HN user
So-called "cookie banners" usually ask for your consent to much more than optional tracking cookies. By accepting you might be giving your permission to e.g. track you through various fingerprinting methods, build a profile and share it with advertising partners.
It shows you the automatic account matches on import, allowing you to double-check and correct any misclassified ones.
Isn't this suitable for a Bayesian classifier?
I think that's what GnuCash does by default. Even with years of past transaction data it still gets some very obvious matches wrong for me. In my experience it's about 90% accurate for the ones it really should be able to do based on the training data.
There is a sign-in/create account screen, but this is easily bypassed if you know how to edit an sqlite file.
You can also just add "SideloadedMode=true" to your "Kobo eReader.conf" to achieve that. This removes the "Home" and "Discover" tabs as well, defaulting to the clean "My Books" tab instead.
Add special signals you can change on your server, which the app will understand, such as a forced update that will install without asking the user.
I understand the reasoning, but that makes it feel a bit too close to a C&C server for my liking. If the update server ever gets compromised, I imagine this could increase the damage done drastically.
I tried the the linked example search for "baby cat" and it returned the same three AI cats you can see in their Google search comparison screenshot on the first page. None of them labeled as AI generated.
Edit: When I explicitly choose to "Include" AI images from the toolbar option, they disappear. When I choose to "Exclude" them, they reappear. Still seems a bit buggy.
I don't remember where I've used my YubiKey in the past.
I track this in my password manager. Accounts where the YubiKey is enrolled are tagged "YubiKey (FIDO)".
I don't get those prompts with Google Photos. Have you tried selecting "Use without an account" in the account menu at the top right?
Not if this is one of a few dozen or few hundred similar ongoing operations. The risk is always there, they have to expect some amount of failure.
That actually makes me think it's not happening at a larger scale, since we'd likely have heard of at least a few similarly elaborate cases being uncovered by now. If not during the attempt itself, then at least at some later point in time.
Either almost all of these operations remain undetected, because they are even more sophisticated and much of the world's software ecosystem has been secretly compromised for years or there aren't actually that many such operations.
OpenWRT's hardware table seems not very useful; I can't, for instance, filter for at least two ethernet ports.
You could download the CSV dump of the hardware table [1] and filter in e.g. LibreOffice Calc.
Last time I checked the Linksys E8450/Belkin RT3200 was widely recommended.
That wouldn't work for dynamically injected ads that could be at different timestamps and have different lengths for each user.
There's a great summary from LWN[1] with lots of references and links to other articles for further reading.
More of these can also be found at https://old.reddit.com/r/CrowdPulledOnStage/top/?t=all.
simply making the username equal to "[deleted]" is likely compliant.
What if any of the comments themselves contain a name, username or other personal data that could be used to connect it to a person? "Anonymization" by deleting comment's authors like that just seems unnecessarily risky considering the potential fines.
I've been using OpenSnitch on Linux for some time now as well. While the user interface can be finicky at times, it's generally working very well. My biggest annoyance would be creating robust rules for applications using runtimes like Python, Java, Node, Electron or even Wine. After a bit of trial and error, I often end up with a relatively complex regular expression for the specific command and its possible parameters, that may or may not work for all future invocations.
Don't all Firefox extensions have to be signed by Mozilla in order to be installable (in non-developer Firefox editions at least) these days? Even if they're publishing it on their own site, it should have gone through the review.
imagine that every spam mail receives a masterfully crafted response showing utter fascination and interest in SEO
That would necessitate reliably detecting the emails as spam in the first place though. False positives in particular could be devastating. Imagine a chat bot coming up or going along with business proposals in your name for example.
I agree, it's a little weird that some very basic quality of life features are missing from such a popular and relatively mature product.
Folder management in particular seems to have been an afterthought. You create a subfolder by setting its name to its full path in the hierarchy, including all its parents. And thus, in order to rename a folder you have to manually go through every single subfolder and rename the particular parent in its name.
Other annoyances off the top of my head are things like the inability to change the type of a custom field from e.g. text to hidden without deleting it and creating a new field. Or the browser extension forgetting everything you just typed into the new item form (unless you remember to pop out the window) when pasting a generated password on the site you're trying to register to.
After switching from KeepassXC to Bitwarden for its better auto-fill detection and convenient synchronization, I can't help but feel that it's also been a downgrade in more ways than expected.
More like a canary I think.
No cryptography can protect against this scenario
I remember reading about how MITM is prevented in U2F [1] by using information about the connection as part of the challenge that the authenticator has to sign. Could something similar be possible in this scenario?
[1] https://fidoalliance.org/specs/u2f-specs-master/fido-u2f-ove...
Reminds me of Bytebeats [1]. My favorite being
echo "g(i,x,t,o){return((3&x&(i*((3&i>>16?\"BY}6YB6%\":\"Qj}6jQ6%\")[t%8]+51)>>o))<<4);};main(i,n,s){for(i=0;;i++)putchar(g(i,1,n=i>>14,12)+g(i,s=i>>17,n^i>>13,10)+g(i,s/3,n+((i>>11)%3),10)+g(i,s/5,8+n-((i>>10)%3),9));}"|gcc -xc -&&./a.out|aplay
If the permissions included "can star repos", instead of just "can read/write repos", then sure.
There could be perfectly legitimate reasons for a "can star repos" permission as well, with no way for a user to know beforehand if it's going to be abused or not. How about a site wanting to ask a user something like "Hey, you've been using this service for a week now. If you want to support us on Github by starring our repository, click here." for example?
Does something like that actually affect a company other than in the very short term? Won't the stock value just go back to where it was before, because nothing about the company and how it should be valued has actually changed?
The name is unfortunate since there's already Vulnhub [1].
For Reddit I've just been relying on uBlock Origin to block trackers, with some custom rules to get rid of all the superfluous sidebars, header bars, banners, avatars, achievement icons etc. The cleaned up interface actually looks very similar to Troddit's "Classic Rows" style.
I wonder if you could train some machine learning model using the data from SponsorBlock and achieve good results on podcasts as well. That way you wouldn't be dependent on a crowdsourced online database for your offline listening. Alternatively, even creating a transscript using something like [1] and scanning for words like "sponsor", "ad" or specific company names might already be a good enough heuristic.
I didn't see one either until I turned off my dark mode browser extension. If you also use an extension that modifies stylesheets, you might want to try disabling it for this site.
on the one hand it's insecure because it is a 1/12 chance of guessing right, but also who remembers what month they created an email account?
IIRC, they require both month and year, so there'd be a bit more guesswork involved. I added the exact creation date for all my Google accounts to my password manager when I learned about this verification method.
I recently created a new PayPal account. Got locked out almost immediately after adding 2FA via TOTP. First login worked, on the second login I just got a message that they were unable to verify it's really me. When contacting customer service, I was told that this is a known problem and I should just write them an email so they can remove 2FA from my account and then readd it a few days later myself.
When signing up it also told me my provided contact details weren't correct because I had a forbidden special character in the password that I typed in the previous form. Took a while to figure that one out.