asimops

It is different, because the access is tied to your contract/job.

But even if it were legal, this only shows the core problem:

That data should not be available to anyone at all.

This immediately reminded me of Answer in Progress recipe cleaner: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZvC2jtmVAMs

The domains that do enforce DMARC are apparently configured so badly that the German secure email provider mailbox.org decided not to honor DMARC.

See this thread in German: https://userforum.mailbox.org/topic/10676-mailbox-org-akzept...

I know it is late, but for anyone reading this now, as I am:

Mailbox.org is completely ignoring DMARC since months... And their handling of the issue IMHO is incompetent at best.

See this thread (in German) https://userforum.mailbox.org/topic/10676-mailbox-org-akzept...

A secure OS is a prerequisite for secure digital services. We can agree on that, right?

The task, therefore, is to convince enough politicians to establish an independent unit that can address this issue without direct political influence.

Fund the unit with enough money so that it can take care of the cybersecurity and sovereignty of all citizens.

A side effect of this would hopefully be that these politicians would then be digitally literate enough to recognize nonsense such as chat control as such and reject it outright. I hope that most politicians would not really want such omnipotent surveillance tools if they could truly grasp their scope.

Germany requires ID for all SIMs (for "normal" people). You can buy activated SIMs in every bigger city if you know what to look for though.

In my opinion, the only solution while keeping Google and Apple as the developing entities is regulation.

Despite that, there are some things that should not be for profit in my opinion. A good OS platform is one such thing.

While it is technically feasible, it is not a good idea to try and find a technical solution to a people/organisation problem.

Do not accept the premise of assholes.

I hope we can get the EU to fund a truly open Android Fork. Maybe under some organisation similar to NL Labs.

--- edit ---

Furthermore, the need for a trustworthy binary to be auditable to a certain hash or something would make banning this a simple task if Google would want to go that route.

The time to fight against this was when they pushed the first kind of this extortion services.

But do not accept it as a given now. The next best time to fight agains this is always now! Do not buys cars that are sold that way. If you have to buy a 'new' car, buy a used one that you can repair. Try to see this pattern in other products and avoid those too.

Talk about it with others while mentioning simple analogies like basfo did here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44944155

And please, do not think that 'the market' could solve this. Once 'the market' sees adoption, it will follow suit. Only regulation can help with these issues.

Nothing is lost until we give up and accept that.

There is a blog post that captures this feelings very well in my opinion: Not being federated and E2E as an advantage https://blog.koehntopp.info/2025/06/17/no-federation-no-e2e....

Yes, that captures my intent :) Sadly, I cannot edit the post anymore.

Wow, that exploded over night :D It's nice to see, I am not alone.

With Android working on including a "desktop mode" where you can add a screen and HID devices, I sure hope that the phone screens will get smaller again.

Might be one of those weirdos using an ad blocker ;)

I don't think the issue really stems from putty.org being there. It stems from a "trusted" third-party, the search engine, suggesting you the wrong place.

Therefore I think you are missing the point with your analogy.

Well, classic sender receiver mismatch I guess :D

Is my intent more clear with that second try to explain? If not, I'm more then welcome to talk about a better way to phrase it :)

IMHO neither of the two showed exactly nice behavior. But I don't think that this is particularly relevant.

This is definitely something that should be raised to the putty team. But with how the rest of the text is worded, I doubt that will change their mind.

As is https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/ to Putty.

Still there were multiple requests to the Keepass project to change that domain to "a proper" domain like keepass.com

I don't get it. The putty website has always been https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/

This has never changed.

Just because someone likes to use short circuit routing in their head doesn't make putty.org the official site for putty.

That is the same attitude as telling the Keepass folks that https://keepass.info/ is wrong...

edit:

Maybe also have a look at the putty FAQ, especially 9.3

https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/faq.html#...

What does 5G have to do with coverage? LTE 800mhz can give you the same coverage as 5G 700mhz

I have seen [1] a long time ago. But AFAIK until this day, the Workstation installer still asks whether you are either a private user or have a license key... So is it really free?

In the case of Attack scenario 2, I do not get why in a secure design you would ever forward the client originating data to the auth service. This is more of a broken best practise then a footgun to me.

The logic should be "Parse, don't validate"[0] and after that you work on those parsed data.

[0]: https://hn.algolia.com/?q=https%3A%2F%2Flexi-lambda.github.i...

The key in question is the acme account key though, correct?

Don't you think you are falling for classic whataboutism here?

Just because ASN.1 and friends are exceptionally bad, it does not mean that Json Web * cannot be bad also.