Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tails 3.0 Released

tails.boum.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 79 posts

Re: Tails 3.0 Released

#31

Post by Laforet »

skraelingjar wrote: post #8
d33 wrote: post #2

Those two changes seem particularly important: * Tails 3.0 works on 64-bit computers only and not on 32-bit computers anymore. Dropping hardware support, even for a small portion of our user base, is always a hard decision to make but being 64-bit only has important security and reliability benefits. For example, to protect against some types of security exploits, support for the NX bit is compulsory and most binarie…

I wonder if this will effect journalists and activists in parts of the world where old machines are still used (Africa, Middle East, parts of Asia). Not being able to make use of newer browser versions (without updating every time or taking the risk of using a persistent volume) could put them at greater risk.

I don't think it is unreasonable to assume everyone already has a 64-bit capable PC considering the most recent mainstream 32-bit only CPU is 2004's first gen Prescott Pentium 4.

Re: Tails 3.0 Released

#32

Post by kasey_junk »

barbs wrote: post #30
nathan_f77 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there an article or post I can read with more information? I was about to downvote before I noticed your username!

I think it's reasonable to downvote if his comment is just an assertion with no evidence. It shouldn't matter who he is or how high his karma is.

Thats not how it works in the real world. Reputation matters, for good reason.

If 'Animats comments on tcp/ip you should trust it more than if I do.

If 'tptacek comments on app security it's sort of the same (though I don't know he has anything named after him).

Re: Tails 3.0 Released

#34

Post by [deleted] »

ryanlol wrote: post #18
WillyOnWheels wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

do you suggest I should be running Firefox in Tails?

The safer solution is to run the modern browser of your choice (probably chrome) in an isolated VM routed through a torified gateway. Hardware isolation would of course be preferable. If you're using Tails you'd probably be much better off using Whonix instead. With Tails, an attacker capable of breaking your browser will m̶o̶s̶t̶ ̶l̶i̶k̶e̶l̶y̶ definitely also be capable of easily grabbing your IP address.

[deleted]

Re: Tails 3.0 Released

#35

Post by snakeanus »

kasey_junk wrote: post #32
barbs wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's reasonable to downvote if his comment is just an assertion with no evidence. It shouldn't matter who he is or how high his karma is.

Thats not how it works in the real world. Reputation matters, for good reason. If 'Animats comments on tcp/ip you should trust it more than if I do. If 'tptacek comments on app security it's sort of the same (though I don't know he has anything named after him).

Making a claim while not explaining your reasoning is a sign of a low quality post that provides no actual contribution to the thread (and more often than not, of trolling) which justifies downvoting the post, no matter who the creator.

Reputation matters if you want to buy something or if you want an expert opinion on a topic that you have no idea about. However I don't believe that reputation matters in a forum full of people who would be able to understand (and wish for) a reasoning behind a claim.

Re: Tails 3.0 Released

#36

Post by dogma1138 »

Laforet wrote: post #31
skraelingjar wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if this will effect journalists and activists in parts of the world where old machines are still used (Africa, Middle East, parts of Asia). Not being able to make use of newer browser versions (without updating every time or taking the risk of using a persistent volume) could put them at greater risk.

I don't think it is unreasonable to assume everyone already has a 64-bit capable PC considering the most recent mainstream 32-bit only CPU is 2004's first gen Prescott Pentium 4.

Intel early centrinos are not 64bit (Dothan / Banias) so are the initial Core / Core Duo CPUs (Yona).

Intel didn't release a mobile 64bit CPU until 2006/7 with Core 2 Duo.

Also the initial implementations of Intel64/EMT64 lack certain functions so even tho they technically support 64bit they might lack certain other features that are required by modern operating systems.

So overall if you have a 10 year old laptop you might not be able to use Tails 3.0.

Re: Tails 3.0 Released

#37

Post by unexistance »

tptacek wrote: post #12

For the love of Christ don't use Tor Browser. Every other modern browser, including mainline Firefox, is safer.

since there's no reply, I'm guessing it's because Tor Browser is using Firefox ESR, even though Fx ESR are guaranteed for a security update...

any other reason?

Re: Tails 3.0 Released

#40

Post by rlka3 »

dogma1138 wrote: post #36
Laforet wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it is unreasonable to assume everyone already has a 64-bit capable PC considering the most recent mainstream 32-bit only CPU is 2004's first gen Prescott Pentium 4.

Intel early centrinos are not 64bit (Dothan / Banias) so are the initial Core / Core Duo CPUs (Yona). Intel didn't release a mobile 64bit CPU until 2006/7 with Core 2 Duo. Also the initial implementations of Intel64/EMT64 lack certain functions so even tho they technically support 64bit they might lack certain other features that are required by modern operating systems. So overall if you have a 10 year old laptop yo…

agree my t60 does not limiting the amount of hardware capable of running libreboot without AMT/ME and tails even more :'(
Post reply on HN