>fell for the open source meme
>fell for the Tor/I2P/decentralization meme
>fell for the Thinkpad meme
>fell for the Firefox meme
>fell for the Linux meme
>fell for the OpenBSD meme
>fell for the Searx/Invidious/Nitter meme

>open source
<"it's more secure than proprietary"
https://seirdy.one/posts/2022/02/02/floss-security/

>decentralization
>must now trust random strangers running tor nodes which could be controlling both the entry and exit node
>I2P exposes your IP address
>federation doesn't actually make you more private but now you're trusting multiple people with your privacy and not just (((facebook)))
<"it's better than facebook"
>still using social media, albeit federated

>thinkpads
>completely obsolete by today's standards, lacking in security and efficiency
>business laptops not made for (((consoomers))) like Luke Smith, Muslim Outlaw, etc.
>desktops in general are less secure than phones
<"but muh Intel ME"
>no proof that Intel ME is actually being used to spy on you, just FUD and conspiracy thinking
>literally just buy a Google Pixel

>firefox
>outclassed by Chromium in terms of security and compatibility with modern standards
<"it's not chrome and we shouldn't support google monopoly"
>literally a bad excuse not to use Chrome
>firefox is supported by Google and is controlled opposition
>google already controls the web since they developed the standards including QUIC
https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/firefox-chromium.html (did I even need to link this since everyone already knows this guy?)

>Linux
<outclassed by all major proprietary operating systems in terms of security
<no proper sandboxing, verified boot, missing lots of exploit mitigations, GUI isolation only works on Wayland
<literally worse for privacy than Windows with telemetry disabled
<"MUH FREEDOM!"
https://privsec.dev/os/linux-insecurities/#lack-of-verified-boot

>OpenBSD
<"it's the most secure operating system ever"
>literally the ultimate meme OS
>missing lots of mitigations and the mitigations they do have are half-baked or useless
>no protection against code reuse attacks, verified boot, trusted path execution, mandatory access control, or GUI isolation (rendering sandboxing futile)
https://isopenbsdsecu.re/
https://web.archive.org/web/20220227172102/https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/openbsd.html

>frontends (Invidious, nitter, etc.)
<"I have more privacy cus I'm not trusting Google"
>literally just a man-in-the-middle between you and Google
>Google can still see your searches (Searx, Whoogle) and the videos you watch (Invidious), even if they don't know your IP address
>but the owner of the instance knows your IP and activity and they could be worse than Google
<"but I randomize instances"
>but you're still trusting them, but now you're trusting even more strangers

Do privacy autists really? Don't fall for the memes. Listen to actual experts like madaidan, the privacyguides team, the whonix team, beerisgood, and the privsec.dev team and take a reasonable approach to privacy and security.

https://github.com/beerisgood
https://www.privacyguides.org/
https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/
https://whonix.org
https://privsec.dev/

Good troll+datamining bread, some things I agree with, others I don't:
>>must now trust random strangers
Tell that to Linux users who have no problem trusting packagers. The binaries aren't built and signed by upstream and nobody bats an eye.
><"but muh Intel ME"
>>no proof that Intel ME is actually being used to spy on you,
Solid arguments there! It has its own operating system, access to all your memory and a network connection. Fool! It doesn't matter if it's USED, it matters that it's THERE. Who asked for remote control/surveillance capabilities built into laptops and desktops as if they were servers? The average Joe didn't. Yet there it is.
>Do privacy autists really? Don't fall for the memes.
Wake me up when Linux has a proper firewall like Windows had since Windows Vista, better yet integrate it with AppArmor/selinux with a user-friendly interface so that people don't have to copy each other's configs like homework.

P6172
I'm impressed. You're so jobless you put so much effort into shitposting the same madaidan bait that's been reposted countless times on nanochan and other chans over the past two years.

Here's a pony for you.

P6177
>I'm impressed. You're so jobless you put so much effort into shitposting the same madaidan bait that's been reposted countless times on nanochan and other chans over the past two years.
wait i thought it was you behind this?

P6172
>fell for the Linux meme
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!

P6191


No, Richard, it's 'Linux', not 'GNU/Linux'. The most important contributions that the FSF made to Linux were the creation of the GPL and the GCC compiler. Those are fine and inspired products. GCC is a monumental achievement and has earned you, RMS, and the Free Software Foundation countless kudos and much appreciation.

Following are some reasons for you to mull over, including some already answered in your FAQ.

