• 0 Posts
  • 66 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 23rd, 2024

help-circle

  • Salt the hash with something unique to that specific user so identical passwords have different hashes

    Isn’t that… the very definition of a Salt? A user-specific known string? Though my understanding is that the salt gets appended to the user-provided password, hashed and then checked against the record, so I wouldn’t say that the hash is salted, but rather the password.

    Also using a pepper is good practice in addition to a salt, though the latter is more important.






  • I don’t really know. For text based discussion, I prefer something like Lemmy, also due to better moderation tools etc. It’s a cool early thread-based discussion tool, but mostly outdated.

    Unfortunately, there is absolutely zero other use for it, and nobody should ever bother, it’s wasted time.



  • I was also with a provider that didn’t offer API access for the longest time. When they then increased prices, I switched, now paying a third of their asking price per year at a very good provider.

    I guess migrating is difficult if the provider doesn’t offer a mechanism to either dump the DNS to a file or perform a zone transfer (the later being part of the standard).

    Can only recommend INWX for domains, though my personal requirements aren’t the highest.



  • Also wildcard certificates are more difficult to do automated with let’s encrypt.

    They are trivial with a non-garbage domain provider.

    If you want EV certificates (where the cert company actually calls you up and verifies you’re the company you claim to be) you also need to go the paid route

    The process however isn’t as secure as one might think: https://cyberscoop.com/easy-fake-extended-validation-certificates-research-shows/

    In my experience trustworthyness of certs is not an issue with LE. I sometimes check websites certs and of I see they’re LE I’m more like “Good for them”

    Basically, am LE cert says “we were able to verify that the operator of this service you’re attempting to use controls (parts of) the domain it claims to be part of”. Nothing more or less. Which in most cases is enough so that you can secure the connection. It’s possibly even a stronger guarantee than some sketchy cert providers provided in the past which was like “we were able to verify that someone sent us money”.


  • The big issue that the author kind of mentions is that while the kernel has all these neat features, the overlaying OS seems to use them in such a way that they’re often not effective. XP before SP1 was a security nightmare and we got lucky that blaster was not working correctly. A secure token for the processes in your session? It doesn’t really help if every process you spawn gets this token with the user being the administrator (I know this is kind of different nowadays with UAC). A very cool architecture that allows easy porting? Let’s only use it on x86. Even today, it’s big news for Windows running on ARM, which the not-by-design-portable Unices have been doing for years.

    Maybe if Microsoft had allowed the kernel to be used in other operating systems - not expecting a copyleft license - the current view is that Windows Is Bad, and the NT kernel is an inseparable part of Windows. And hell, even Windows CE which did run on other devices and architectures, doesn’t use the NT kernel.

    So while the design and maybe even large parts of its implementation may be good and clean, it’s Microsoft’s fault that the public perception of the NT kernel.









  • I’ve been recently thinking the same thing and was wondering why no one seemed to talk about it. I think, while the gaming market is very important to Microsoft with regards to PCs, it basically has no leverage. Gamers won’t switch anyways, Windows is ubiquitous and studios are just committed to what means minimal support at maximum profit, so they target Windows. Apart from Valve, no publisher or studio has any credibility when threatening to move to another platform, and Valve won’t do it because they’re basically a store that develops a game from time to time. So MS can do whatever they want and anything gaming related will swallow it anyways.

    With that in mind, I do hope that MS removes the privileged interfaces and all kernel level anticheat dies with it. Studios will cry, but that’s all they’ll do, and in fact, they wouldn’t even have any option at that point; there’s no alternative offering anything similar. Even Apple doesn’t offer privileged access to 3rd party developers, which is why for example while mandatory for Windows gamers, Riot’s games can be played without any kernel level anticheat on Mac.