21–30 of 207 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this belief that personally run software is more secure than professionally run software is a bit optimistic.
It doesn't have to be more secure, it just has to be less likely to get hacked.
I think we've reached a point where it's safe to say that if you're using a service - _,any_ service - assume your data is breached (or willingly given) and accessible to some unknown third party. That third party can be the government, it can be some random marketer or it can be a malicious hacker. Just hope that you have nothing anywhere that may be of interest or value to anyone, anywhere. Good luck.
I've made it a point to start self hosting anything that's particularly sensitive that I don't want third parties to have access to. KeePass and SyncThing probably have my most important information, and it's all owned by me.
Reflecting on this, I wonder if a PaaS solution that is a "vault" of confidential information would be a good thing. Similar to how Stripe handles payments with a token, we could all store tokens for User information (eg the Id) and query the vault (or operate on the vault, eg, validate login, or return email, etc) using keys. The service could be hardened (like Stripe) to ensure the data is stored securely, and dete…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't have to be more secure, it just has to be less likely to get hacked.
Less likely to have targeted attacks but you are still at risk of someone finding an exploit in the software and sending a bot to scan the internet for the software
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'd have to copy/paste a serious chunk of code you don't understand to really cause any damage. I think this comment is either taking the pun or misguided.
He/she is making a joke. No user data was accessed so the assumption is questions may have been, a couple pluses changed to minuses could cause a lot of damage (headaches?) when copy pasting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've made it a point to start self hosting anything that's particularly sensitive that I don't want third parties to have access to. KeePass and SyncThing probably have my most important information, and it's all owned by me.
The biggest thing stopping me is the worry I might misconfigure something after making some change in 6 months when I’m busy.
The simpler and smaller the surface of attack is, the better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've made it a point to start self hosting anything that's particularly sensitive that I don't want third parties to have access to. KeePass and SyncThing probably have my most important information, and it's all owned by me.
The biggest thing stopping me is the worry I might misconfigure something after making some change in 6 months when I’m busy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've made it a point to start self hosting anything that's particularly sensitive that I don't want third parties to have access to. KeePass and SyncThing probably have my most important information, and it's all owned by me.
I hear you. But I worry that that's not enough. I trust Syncthing and the (many) Keepass (X/C)++ developers, but how hard really would it be to slip something in unnoticed. All it requires is some minuscule bug somewhere. It doesn't need to be in the software itself! It can be in the compiler, or in the crypto or in the machine running it. If the OpenSSL debacle taught us, open source and the fact that many people ca…