cultural reviewer and dabbler in stylistic premonitions
Funny that blog calls it a “failed attempt at a backdoor” while neglecting to mention that the grsec post (which it does link to and acknowledges is the source of the story) had been updated months prior to explicitly refute that characterization:
5/22/2020 Update: This kind of update should not have been necessary, but due to irresponsible journalists and the nature of social media, it is important to make some things perfectly clear:
Nowhere did we claim this was anything more than a trivially exploitable vulnerability. It is not a backdoor or an attempted backdoor, the term does not appear elsewhere in this blog at all; any suggestion of the sort was fabricated by irresponsible journalists who did not contact us and do not speak for us.
There is no chance this code would have passed review and be merged. No one can push or force code upstream.
This code is not characteristic of the quality of other code contributed upstream by Huawei. Contrary to baseless assertions from some journalists, this is not Huawei’s first attempt at contributing to the kernel, in fact they’ve been a frequent contributor for some time.
Wasn’t Huawei trying to put a Backdoor into linux?
as far as i know, that has not happened.
what makes you think it did?
fremdscham++
😬
Or you could just… learn to use the modern internet that 60% of internet traffic uses? Not everyone has a dedicated IPv4 anymore, we are in the days of mobile networks and CGNAT. IPv4 exhaustion is here today.
Where are you getting 60%? Google’s IPv6 Adoption page has it under 50% still:
(while other stats pages from big CDNs show even less)
If you have ::/0
in your AllowedIPs and v6 connections are bypassing your VPN, that is strange.
What does ip route get 2a00:1450:400f:801::200e
(an IPv6 address for google) say?
I haven’t used wireguard with NetworkManager, but using wg-quick
it certainly adds a default v6 route when you have ::/0
in AllowedIPs
.
You could edit your configuration to change the wireguard connection’s AllowedIPs
from 0.0.0.0/0
to 0.0.0.0/0,::/0
so that IPv6 traffic is routed over it. Regardless of if your wireguard endpoint actually supports it, this will at least stop IPv6 traffic from leaking.
ipv4 with an extra octet
that was proposed as “IPv4.1” on April 1, 2011: https://web.archive.org/web/20110404094446/http://packetlife.net/blog/2011/apr/1/alternative-ipv6-works/
I wrote a comment here about why sealed sender does not achieve what it purports to.
Formally.
This video is full of jarring edits which initially made me wonder if someone had cut out words or phrases to create an abbreviated version. But, then I realized there are way too many of them to have been done manually. I checked the full original video and from the few edits i manually checked it seems like it is just inconsequential pauses etc that were removed: for instance, when Linus says “the other side of that picture” in the original there is an extra “p” sound which is removed here.
Yet another irritating and unnecessary application of neural networks, I guess.
To answer your question: yes, YTA 🤦
Also, I’m deleting this post per asklemmy rule 3.
The tone which comes across in the video (linked from the other post I linked to in this post’s description) is unfortunately much less amicable than this article conveys.
the guy speaking off camera in the linked 3min 30s of the video is Ted Ts’o, according to this report about the session.
If copyright holders want to take action, their complaints will go to the ISP subscriber.
So, that would either be the entity operating the public wifi, or yourself (if your mobile data plan is associated with your name).
If you’re in a country where downloading copyrighted material can have legal consequences (eg, the USA and many EU countries), in my opinion doing it on public wifi can be rather anti-social: if it’s a small business offering you free wifi, you risk causing them actual harm, and if it is a big business with open wifi you could be contributing to them deciding to stop having open wifi in the future.
So, use a VPN, or use wifi provided by a large entity you don’t mind causing potential legal hassles for.
Note that if your name is somehow associated with your use of a wifi network, that can come back to haunt you: for example, at big hotels it is common that each customer gets a unique password; in cases like that your copyright-infringing network activity could potentially be linked to you even months or years later.
Note also that for more serious privacy threat models than copyright enforcement, your other network activities on even a completely open network can also be linked to identify you, but for the copyright case you probably don’t need to worry about that (currently).
he wouldn’t be able to inject backdoors even if he wanted to, since the source code is open
Jia Tan has entered the chat
they aren’t the only animal that does it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kleptoplasty#Animals