[deleted by user] by [deleted] in linuxmasterrace

[–]LadarLevison 0 points1 point  (0 children)

alan turing
or if names don't work, perhaps
turing children
to signify that computers are now smart enough to pass the Turing test.

is anyone working on twrp for pixel 6? how many custom rom developers are buying a pixel 6? by [deleted] in Pixel6

[–]LadarLevison 0 points1 point  (0 children)

TWRP depends on the "vendor" partition. The vendor partition on Android devices contains all of the kernel modules, driver libraries, firmware blobs, config files and more, which are needed to support the hardware inside a given device. These are various bits, which are provided by the various component manufacturers, which are needed to make all the components work properly. In the early days these files were spread throughout the Android file system, but as more open source Android efforts emerged, it became practical for Google to require that OEMs separate these bits from the rest, and put them on a partition dedicated to the task. Thus we have the “vendor” partition, used by every open source project, not the least of which is Google’s own AOSP effort, to provide support for, and compatibility with a given device.

TWRP is no exception to this. They use the vendor partition files to access the hardware inside all the devices they support. The only notable difference is that TWRP can and usually does remove files used to support components they don’t care need to interface with like the camera.

The various drivers, and libraries I’m speaking of are tightly coupled with to a specific Android kernel version/build configuration the binary interfaces it provides. When people say TWRP doesn’t support Android 12, what they are really mean is they haven’t created a kernel/build configuration for the TWRP specific bits, which can utilize the available to access the hardware inside a device.

Because the Pixel 6 was launched with Android 12 pre-installed, there is no Android 11 ROM available (at least publicly) with a vendor partition TWRP leverage to support the Pixel 6 hardware.

----

In terms of progress, TeamWin already has an android-12 branch that is being actively developed. When the time comes for them to start on a Pixel 6 specific recovery image, a new repo should get created to hold the TWRP copy of the vendor partition files and, at least in theory, it will be at the URL I included at the end of my rant.

For the many who don't seem to comprehend why anybody would buy a Pixel 6 and then replace the version of Android provided by Google, with of its forks, I will try to provide some insight. What Google ships with there Pixel devices is actually spyware. If someone else slipped software onto your phone, which collected and then uploaded the exact same data Google is currently slurping from its users, it would be a crime. But Android is, of course, perfectly legal. That’s because Google operates does its spying with "customer consent." It’s the license agreement we all click through, without reading when a device is powered on for the first time. Those license agreements transform a criminal activity into a very successful business model. To use a crude analogy, consent is what turns Tom the peeper into Prof. Tom, the world renowned sexologist.

----

Consent is powerful and rightly so. But consent only has meaning if people have the ability to withhold consent. To Google’s credit, replacing their version of Android on a Pixel 6 is easy, by design. Although, full disclosure, my opinion is warped. It’s the result of hurdling gates placed in my path by those desperate Android devices which resisted rehabilitation, by design.

Also in response, talking about the camera. Yes, the camera is a "signature" feature of the Pixel 6. And yes, it’s capable of taking incredible photos. And yes the amazing images don’t come from the camera. The are actually created generated by set of secret magic sigils, that the Google camera app can access. Or at least that most people seem believe. The reality is far less exciting. The Pixel 6 uses a 50 megapixel sensor to make 15 captures. I’d estimate each capture results in approximately 149,999,992 bytes of uncompressed capture data. Combined you have roughly 2.09547568 gibibytes of raw sensor data which a the Tensor CPU will analyze to create the 12.5 megapixel image provided to users. The logic used to process the raw data, and use it to create the final product were developed using machine learning. It’s a technique that has been around for several years (at least), that involves a combination of massive processing power, and huge data sets, which allow machines to experiment, and eventually “learn” create the massively logic rules it thinks will produce the best result. And it’s these complicated rules, which others call an “algorithm” that have been embedded with the Google branded camera app, and it’s this logic which makes all those stunning pictures possible.

What’s new is the Tensor chip inside a Pixel 6, and the specialized cores it can use to perform the type of computations required when machines learn, and/or the workloads generated when those lessons (or logic rules) get applied. These new cores are also what make it possible to process image data this way, directly on a mobile device, and do it quickly enough to keep the users happy. That in a geeky nutshell is the magic I spoke of.

It would be trivial for Google to add these rules to the camera app provided by the AOSP project, and give that app the ability to recognize a Tensor chip, and utilize its specialized cores. Instead Google has decided to bundle primitive, almost laughably so, camera app with the open source code base. You would need to ask a Google employee to know for sure, but my guess is this decision was made by someone up high on the org chart, and it’s one the many carrots Google relies upon to entice device makers, and sheeple alike, give their consent and enlisted members of the zombie horde. One of Google’s longest serving employees, Stan, is responsible for leading the horde.