One guy, Linus Torvalds, used GCC to make his operating system (yes, Linux is an OS -- more on this later). He named it 'Linux' with a little help from his friends. Why doesn't he call it GNU/Linux? Because he wrote it, with more help from his friends, not you. You named your stuff, I named my stuff -- including the software I wrote using GCC -- and Linus named his stuff. The proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so. Linus has spoken. Accept his authority. To do otherwise is to become a nag. You don't want to be known as a nag, do you?

(An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system. By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a computer. That definition applies whereever you see Linux in use. However, Linux is usually distributed with a collection of utilities and applications to make it easily configurable as a desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution. Therein lies your strongest argument for the unwieldy title 'GNU/Linux' (when said bundled software is largely from the FSF). Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Take your beef to Red Hat, Mandrake, and Slackware. At least there you have an argument. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in various applications without any GNU software whatsoever. Embedded applications come to mind as an obvious example.

Next, even if we limit the GNU/Linux title to the GNU-based Linux distributions, we run into another obvious problem. XFree86 may well be more important to a particular Linux installation than the sum of all the GNU contributions. More properly, shouldn't the distribution be called XFree86/Linux? Or, at a minimum, XFree86/GNU/Linux? Of course, it would be rather arbitrary to draw the line there when many other fine contributions go unlisted. Yes, I know you've heard this one before. Get used to it. You'll keep hearing it until you can cleanly counter it.

You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNU code in a typical Linux distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing XFree86 code, XFree86 is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never excuted that bloatware, it certainly isn't more important code than XFree86. Obviously, this metric isn't perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in supporting any argument.

Last, I'd like to point out that we Linux and GNU users shouldn't be fighting among ourselves over naming other people's software. But what the heck, I'm in a bad mood now. I think I'm feeling sufficiently obnoxious to make the point that GCC is so very famous and, yes, so very useful only because Linux was developed. In a show of proper respect and gratitude, shouldn't you and everyone refer to GCC as 'the Linux compiler'? Or at least, 'Linux GCC'? Seriously, where would your masterpiece be without Linux? Languishing with the HURD?

If there is a moral buried in this rant, maybe it is this:

Be grateful for your abilities and your incredible success and your considerable fame. Continue to use that success and fame for good, not evil. Also, be especially grateful for Linux' huge contribution to that success. You, RMS, the Free Software Foundation, and GNU software have reached their current high profiles largely on the back of Linux. You have changed the world. Now, go forth and don't be a nag.

Thanks for listening.

P6172
nice shitpost mate.
[bold: total.iq.points.lost = "84"]

[bold: fagman.aids.aquired = "true"]

[bold: strong.urge.for.BBC = "true"]

not in /trash/

>>p6172
>fell for the Firefox meme
its actkually gud idgi ?

Go back to 4chan retard

>>firefox
>>outclassed by Chromium in terms of security and compatibility with modern standards
can you SHUT THE FUCK UP with this
they are both trash and not even distinguishable. commercial security literally is a bunch of security theater like cloudflare trusted computing, HDCP, etc. literally a bunch of boomers go in the office and SURPRISE BOSS I GOT YOU A NEW DILDO ITS CALLED LINT WOOOW WE ARE NOW NIST FIPS LINT CERTIFIED WE NO LONGER HAVE DOUBLE SEMICOLONS IN OUR CODE
the web is an abomination, it creates security vulnerabilities over nothing, see CSRF for the state of how broken it was in 2000 (it gets 10x more broken every year)
>maidaidan maidaidan maidaidan maidaidan maidaidan maidaidan maidaidan googoogaga
>still not clicking that, still never did

>Listen to actual experts like
all said experts listed use linux lol

you'll know nothing about the state of security
your contributions are all negative because you do not have basic understanding of the structure of stupid unedcated niggers (EEs, newgrad for life programmers, programmer elitists who are actually just niggers, infosec kiddies, infosec cartel, CEOniggers, lay people, "tech savy" niggers, "avid gamer" niggers) who make up the industry. everything you do just plays into their retardation and causes a net negative
here is how security actually works in a "we're not open source hippies we are actual serious business":
>the ' key is accidentally pressed
>the user now spends the next 3 hours of his life trying to get back on the service

this is now a thread about programming languages
niggers who make programming languages are fucking gigantic nigger retards
PHP solved no fucking problem, it was a net negative. it had some feature where you can set any variable in the code by adding shit in the url, e.g x=1&y=2&admin=true
some built in functions would treat a string with a zero in it as the end of the string, leading to endless vulns
so the faggot didnt even bother to polish up any of the "oh so convenient" built in functions, he just inherited semantics from C like a typical PL nigger
why the fuck would i ever use this horse shit when at the time i could just use some existing language better in every way and just return "<a href=\"$link\">$title</a>"

