Still closed source proprietary software, but good for them.

Yeah I have a dedicated IoT wifi network for those types of random devices. They are isolated, so any device on that particular network cant talk to any other device. If they must communicate with each other, I will set up firewall rules between the two, but wont let them access anything else on the network.

If they need internet access, you can rate limit their speed to like 1kb/s and set their dns resolver to a pi hole to keep tabs on where they are phoning home to and block accordingly.

If you can configure that devices TTL, set it low to like 4 or 5, and increase by 1 if its having trouble reaching the necessary destination. Also, block access to outside countries, as you probably aren’t needing remote management from the foreign motherlands.

Discord is still a privacy nightmare regardless, but at least they won’t require your ID by default.

Looks like a bug report is already there and has been there since Firefox 106. What exactly are you asking? Its been on their radar for a while now.

Who snitched to bluesky about that israeli war crimes account? Now those 13 year old children on bluesky cant watch other 13 year old Gaza children getting sniped by israeli forces.

Stay woke. Fascists creepin. They gon’ find you. Gon’ catch you sleepin.

The current description of Tails seems to say the opposite. They say ALL traffic goes through Tor. And only the Tor Browser is installed.

Tails?

Tor for everything

Everything you do on the Internet from Tails goes through the Tor network. Tor encrypts and anonymizes your connection by passing it through 3 relays. Relays are servers operated by different people and organizations around the world.

https://tails.net/about/index.en.html

https://tails.net/doc/anonymous_internet/tor/why/index.en.html

If its an Android or iOS phone, then it will prompt for a password or pin after a few failed fingerprint scans.

Fingerprint is just there for convenience, but you can get around it in most cases.

if we remove microsoft signing as an option for whatever reason (which we have) then it’s still very possible, and very easy to implement signed updates into your own custom update mechanism

Im not convinced

the part that we’re arguing against isn’t that a microsoft signing key would have fixed the problem, it’s

I didn’t say a Microsoft signing key is required. Im saying Microsoft requires that you go out and obtain a signed certificate that proves your identity as a developer.

this update mechanism already exists: it’s the reason the hijack was possible. whatever the technical process behind the scenes is irrelevant… that is how it currently works; it’s not a “what if”

The update mechanism was successful hijacked because integrity checks and authentication checks were not properly in place. Notepad++ even said that they moved hosting providers after this happened to them.

Per https://www.rapid7.com/blog/post/tr-chrysalis-backdoor-dive-into-lotus-blossoms-toolkit/

adding signing into that existing process without any 3rd party involvement is both free, and very very easy

Can you point out an existing open source application that runs on Windows that only uses GPG signatures?

They literally are

Agreed.

If the updates were signed, then the malicious actor could not push their own updates. It would fail authentication and integrity checks.

The gpg sig method works great on other operating systems that aren’t Windows or MacOS, but Windows and MacOS do not use that method to verify the authenticity of developer’s certificates.

The update mechanism works fine, but you will not be able to execute the binary on a Windows or MacOS system. The OS will not allow it to run without it being signed.

The malicious actor would not be able to drag and drop their malware in without the Notepad++ certificate. The signature wouldn’t match.

The certificate is not only doing authentication of the developer, but it is also doubling as an integrity check to make sure the code hasn’t been modified.

And they’re both ass tbh because the community edition for each one has arbitrary limitations built in, and you need a premium license to unlock its full capabilities.

Im not sure. I don’t have Windows to look at the code signing certificate they are using (if they are using one at all). Hopefully someone else can check and let us know.

If Notepad++ had a valid signing certificate, you wouldn’t be able to run the malicious binary in the update. How is that not relevant?

After an update on Windows, you must close the application to clear the RAM before launching the updated exe.

Upon launching the new binary exe, Microsoft will check the code signing certificate and make sure its valid before letting it execute. If its not signed, you will be met with a warning that the binary publisher is unknown, and I believe that Microsoft won’t even let it launch nowadays

The answer to that question is honestly super complicated, and it has its own job title tbh. Managing code signing certificates can be really complex depending on the software.

This gist kinda covers the basics

https://gist.github.com/MangaD/e8f67fb39a35abdbf4ad26711c5957cc

After you install the update, which exe will you execute after the app restarts?