Considered "18+"
daniel.haxx.se
Considered "18+"
1–10 of 156 posts
Re: Considered "18+"
#2I'm glad he was able to resolve this. I get the feeling most people wouldn't care, because after all they're not blocking instagram/facebook/tiktok.
Re: Considered "18+"
#3It's because there are too many x's in the name
Re: Considered "18+"
#4ESNI cannot come fast enough.
Re: Considered "18+"
#5ESNI cannot come fast enough.
Yes, we really need that. Glad we have TLS and questionable ambitions show that it doesn't even reach deep enough.
Although the way the web works a web request to domain.xy doesn't mean much anyway but people still believe in it.
Also MITM attacks in IT security should be shunned and I believe the users need to be informed about it when they happen. IT could potentially steal banking information. I believe this to be highly illegal in my country and still a data breach even if an employee wasn't allowed to do the transaction because it was private.
Re: Considered "18+"
#6Why would they bother doing a TLS handshake with a phony certificate?
Re: Considered "18+"
#7And if this wasn't bad enough, they want your credit card info to unblock the site.
Re: Considered "18+"
#8I'm glad he was able to resolve this. I get the feeling most people wouldn't care, because after all they're not blocking instagram/facebook/tiktok.
Where have you read that? It reads to me that he applied for unblocking, but no result as of yet.
Re: Considered "18+"
#9im always chuffed and fascinated when tech companies cloister themselves in the robes of moral arbiter. Twitter does this now, albeit it seems like a cheap excuse to pump user numbers by forcing authentication.
Why 18? why not 21? or 23? What qualifies as explicitly "adult" content? violence perhaps could disqualify most military recruiting sites from my vodaphone. Alcohol? its certainly a moral vice in the UAE but in germany even a fourteen year old can order a bier with their parents. Sex? its a sensitive subject for even the most conservative among us until we touch upon religious texts, which seem to enjoy free reign.
what i wonder most is...what is the altruistic moral source of truth used as litmus by Voda and others? or is it driven largely by a small but vocal minority or is the board pushing this as some sort of nineteenth century neo-victorian purity charge.
Re: Considered "18+"
#10[deleted]