After all these decades.
The year of the gnu hurd.I do not understand the joke.
David doesn’t want anything to do with the Linux Foundation anymore because they used AI generated art for an ad/promotion thing.
It had a blue cup with a tux on it in it and a big tux with a 35years head, which I put on Pepper’s cup. It also had a bunch of hallucinations in it
I kinda agree with him as an artist. It makes me sad to see people generate art with ai when they could’ve made a noobie drawing that will still be far much better than the ai one. Ai art can be so weird as well.
Hi Pepper! Everything’s fine there?
I played SuperTuxKart before. Is pepper a mascot somewhere, or is it a character for SuperTuxKart?
It’s a comic https://www.peppercarrot.com/ licensed under a Creative Commons license and made with Krita
Year of the Linux desktop when the years of neglecting security comes to bite them
… Compared to what?
MacOS, iOS, GrapheneOS (and even then, Graphene doesn’t believe themselves to be doing enough due to the fundamental limitations in AOSP)
There is one distro trying, and even they make it clear that they’re bound by the limitations of the Linux desktop’s security model at the moment (SecureBlue).
It is also technically possible to harden Windows to become nearly bulletproof but that usually requires third party software like ThreatLocker.
MacOS, iOS
Do you have a source for that beyond shills and their marketing?
There most definitively are vulnerabilities and backdoors in these OSes. Whether or not we hear of them doesn’t prove otherwise
My source is primarily the GrapheneOS team’s praises for how Apple handles iOS, particularly in Lockdown Mode. There was also a recent situation where they warned their users of “mercenary spyware” attacks.
It’s also a position that many in the SecureBlue community would agree with, which is where I’ve learned the majority of my recent security stuff from.
I mean it’s commendable that Apple makes an effort to keep their users secure from third-party attackers (besides MDM software), but there’s just no telling how much control and privacy violation is going on when they’re keeping their source code secret. (“What do they have to hide? Clearly something.”)
SecureBlue seems interesting, though most of their features look like security theater compared to the default
Suppose this is a fair point. The stuff that is exposed seems to be quite helpful, such as already integrating features like Global Privacy Control long before Google.
As for SecureBlue… a lot of it seems quite extreme even for me but they’re doing good work overall. I was maining their browser for a bit until I realized I was fighting against the current to make it usable for my use case and I felt kind of dirty doing all that to their excellent baseline. But I did grab their sysctl config, commented out 3 or 4 that I didn’t need, and inserted it into my own. I like having more control, but I’ll gladly take a more secure option if it doesn’t affect usability significantly, so I cherrypick fixes liberally from their setup.
A true turfblaster found in our midst.
What is a turfblaster? I’m confused but maybe someone can explain that to me
Maybe it is someone who blasts astroturfing? Idk
I mean I guess following the messaging of one of the only explicitly security-focused Linux distros is considered “astro turfing” then? Hmm.
secureblue is for those whose first priority is using Linux, and second priority is security. secureblue does not claim to be the most secure option available on the desktop. We are limited in that regard by the current state of desktop Linux standardization, tooling, and upstream security development. What we aim for instead is to be the most secure option for those who already intend to use Linux. As such, if security is your first priority, secureblue may not be the best option for you.
If security is your FIRST priority, they outright say their work is limited. So… that’s where I’m getting it from.
If security is your first priority you really just gotta stop using a networked computer, and even an airgapped one would be risky


