $400, expected average lifetime revenue from user data and ads is $60 ($15/"user"/yr for 5 years which is damn good for an ad network), throw in a 6.3% profit margin and we get TV priced at $999.99.

Throw away the ads and user data collection and up the profit to 10% to make it worth their while (since someone willing to pay more is on average worth more to advertisers and so decreases the value of their network) and we get a TV priced at $1099.99.

This seems totally fair to me.

Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by freeflight on Saturday November 27, 2021 @02:35PM (#29362717)
> But why is it a con though?

The product would work just fine without all the extra monetization, that's how it worked for the longest time. Nobody asked for savings trough selling their privacy, that was very much forced on us, and now they force the upsell to "enterpise privacy edition" as the solution to a problem they themselves introduced.

Re:Microsoft pushes ahead with controversial ‘buy now, pay l... by the_pwner224 on Friday November 26, 2021 @09:02PM (#29356523)
Only until they implement cert pinning, unfortunately.