- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Re: "Data Detox Kit" by Tactical Technology Collective & Mozilla
by g2s 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

That was a blank email to match a blank stare, stupid. null

1 0

Re: "Data Detox Kit" by Tactical Technology Collective & Mozilla
by g2s 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

null

1 0

Re: "Data Detox Kit" by Tactical Technology Collective & Mozilla
by juan 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 09:06:59 -0800 g2s <g2s(a)riseup.net> wrote: > ...and if you're really paranoid perhaps find some > other hobby than the internet rather than spewing paranoia all over > everyone like digital diarrhea. wow - NSA bathroom cleaner rayzer gets really mad when the tools of the trade get a proper review > The internet isn't Safe Space... > never was. Never will be. Rr

1 0

Re: "Data Detox Kit" by Tactical Technology Collective & Mozilla
by John Newman 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

> On Jan 29, 2018, at 12:06 PM, g2s <g2s(a)riseup.net> wrote: > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: John Newman <jnn(a)synfin.org> > Date: 1/29/18 8:27 AM (GMT-08:00) > To: cypherpunks(a)lists.cpunks.org, g2s <g2s(a)riseup.net>, juan <juan.g71(a)gmail.com> > Subject: Re: "Data Detox Kit" by Tactical Technology Collective & Mozilla > > > > On January 28, 2018 10:31:40 PM EST, g2s <g2s(a)riseup.net> wrote: > > > >-------- Original message --------From: juan <juan.g71(a)gmail.com> Date: > >1/28/18 6:32 PM (GMT-08:00) To: cypherpunks(a)lists.cpunks.org Subject: > >Re: "Data Detox Kit" by Tactical Technology Collective & Mozilla > >On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 22:38:33 -0200 > >Cecilia Tanaka <cecilia.tanaka(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hello from Brazil, Shiny Happy TTC People! :D > >> > >> May someone give a really good technical answer to my friends, > >> please? <3 > >> > >> I will need to share the answer about the use of JavaScript with two > >> other discussion lists, where I also received a "not-so-good" > >> feedback in private. Sorry but I am using an euphemism, uh! :P > > > > > > If you don't enable javascript that site won't show you any > > content at all. They could have put a static page explaining > > what the site is about but apparently they were too lazy to > > do that. > > > > And, javascript is the number one tool used to track and > > fingerprint browsers so a site about privacy (I'm assuming > > that's what the site is about) that refuses to do anything > > unless javascript is enabled....looks like a joke. > > > > > > > >> > >> Thank you all in advance! Kisses, hugs, and much love! <3 > >> > >> Ceci > >> > >> > >> On Jan 28, 2018 21:12, "juan" <juan.g71(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 21:53:24 -0200 > >> Cecilia Tanaka <cecilia.tanaka(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > # https://datadetox.myshadow.org/detox > >> > <https://datadetox.myshadow.org/detox> > >> > >> > >> "Sorry! > >> > >> The Data Detox Kit requires javascript and supports newer versions of > >> Chrome, Safari, and Firefox. Please enable javascript in your browser > >> and refresh this page. " > >> > >> > >> lawl - so data detox - whatever that means - requires you to > >> run javashit malware - priceless =) > >> > >> > >> > >> > > >> > # https://datadetox.myshadow.org/about > >> > > >> > Wish you all a lovely week, la la la! <3 > >> > > >> > c. > >> > ---------- > >> > "Don't let anyone rob you of your imagination, your creativity, or > >> > your curiosity. It's your place in the world; it's your life. Go > >> > on and do all you can with it, and make it the life you want to > >> > live." > >> > - Mae Jemison > > > > > >Jscript allows for extreme interactivity between your computer and a > >server, but the code is plaintext. It can be examined for functions. > >Rr > > > JS is usually obfuscated to the point of complete unreadability. > Coders do this so you can't "steal" their code, or maybe > sometimes to get slight compression (all the variables get > renamed to one or two letter names, etc) So, you can still > look at it, but it's often only nearly as opaque as byte code :) > > Thats where crowdsourced blockers come into the picture. NoScript for instance. You > have dozens of folks unobfuscating the scripts. Ofc you have to have some trust in the blocker, and the site's intention for the data gleaned, Yeah, noscript is cool. Been a while since I’ve really played with it. > and if you're really paranoid perhaps find some other hobby than the internet rather than spewing paranoia all over everyone like digital diarrhea. The internet isn't Safe Space... never was. Never will be. > Yeah, clearly you have to make a few risk value judgements, otherwise you may as well just stay in the default most secure position: computer powered off ;) > Rr