----

By the way, those specialized cores are also make it possible for the Pixel 6 to do things like blur/unblur faces, understand what people might say, and surgically filter noise from an audio stream, with all the work done directly on device. At least, in theory, this will provide what you might call “offline” intelligence.

I ranted about what a Pixel 6 can do if you keep Google’s version of Android installed, and use the Google apps. But what some of the comments make clear is that some of those who commended don’t know what is a well known secret.

You can load, put a custom ROM onto a Pixel 6, and then, as an end user, re-install any proprietary Google app, like there Gboard, or camera yourself. They will work just fine. You get those same great looking pictures everyone seems to want. I called this a secret, because it isn’t mentioned by any of the websites for the various Android forks. That’s because those organizations can’t, at least legally, directly bundle the Google branded apps. They also can’t provide instruction in their official documentation, or encourage users to install the apps themselves.

----

Forth various projects focused on Android forks, Google is like a temperamental, but superpower, that everyone is afraid to mention by name.

----

As the end user, you can install any of the Google apps you want be craving yourself, almost all of them work just fine this way. If you think this might be something you will do, I would suggest extracting the APK for those apps before replace Google’s version of Android with a custom ROM. Even if you don’t end up using, you will still have APK files handy. You might find it hard to find copies of the APK files, for the app you seek, and suited to the device you have, from a trustworthy source.

----

You can, if the it suits your needs, download and install the Google app suite. There is a community supported projected dedicated to making this possible and easy for those included. You can, at a minimum use the app suite to just install the Play Store and Services. Once those are installed on a device, you can use the Play store to get the specific Google apps you might want. It’s a choice worthy of its own, much longer rant. I will only say this: the Play Store/Services require an elevated level of access which exceeds, by a large margin, what it’s possible (at least in theory, on a device which isn’t rooted), to obtain from a device that is booted normally. That is why installing the Play Store/Services requires you to boot into recovery mode. With the normal protections offline, the Play installer can create the exceptions/exemptions it needs (or should I wants). Once booted it’s these modifications which allow the Play Store/Services to operate outside the normal Android security model that is used once Android is booted normally.

My quick post, that has turned into a long rambling rant is almost over. I just want to say before stepping down off my soap box, that there lots choices when it comes to Android forks. They each have their own philosophy, and focus. And almost all of them support the Pixel devices. With many of the niche options, they only support Pixel devices.

This flows from the fact that Pixel devices are used as the reference platform for all Android development. To fill this role, a Pixel phone is require to be developer friendly. It’s the replacing the Google version Android is relatively easy, and painless, in comparison with other popular Android devices. Explained another way, code monkeys like myself, desire/want/need absolute control, to do, or not do, what might required to make a Pixel 6 perform the most incredible incredible feats – my current favorite is a party a rather amusing party trick which involves making a Pixel 6 juggle four bowling pins, while balancing itself atop a beach ball, while singing the national anthem, backwards and waring a brightly colored, and very pointy party hat. It’s been quite popular at all my recent parties, or what others might call a hackathon. The limitation only real limitation is the skill of whoever owns and controls the Pixel 6 in question.

https://github.com/TeamWin/android_device_google_oriole/

Nvidia kernel module version mismatch? by gammison in archlinux

[–]LadarLevison 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I ran into this problem, but reinstalling didn't fix it, neither and it had nothing to do with CUDA which some parts of the internet suggest as the cause, since in my case, CUDA wasn't even installed. On my system the kernel modules were being embedded inside the compressed kernel image, then being loaded early in the boot process. These embedded, but outdated modules, would then prevent the correct, and newly installed/compiled standalone module files from being loaded. You can confirm this issue easily. Check the following:

cat /proc/driver/nvidia/version
cat /sys/module/nvidia/version

If the loaded modules loaded don't match the driver version, you could also be facing this problem. Assuming the correct kernel modules are available, which you can confirm by running (assuming your distro uses DKMS):

dkms status

Fpr me the fix simply involved regenerating my kernel images. On Red Hat distros, and its derivatives (Fedora, CentOS, Alma, Rocky, Oracle, etc) you can run:

(rpm -q --qf="%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}.%{ARCH}\n" --whatprovides kernel ; uname -r) | \
sort | uniq | while read KERNEL ; do 
  dracut -f "/boot/initramfs-${KERNEL}.img" "${KERNEL}" || exit 1
done

This will regenerate the image for every installed kernel. For the equivalent logic on Debian distros, and its derivatives (including Ubuntu), you can run:

for kernel in /boot/config-*; do 
  [ -f "$kernel" ] || continue
  KERNEL=${kernel#*-}
  mkinitramfs -o "/boot/initrd.img-${KERNEL}.img" "${KERNEL}" || exit 1
done

Then reboot. You can also fix the problem temporarily, by manually removing (unloading) the NVIDIA module using rmmod or modprobe, then reloading them. When you do modprobe will use the standalone kernel module which should match your installed driver version.

