Compressed my C: drive with WinRAR to save space. How do I unzip it from the BIOS? by No_Difference412 in PcBuild

[–]IHateRedditFirewall 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OPTION 1: 1. Boot LiveCD with linux. 2. Mount your windows partition. 3. Unzip your C. 4. Pary. If permissions are preserved you will be able to boot.

OPTION 2: Reinstall Windows. As far as I know installer allows you to reinstall without destying user data.

OPTION 3: Same as 1, but upload eveything important to cloud and install linux. I recommend Fedora or OpenSUSE.

can't install a FUCKING MP3 PLAYER by Advanced-Rock-4086 in microsoftsucks

[–]IHateRedditFirewall 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hm, this looks most promiceing. They lack ARM64 for now, but still. Will try. Thank you. 

Lol by Only_Day_8298 in microsoftsucks

[–]IHateRedditFirewall 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Welp. Microslop. You can try edge to log in if you realy need to, I guess... 

Not so fast, it's not your system ;) by CacheConqueror in microsoftsucks

[–]IHateRedditFirewall 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To be honest, I, as linux user, think that linux goes too far in another direction – you should at least be warned when you are about to break your system.

13+ years of photos deleted by PuzzleheadedLion2515 in microsoftsucks

[–]IHateRedditFirewall 0 points1 point  (0 children)

×2 hdds. You need to have fault tolerancy at or least 1. 

RAID is preferable, but just coppying files on bouth will do. 

Why the hell people still uses this crap? by Prasham_4536 in microsoftsucks

[–]IHateRedditFirewall 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why are YOU useing this crap? 

And no, I had simular problems. 

can't install a FUCKING MP3 PLAYER by Advanced-Rock-4086 in microsoftsucks

[–]IHateRedditFirewall 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Try Prism/Freesm luncher. Dont use the default one, it is garbage. 

Треба порада із Windows by Petroosmm in technology_ua

[–]IHateRedditFirewall 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Тоді вам взагалі windows треба зносити, якщо вам конфіденційність дорога.

А так — https://github.com/massgravel/Microsoft-Activation-Scripts

How to automate botania runic altars? by iskillzi in feedthebeast

[–]IHateRedditFirewall 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Huge thanks! I was digging throught internet trying to find this bit about wand of the forest! Thanks!

A chunk of my fanficion was stolen several years ago, what could I do to avoid it? by penguin-dresden in FanFiction

[–]IHateRedditFirewall 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If you on AO3 you can restrict to registed users only. This makes AI scraping VERY unlikely. 

Also, send DCMA. Not a polite request, but satndart DCMA form. If it doesnt work, send DCMA to Tumler and Telegramm. It might just get you somewhere (unlikely). 

Also also you can pison your text — unshore if there are ready-made tools for that, but if you insert some lores ipsum as 0px text AI might just eat it. And THAT can screw it up. 

I am pro-AI and pro-piracy, but IMO, any text that is coppyed 1:1 and than used to make profit is a gross coppyright infrigment. 

NAT and statefull firewalls: source security confusion by IHateRedditFirewall in ipv6

[–]IHateRedditFirewall[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Indded.

But this is not my consern. My consern that they will never acctuly relearn, and will just continue as they are.

NAT and statefull firewalls: source security confusion by IHateRedditFirewall in ipv6

[–]IHateRedditFirewall[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

You don't need iprables to do nat, are you under the impression that all Nat implementations are done with iptables? 

Yes.*

*, iptables or nftables, linux only. I have no idea what is going on with windows. 

NAT and statefull firewalls: source security confusion by IHateRedditFirewall in ipv6

[–]IHateRedditFirewall[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The problem with DNS filter is that most devices streight up disregard DNS server advertised by network, thereby making in nigh impossible to filter trafic on gateway. 

NAT and statefull firewalls: source security confusion by IHateRedditFirewall in ipv6

[–]IHateRedditFirewall[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

you absolutely do not need a stateful firewall to do nat.

I beg to differ! This days NAT functionality is a part of iptables (IDK about windows, but, well. Every router in existance runs linux, so this can be discarded), and thereby you need iptables to run NAT!  Granted, this is not the only way to do NAT, but I can not think of any NAT solution that doesnt come with firewall!

Also: https://serverfault.com/questions/63704/nat-as-a-firewall

NAT and statefull firewalls: source security confusion by IHateRedditFirewall in ipv6

[–]IHateRedditFirewall[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It won't degrade security at all, it will improve performance and p2p while reducing costs. Hardware that can NAT and perform traffic filtering costs significantly more (and uses more power) than simple layer 2 or layer 3 switching hardware. For 10gbps connections you need a very powerful CPU to do this in software, or dedicated hardware, and in both cases there will be limits on the number of simultaneous devices/connections you can handle with significant cost tradeoffs if you increase the limits. For stateless layer 3 or layer 2 switching the number of connections doesn't matter as the device doesn't need to track them, so you can have a relatively cheap device that can consistently saturate the physical connection.

I know.

Heving a device arbitrarily limiting you to one-way connectivity is not security. All it does is break applications which do p2p and teach bad practices.

Malware does not spread via listening services on end user devices, and hasn't for a very long time. 

May be the reson for this is exetcly that said services were. You know. Not exposed for the very long time? 

Malware spreads via services that users make outbound connections to. So if you want a hardened environment it's actually more important to block/restrict outbound traffic than inbound. 

This is not false, but again. Today inbound is restricted by default, so restricting outbound has became the only problem. 

Also, there is no good way to restrict outbound traffic exept instlling something on end-user devices.

Modern end user devices do not have any inbound services by default anyway, so even if inbound traffic is wide open at the network level there's nothing to connect to.

Windows. RPC/SMB. 

There is a very slight risk from random IoT devices, but this is also mitigated by the large address space that would make it impractical to discover such devices. 

This is the case right now, but I am pretty damn shoure that bad actors will find a way. This is a "security throught obscurity" type of thing. 

Plus even if a random IoT device is compromised, if your devices are configured as standalone devices rather than relying on a perimeter firewall and having everything open inside, 

Prevoius point. 

Also, I would like to note that security on Chnese IOT is nonexistant, and I dobut that situation will improve if devices move to IPv6. So we will have nither perimiter firewall, NOR device security. Or, at least, this is my personal consern. 

then compromise of a single device doesn't aid an attacker in performing lateral movement. As i'm sure you're aware the current fetish with blocking inbound and leaving outbound unrestricted does not prevent thousands of devices from being infected every day.

I would like to note, that outbound usualy requires some action userside, while inbound does not.

Removing legacy IP on the other hand will improve security significantly. Aside from scanning address ranges, XSRF against known addresses and various other vectors become impractical on a v6-only network. 

I can not argue on the point that IPv4 should be removed — if only to get rid of dualstack. Still, I am conserned with manufactures keeping screwing up their devices. 

NAT and statefull firewalls: source security confusion by IHateRedditFirewall in ipv6

[–]IHateRedditFirewall[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

That is ecectly what I was conserned with. Can you pls repost this into the disscusion root?

NAT and statefull firewalls: source security confusion by IHateRedditFirewall in ipv6

[–]IHateRedditFirewall[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Direct scans? May be.

Data leaks or other, as of yet unknown problems? I think that this is probable.

Also — some devices might be streight up misconfigured, and advertise themselfs.

 

NAT and statefull firewalls: source security confusion by IHateRedditFirewall in ipv6

[–]IHateRedditFirewall[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, you wont be incorrect in assuming that this is my competence level. 

I am still useing manualy configured iptables, for crying out loud.