@topher@mastodon.online
@topher@mastodon.online avatar

topher

@[email protected]

🙇 person/x-generic (them)

🔐 Digital #privacy advocate

🌻 Love #gardening, #solar power, #renewables & #sustainability

🌿 13+ year #vegetarian who enjoys growing much of my own food

🐧 #Linux desktop & server user, supporter and (unofficial) ambassador

🖥 Constantly scavenging and fixing old tech to reduce e-waste

👨‍💻 Don't work directly in, but follow and regularly share #infosec topics

♥ Likes salads, sunlight and skeuomorphism

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

topher, to firefox
@topher@mastodon.online avatar

Hey @mozilla, how can I have this page as RSS?

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/

(I couldn't find any RSS or atom links in the HTML source)

cc @firefox

topher, to random
@topher@mastodon.online avatar

Curious which distro repos end up with patched builds first

topher,
@topher@mastodon.online avatar

Official obviously takes the lead - already there.

Not yet on 38 repos

Nothing yet or LMDE

Users of other Linux distros feel free to chime in with updates. I'm about to check and (edit: Rocky and the RHEL family appear to use the extended support release like Debian; Manjaro currently has 117.0-1 in stable)

Anyone with who uses snap?

topher,
@topher@mastodon.online avatar

As of 2023-09-12 12:05 UTC

Flatpak is current with 117.0.1

Snap for is updated, currently at 117.0.1-2

Arch is current with 117.0.1-1 in extra-testing (thanks @bigolewannabe)

Fedora is still at 117.0

LinuxMint (Ubuntu and LMDE) is still at 117.0

Manjaro is at 117.0-1

Pop!_OS is still at 117.0 (thanks @techaddressed)

lauren, to random
@lauren@mastodon.laurenweinstein.org avatar

It's worth keeping in mind that in ARPANET days (the direct ancestor of the Internet), we were largely ignored by AT&T et al. because they had their own plans for public networking that would follow the telephone model -- pay per minute of connect time and per kilopacket sent or received, etc.

That the ARPANET model would succeed was not at all guaranteed, and in fact seemed extraordinarily unlikely at times. Just a minor change here or there in the timeline and most of what we take for granted now on the Net would not exist in any kind of recognizable form.

The rise of advertiser-supported services is largely what made most of the modern Internet possible, and those persons and organizations who routinely block or rant against advertising have yet to offer an alternative funding model to keep this stuff going that wouldn't make the current digital divide look like a pimple compared with their Mt. Everest of user charges that would be necessary if the advertising model collapses.

topher,
@topher@mastodon.online avatar

@lauren

How about safe, respectful, non-predatory advertising?

You know, with some sane, bare-minimum ethical boundaries?

topher,
@topher@mastodon.online avatar

@lauren

So, in the meantime, what's the solution? Just accept the egregious violations of personal privacy, allow all the spyware and malware and horrible things that are present in its current form, so that the profits from that advertising can materialise for the companies behind it?

Obviously, aside from just conceding and allowing this, in its current form it must absolutely be blocked - if nothing else, as a clear statement to those companies that this is utterly unacceptable.

topher,
@topher@mastodon.online avatar

@lauren

For me, personally, and I imagine many others like me, it is not at all about seeing or not seeing the advertisements. It's about protecting our safety and security, and fundamental rights to basic privacy.

When you can no longer even web search for information about a possible health condition without a dozen companies knowing and selling that information to each other - including your health insurer - we have a critically severe safety problem that renders it incredibly dangerous.

topher,
@topher@mastodon.online avatar

@lauren

HIPAA does not apply in this arena. Data brokers, advertisers and advertising platforms are not health providers. They are acquiring information directly from individuals themselves via various tracking methods - much of which, even if anonymised, can be de-anonymised extremely trivially. It's not considered PHI in this context and they are not bound by the same regulations as a healthcare provider (physician office, insurer, so forth). Even most health "apps" aren't.

catsalad, to random
@catsalad@infosec.exchange avatar

That Gulf heat is going to crank that bad boy up for sure...

🌀⁠https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/

topher,
@topher@mastodon.online avatar

@catsalad

Tell Jerry we need a dislike button

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • uselessserver093
  • Food
  • aaaaaaacccccccce
  • test
  • CafeMeta
  • testmag
  • MUD
  • RhythmGameZone
  • RSS
  • dabs
  • KamenRider
  • TheResearchGuardian
  • KbinCafe
  • Socialism
  • oklahoma
  • SuperSentai
  • feritale
  • All magazines
    •