1 0

Re: "Data Detox Kit" by Tactical Technology Collective & Mozilla
by juan 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 08:22:18 -0800 g2s <g2s(a)riseup.net> wrote: > Wassamatteru? Can't read ingrish? > You can examine the script and see what it does. You can discern > which informatiin the server is gleaming and decide if you want to > participate or block. Or are you a NAZI who wants to decide what > others do when they browse? Rr null ok razer - your trolling job for today is to pimp javascript. I guess replacing plain text with malware is something that every person with a passing interest in privacy and security must do.

1 0

Actually useful license terms
by Ryan Carboni 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

+if a critical security bug is found and unpatched in excess of 6 months from the time the bug was first communicated, the software is unsupported +when software becomes constructively unsupported, the source code is either released, or sufficient documentation must be provided to reverse engineer a patch of any code with a critical vulnerability +no non-disclosure agreement for any software bug can be allowed more than 9 months. +A notice must be displayed from where a compiled program is downloaded from or extracted from that includes this code that states the amount of money the licensee donated to this project. obviously a lawyer can make it less ambiguous, but the idea is clear no one will adopt this because they value monkey behaviors over accomplishing things or their principles

1 0

Re: "Data Detox Kit" by Tactical Technology Collective & Mozilla
by g2s 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

Wassamatteru? Can't read ingrish? You can examine the script and see what it does. You can discern which informatiin the server is gleaming and decide if you want to participate or block. Or are you a NAZI who wants to decide what others do when they browse? Rr null

1 0

Razer sock-puppet "Walter Block" writes for Russia Insider (the day pigs flew): “Is It Permissible to Criticize Jews?”
by Zenaan Harkness 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

Well, well, well, Razer has an em-publishing sock-puppet, who woulda thunked it?‼ Read it and chuckle :) Is It Permissible to Criticize Jews? http://russia-insider.com/en/it-permissible-criticize-jews/ri22297

1 0

Re: "Data Detox Kit" by Tactical Technology Collective & Mozilla
by juan 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 19:31:40 -0800 g2s <g2s(a)riseup.net> wrote: > Jscript allows for extreme interactivity between your computer > and a server lolwut - now you write marketing slogans for the NSA? 'extreme interactivity'? wtf Alos, javashit is 'client side' - it's a way to offload work to clients. See the latest cryptocurrency mining scams, enabled by JavaScript(tm) for instance. Javashit is malware running in your computer without any sort of 'informed consent'. Yeah one of its uses is for real time spying but not the only one. >, but the code is plaintext. It can be examined for functions. again lolwut - yeah it's plaintext, except most of the time it's obfuscasted, the scum who do 'web developing' use huge liberaries to print two lines of text and a put a picture, it's automatically loaded, unsigned, can be changed by the server at will, etc, etc, etc. > Rr

1 0

American Culture
by JewSA 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

> juan juan.g71 > Sun Jan 28 16:05:50 PST 2018 > germanics.png image/png (742259 bytes) > computer iiliterate asshole > doesn't even know to compress an image Lol. Quantity over quality much. ""But, 2.4 MB is yet a big file size. Let's now play with some other ImageMagick convert commands in order to create smaller file sizes: $ convert cpunk.jpg -quality 50% cpunk50.jpg This is what we need to do in order to "compress" an image. This is going to reduce the image's quality by 50% and deliver a 938.4 KB <=== (Note: KILOBYTES, not even a Megabyte) filesize. Please have in mind that in this example we're reducing the quality of the file, not the image dimensions."" ""reduce the image's quality"" ""not even a Megabyte"" I am on to you, lowqualityanon. Pic related.

1 0