Soatok

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] Soatok@pawb.social 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Which is more toxic?

The one that contains the most aggression.

Aggression isn't toxicity. The logical consequence of your stance is negative peace, and broken stairs.

Do most of those strangers know that you are receiving hundreds of requests? They’re strangers, so I’m betting on no.

Sure they do, because I tell them. The screenshot you posted is proof that I inform them.

The rest of this is needless language policing.

[–] Soatok@pawb.social 3 points 1 week ago (3 children)

You say you're arguing in favor of less toxicity, but your example was a screenshot of a comment where I asserted my own healthy boundaries (after being needled by hundreds of demands in the form of "what about ?" from strangers over the course of months).

Which is more toxic?

[–] Soatok@pawb.social 7 points 4 months ago

Thanks. Happy to help! <3

[–] Soatok@pawb.social 9 points 4 months ago

You're the one that chose to comment on my post lol

[–] Soatok@pawb.social 15 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Hell, even Mullvad uses WireGuard. Your argument is the most confidently incorrect I've seen on Lemmy ever since that one furry shouted over me to recommend Matrix instead of Signal.

[–] Soatok@pawb.social 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Wireguard is not a vpn, there is no usable vpns built on wireguard,

Tailscale

[–] Soatok@pawb.social 4 points 4 months ago
[–] Soatok@pawb.social 6 points 5 months ago

TL;DR from oss-security:

At a glance, what I found is the following:

  1. Session only uses 128 bits of entropy for Ed25519 keys. This means their ECDLP is at most 64 bits, which is pretty reasonably in the realm of possibility for nation state attackers to exploit.
  2. Session has an Ed25519 verification algorithm that verifies a signature for a message against a public key provided by the message. This is amateur hour.
  3. Session uses an X25519 public key as the symmetric key for AES-GCM as part of their encryption for onion routing.

Additional gripes about their source code were also included in the blog post.

[–] Soatok@pawb.social 17 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That's a reasonable thing to dislike about it.

I dislike that I can't reply to another message with a sticker.

I also dislike that, despite having admin access, I can't delete abusive messages left in groups for anyone but myself. That makes it unsuitable for building communities.

[–] Soatok@pawb.social 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

How much can you control the conversation if the entity you are discussing only wants their name published?

It's not about what they want published. It's about what they don't want published.

Sure there will be a few GDPR letters and maybe an inquiry by some regulatory body. Satisfyingly annoying to them, but compared to the cost of an advertising campaign; would this not be just a drop in the bucket.

Advertising campaigns generally don't include OSINT on the people behind it and evidence of their crimes. How does what I published help them increase their revenue or reduce their costs? Everything is ruled by incentives.

view more: next ›