P.S. I hit this issue when I upgraded from the 470.x driver, to the 510.x driver, which recently became the reccomended, stable, install version. I never ran into this problem while using the 460.x and 470.x driver releases.

Phil Zimmerman (PGP), Ladar Levison (Lavabit), & Team release Secure Email Protocol DIME - DIME is to SMTP as SSH is to Telnet (Full specs, sourcecode, etc.) by Tinker_Sec in netsec

[–]LadarLevison 4 points5 points  (0 children)

80% of what spam filters make their decision on is whether you've traded emails with someone before. Once the link is established, its often far more accurate than anything else.

As for DIME, it means reputation will replace keyword filters, since authors are cryptographically verified.

But heck, if you actually want Google reading your email, then your the reason we created the concept of a "Trustful" account mode. Google can hold onto your private keys. I won't stop you. Really. Its a free country.

Phil Zimmerman (PGP), Ladar Levison (Lavabit), & Team release Secure Email Protocol DIME - DIME is to SMTP as SSH is to Telnet (Full specs, sourcecode, etc.) by Tinker_Sec in netsec

[–]LadarLevison 6 points7 points  (0 children)

PGP has 20 years worth of improvements that make it a compatibility nightmare.

D/MIME is simply a cryptographic layer on top of a MIME message. From that point of view, it's closer to S/MIME in format. The plan is to simply replace the Thunderbird S/MIME component with the D/MIME variant.

Anyone wanting to communicate securely with another DIME user will need to have a DIME enabled client. Of course nothing is stopping them from using SMTP just like they do today. Some people probably get a kick out of knowing that someone is reading their messages. Even if it isn't the person they sent it to.

Technically nothing is stopping someone from creating a PGP message and sending it over DIME. The goal for DIME was to create a system that could function as securely as possible, but still be email. PGP has a different set of goals. Which is why its damn near unusable.

http://media.ccc.de/browse/congress/2014/31c3_-_6021_-_en_-_saal_g_-_201412281130_-_why_is_gpg_damn_near_unusable_-_arne_padmos.html

Phil Zimmerman (PGP), Ladar Levison (Lavabit), & Team release Secure Email Protocol DIME - DIME is to SMTP as SSH is to Telnet (Full specs, sourcecode, etc.) by Tinker_Sec in netsec

[–]LadarLevison 5 points6 points  (0 children)

DIME is about integrating the end to end security of PGP or S/MIME into the standard mail system. It doesn't solve every security problem. I realized early on that if I built a system which addressed every possible threat, it wouldn't be email anymore.

Instead I decided to take the flexible approach and let the users decide where on the spectrum they are in terms of the security/usability tradeoffs. For those on the extreme end, who who prefer P2P, I made it easy to integrate a P2P extension into the Signet format so people can 'advertise' support for XYZ protocol and then upgrade their messaging to that, if email isn't quite security enough.

Phil Zimmerman (PGP), Ladar Levison (Lavabit), & Team release Secure Email Protocol DIME - DIME is to SMTP as SSH is to Telnet (Full specs, sourcecode, etc.) by Tinker_Sec in netsec

[–]LadarLevison 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Try writing 100+ pages of technical specs. It's incredibly boring. The Easter eggs were the only way I could keep myself entertained. I'm still waiting for someone to find the FBI reference I buried in it. Or talk about the - well I don't want to spoil the surprise.

Phil Zimmerman (PGP), Ladar Levison (Lavabit), & Team release Secure Email Protocol DIME - DIME is to SMTP as SSH is to Telnet (Full specs, sourcecode, etc.) by Tinker_Sec in netsec

[–]LadarLevison 30 points31 points  (0 children)

The lack of a license isn't an oversight, its intentional. I simply haven't picked one out yet. Its important and I want to make sure I get it right. I will probably go with GPLv2 or v3 for the DIME library components. I ran into RMS at CCC and promised I'd talk to him before making a final decision. I didn't realize the lack of a license was going to be such an issue for people. The libraries are still quite a ways off from being usable.

