[shurcool]As of last night, I've made it possible for me—after being notified about activity on GitHub issues I'm subscribed to—to be able to read, comment on, and react to said GitHub issues completely through my personal site (and open source software I'm actively developing).
[shurcool]My goal was to dogfood this software even harder (it's pretty stable and feature complete by now), and most of the issues I deal with are on GitHub, so this only made sense as the next step hehe.
[shurcool]gotcha. It's already there. and screenshots aren't really needed because there are links to where one can see it in action (in a browser). I just offered to share a screenshot of this particular new use case I found for it.
[shurcool]it's mentioned at https://indieweb.org/Selfdogfood#Dmitri_Shuralyov. I'll update that to say I use it to read GitHub issues as well... but later on, after the dust settles. who knows, i might end up backing out if the experiment doesn't go well.
ZegnatIt doesn’t circumvent it, as attacker would still have access to your WiFi and can monitor the data stream. But it does mean the attacker should be incapable of reading the contents of the stream because that is end-to-end encrypted.
ZegnatOf course once they are on your network they might try other things. E.g. your DNS requests probably aren’t encrypted, so they might feed you dummy DNS and send you to a fake bank site. HTTPS doesn’t matter then because they are in control of the fake bank site.
ZegnatKRACK doesn’t make HTTPS/SSH more or less vulnerable, no. You just have new problems because a network you probably treat as secure no longer is.
sknebeldgold: having AES instead of TKIP protects you against packet injection if I remember correctly, so if at all possible you should at least have that. Should be default nowadays, but...
tantekdgold, your expression "network as secure" seems to imply that a framing of absolute security is possible or even useful as a concept, whereas security is never about absolutes, just about raising barriers
tanteksimilarly "free of" seems to imply absolute framing, also not helpful for surveillance, monitoring and logging. again, raising barriers is the point
tantekso there is no point to describing something 'as secure', or 'free of', because it's an impossible goal and thus a distraction from what is achievable
dgoldjust because there is no point in describing something 'as secure' it doesn't follow that there is no point in describing something as 'manifestly insecure'
skippytying in with the above discussion about KRACK and state actors and all that ... I would like some level of control and confidence in my DNS queries.
myfreewebif you care a lot about privacy, you can use Tor as a DNS resolver. otherwise, set up your local resolver to query root servers directly and check DNSSEC signatures (of course not every domain is signed lol… but some are)
skippyI have a ProtonVPN account. I thought about setting up a Raspberry Pi with an always-on VPN connection and unbound sending requests to the ProtonVPN DNS servers.