- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
I know people have mixed opinions on Braxman but I don’t see any huge leaps in logic here tbh… Thoughts?
You must log in or register to comment.
Removed by mod
the lengths i go
sorry but you’re not the standard for “honest dialogue” 🤣 seems like this comment is just a weird excuse to talk about yourself and Graphene lol
Removed by mod
oh please all powerful lemmy mod! I will be a good little lemming! only do not ban me. I’ll keep my mouth shut!
🤣🤣 jesus christ get a life. go touch grass. or women. or both.
Removed by mod
Sometimes I think you’re strcat because you behave the same in a lot of ways but seem to have the complete opposite opinions
insecure and power tripping. typical stuff
Removed by mod
“looking spicy” god the narcissism is too cringe sheesh
3 letter agencies, governments in general and data hungry companies will continue searching for a way to bypass encryption. And just a reminder: direct access to the system (remote or physical) bypasses all kinds of encryption unless it’s protected separately. Backdoors and kernel level anti-cheats ftw
true
Physical access trumps all.
Eh, kind of. Remote Desktop with an admin account would be more useful than physical access to a locked computer. Because if Bitlocker is enabled, then all that matters is that you can sign into the computer. Use strong passwords, don’t open RDP to the WAN, lock your workstations when walking away, etc…
Even cloning the drive to crack later (historically, this was a popular choice if you had physical access) is pretty useless if you don’t have a user’s password.
Physical access like an NPU chip fixed onto your motherboard?
Sure, anything with direct bus access to unencrypted data… that’ll do it
I didn’t mean that. I meant if the hacker has access to the administrator (or just user in case with E2EE messengers) account, they can see and download anything, no matter how encrypted it is. The chips can do stuff as well but idk any proof of that tbh
Sure, side channel leakage if you can run locally.
Honestly, most machines have enough cores, that you could pin a process to a specific core giving it independent cache, and work around a lot of these side channel attacks. So you’re encrypted and send messenger would get an exclusive core. Kind of like how we do VM pinning nowadays
What?
Bone apple tea. Fixed
Not really? If disks are encrypted good luck getting anything out of it. A remote access to a running machine? It’s all laid there.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/PnG66fHKRw0
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Death of encryption?
They are rolling out forced turned-on-by-default BitLocker hard drive encryption for everyone using Windows 11. Including all those people who dont understand how it works and won’t save their backup keys.
Microsoft is dumb but pretending they are trying to kill encryption is also dumb.