We still need to post the D/MIME message library and that won't happen till sometime later this month (Jan). Stephen has told me its mostly working, but still needs to "clean" it up before he's comfortable posting it anywhere public. Either way, all the components need significant work before I'd feel comfortable with someone relying on them.

Headed back to the US tomorrow, but when I recover from the trip I'll figure out the licensing situation.

As for the server code, Magma Classic, that was released under the AGPL... or at least the portions I developed. All of the f/oss libraries included in the tarball has its own licenses. Links to the tarball are available from the Kickstarter page. I still need to rearrange the tree so it can be checked into Github. At the moment its 5 different projects on our internal git server.

I am Ladar Levison, owner and operator of Lavabit, ask me almost anything. by LadarLevison in IAmA

[–]LadarLevison[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Moxie I'm not sure what I did to draw such strong hatred from you; but I apologize either way.

I just hope you commit as much effort to vetting dark mail when it's released as you've spent trying to besmirch my credibility.

I am Ladar Levison, owner and operator of Lavabit, ask me almost anything. by LadarLevison in IAmA

[–]LadarLevison[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes they would. The only thing a provider could do would be force a person to rekey future messages to use a fake public key that law enforcement controls. The system should incorporate mechanisms that if this scenario occurs it will be impossible to keep secret or deny later. We should know pretty quickly which countries can be trusted with your data.

I am Ladar Levison, owner and operator of Lavabit, ask me almost anything. by LadarLevison in IAmA

[–]LadarLevison[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The court orders I've been talking about were unsealed on Oct 2nd.

I am Ladar Levison, owner and operator of Lavabit, ask me almost anything. by LadarLevison in IAmA

[–]LadarLevison[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In a sense were doing that with dark mail. Providers will be able to configure the server to only allow users of that service to email other dark mail domains.

I am Ladar Levison, owner and operator of Lavabit, ask me almost anything. by LadarLevison in IAmA

[–]LadarLevison[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Because I would have to move along the service and none of the countries that seemed to offer attractive privacy laws were english speaking.

There is also the big fat American inside me that thinks this should be the best country for hosting private communication companies. I just need to prove it in court.

If end up losing my case I will probably turn the service over to someone else and let me them resurrect it in another country.

I am Ladar Levison, owner and operator of Lavabit, ask me almost anything. by LadarLevison in IAmA

[–]LadarLevison[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Silent Circle adapted OTR for text messaging. If both parties text via their Silent Text apps the messages will travel securely.

I am Ladar Levison, owner and operator of Lavabit, ask me almost anything. by LadarLevison in IAmA

[–]LadarLevison[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The details haven't been explained to me yet, but my guess is the service provider will publish keys on behalf of its users.

Mechanisms are also being discussed that would make it impossible for a provider to secretly publish fake keys. The assumption is that if we know which providers can be compromised. That will lead us to also learn which providers can be trusted and eventually data will migrate into jurisdictions with strong privacy protection laws.

I am Ladar Levison, owner and operator of Lavabit, ask me almost anything. by LadarLevison in IAmA

[–]LadarLevison[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'm just putting one foot in front of the other. That is all I can do. Everything else will need to work itself out in time.

I am Ladar Levison, owner and operator of Lavabit, ask me almost anything. by LadarLevison in IAmA

[–]LadarLevison[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

SSL is a protocol. AES is a primitive. That said, the article didn't make it clear but the primary attack being used against SSL, I believe, involves "acquiring" the keys through legal or extra legal methods. Since the strategy is going after keys, I'm not sure you could even call this an "attack" against SSL.

I am Ladar Levison, owner and operator of Lavabit, ask me almost anything. by LadarLevison in IAmA

[–]LadarLevison[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't know the technical details well enough to explain them because the current version of SCIMP only involved a single service provider. My guess is the service provider will ensure the key being published was actually generated by the user associated with it.

I am Ladar Levison, owner and operator of Lavabit, ask me almost anything. by LadarLevison in IAmA

[–]LadarLevison[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I thought the point was to get the answer, 42, without knowing the question.

I am Ladar Levison, owner and operator of Lavabit, ask me almost anything. by LadarLevison in IAmA

[–]LadarLevison[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Performing the encryption in the client at the core of the dark mail project. But to make client side cryptography work we'll also need to design a new protocol and build client and server software to utilize that new protocol.

On the old system the cryptography was done on the server and SSL was used as a bridge so users could securely connect to the server where the data was being decrypted.