P6172
intel ME is nigger garbage though
literally just a bunch of retarded garbage that makes the product worse than if it wasnt there at all
>has pointless features for business niggers that have nothing to do with a consumer application, which when you first hear of it you just know they'll fuck it up and turn it into an RCE vuln, which was later proven although only business niggers who turned it on in the first place were vulnerable which is still ironic and a prime example of why IME is garbage retard nigger shit
and it also insinuates that youre a nigger cattle and should suck corporate cock just to view a movie
>its part of HDCP, meaning you need it to view a DVD or Bluray disk on a computer
3rd, it has webshit in it, the web is not a valid thing. nor is any hardware that acknowledges the web

P59984
>your contributions are all negative because you do not have basic understanding of the structure of stupid unedcated nigger
contributions to jew nigger cock wtf u talking about chud?
contributions to what?

>>open source
It's a matter of trust. Nobody non-retarded uses open-source programs because of security, but rather because they don't have to be trusted and can be audited by everyone who knows how to read source code. Trust is bad and you want to eliminate that as much as possible.
>>no proof that Intel ME is actually being used to spy on you, just FUD and conspiracy thinking
Why would you want it? Even if you would trust some huge megacorp like Intel, that they don't use it as a backdoor (which is a retarded assumption) you'd still have a proprietary black box in your computer, that could do anything. It's already bad enough that it could do it.
>>completely obsolete by today's standards, lacking in security and efficiency
Fair enough, old laptops with core 2 duo aren't the perfect solution either, but the best we have until open ISAs become viable. You don't have to use thinkpads, a bunch of other mainboards and laptops support coreboot and disableing me as well.
>>still using social media, albeit federated
>>>frontends (Invidious, nitter, etc.)
This one is true though, most people in our spaces, still want to use (((social media))), because they are retarded normals, but in a "private" and "secure" way, instead of embracing solitude. Same for all those "privacy frontends", you shouldn't use youtube/twitter/tiktok/stackoverflow in any way, it being accessible through those frontends doesn't make it better.
>>>literally just buy a Google Pixel
There is no secure, anonymous or private phone. They all suck by idea, design and implementation and always will. Don't do phones, kids.
>>https://web.archive.org/web/20220227172102/https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/openbsd.html
Aye, is it possible that you can't find this stupid article, because everybody who knows shit about security called madaids on his nonsensical article? There are some good points, like calling the OpenBSD out on their misleading wording and some missing mitigations. He treats unveil and pledge a bit unfair, because unlike he implies, they are widely used in kernel and userland. I think sandboxing every application to death with Apparmour (Linux) and VMs (Qubes) is not a good approach, it makes everything more complex and doesn't fix insecurities in the programs themselves. Given, it's good way to protect against programs, that are insecure in nature, but you shouldn't rely on it as a go-to and seek to secure them with those mighty syscalls.
><literally worse for privacy than Windows with telemetry disabled
The difference is, that you can't trust Windows with anything. In the best case, you don't have to trust anyone and can review it yourself and by people you (((trust))).
><outclassed by all major proprietary operating systems in terms of security
<no proper sandboxing, verified boot, missing lots of exploit mitigations, GUI isolation only works on Wayland
Kicksecure (the base for Whonix, which you seemingly recommend) fixes a bunch of those issues. Use Kicksecure if you need to use Linux, otherwise go for OpenBSD.
>>outclassed by Chromium in terms of security and compatibility with modern standards
False dichotomy, neither Firefox nor Chromium are secure. They are gigantic programs with millions LoC. Use links+ or links2. Lynx is okay too. If need something graphical use Dillo.
>>>but you're still trusting them, but now you're trusting even more strangers
Yacy still exists, but it sucks desu. Searx over I2P is probably the best we have.
>https://whonix.org
>https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/
Why would you link a Whonix developer and Whonix itself if it's all a big autistic meme? Whonix is probably one of the most secure ways of running Linux and all those other things you listed as memes.

core 2 duo = vulnerable
social media = dancing lolis
phone = business
windows = industry
whonix = trash
openbsd on desktop = trash
using lines of code as metric = trash
cli www-client = trash
dillo = trash
searx = trash
ftfy depressed doomer non-knower