It depends on your threat model again. Many people are able to live as fugitives for a long time because they're not very high priority for the cops. I've personally known people who have been able to evade the state just by living nomadically because the state doesn't put many resources towards finding you if you're low-priority. Obviously if you're actively wanted for idk terrorism or something then you'll need more than just a nomadic lifestyle.
communism
joined 2 years ago
Whichever distro you choose, you could set up SSH access for yourself to do things for them (apart from fixing most networking issues if they can't connect to the internet ofc).
I would say Rust is more similar to java and Zig is more similar to C in that manner
You're gonna have to elaborate on that… How so?
I don't sit on corner sofas regularly enough to have a standard seating position. In that picture I think I feel inclined towards the junction of the sofa.
Because they benefit from eating animals (they enjoy eating them) whereas they don't benefit from having sex with animals (they don't enjoy having sex with animals).
It's fairly difficult to have a fixed abode anonymously. It depends on what your threat model is, but if concealing your location, particularly to the state, is part of your threat model, living nomadically is better. You're talking about something different, which is blending in socially.
The forking option wouldn't work as well as it does on github because AUR packages are not namespaced like GitHub repos, e.g. communism/mypackage; instead it's just mypackage. So if adoption required a new name you'd have mypackage-cont, mypackage-cont-cont, or whatever. And it wouldn't really be possible to introduce username namespacing because AUR packages are just Pacman packages that are community-contributed rather than official, and Pacman, like most package managers, doesn't namespace their package names; firefox is just firefox rather than, say, mozilla/firefox. Some AUR packages get added to the official repos so when you do, e.g. yay -Syu, you'll then install the official package if you previously had the AUR package installed as it has the same name.
There isn't a perfect solution. Even if package adoptions were moderated, someone could take over a package and initially push a genuine commit, and then their next commit is malicious. Reviewing every single AUR commit would be incredibly labour-intensive. Possibly you could add automated checks for commits that suddenly add an npm install or other suspicious command with regex, but attackers could just get cleverer about avoiding those regex checks. Imo the best solution is just more widespread warnings about the fact that AUR packages are community-contributed with no guarantees of safety (e.g. on the Arch wiki where it sometimes suggests users install AUR packages), and AUR helpers forcing users to read PKGBUILDs before installation.
Just look for "faraday bag" online. There's some online stores that sell them.
If you mean an actual cage rather than a bag, not sure, but I imagine you could make one to your specified dimensions.
I agree about the risks in terms of the way some sources present the AUR as just extra packages. But I don't think you can object to the AUR more than any other place on the internet where anyone can upload software; unfortunately, the onus is going to be on the user to verify what they install. The AUR is moderated by volunteers and it wouldn't be fair to expect them to vet all of the high volume of commits to the AUR. Possibly they could vet new maintainers or new packages or newly adopted packages, but nothing would stop someone from initially uploading a genuine package and then replacing it with something malicious. Or they could require identity verification to be an AUR maintainer but then far fewer genuine packages would be on there because people don't want to give their real identity to contribute (I maintain some AUR packages, and would stop if required to verify my IRL identity).
I can totally understand if the AUR is not for you; it's more time-consuming as you have to read PKGBUILDs (I always do). But that doesn't make it bad that it exists at all. I think there should be more warnings about it for new users, and possibly some more moderation, though like I said above there's no perfect moderation solution that would simultaneously forgo users' responsibility to check and keep the AUR as large as it is today. Ultimately the option should still exist for users who want it. If it didn't exist, I'd have to hand-package every program that's not in the official repos, and that's even more time-consuming than pulling and reading through a PKGBUILD that someone else already wrote and shared.
It's just a repository of user-contributed packages. It's no different malware-ability-wise to, say, GitHub. If you are running code you found from a stranger on the internet then you are liable for it, and you need to do your due diligence in checking that you are not running malware. It is a good thing that the AUR exists because it means Arch user packages are all in one centralised repository instead of scattered across GitHub, Sourceforge, Codeberg, Pastebin, forums, whatever. If you are just installing random AUR packages then that's on you. It's basic internet safety to not automatically trust random scripts you find on the internet.
What an annoyingly uninformative title. Better title: a lot more compromised AUR packages have been found since our last update.
"A lot worse" is intentionally vague to get people to click.
view more: next ›
I also used to use the same thing. Been a long time since I've had to remote access someone else's PC for troubleshooting but I think I also used TeamViewer back in the day (which I assume might not work as well on Linux anymore now that Wayland is the norm?). Perhaps you could write a quick script to get your public ip address by curling some web service that tells you your public ip address, add a desktop shortcut to that script, and over the phone tell the person to double click that desktop shortcut and read out the number they see. It'd still trip up the most tech illiterate but hopefully if they're at the "can follow clear and basic instructions" level they can manage that. And possibly there are still dyndns clients that do that; I've just not messed with any of that for a long time, but you can set that up on their PC if that stuff is still around.