HiddenLayer555

I use Linux on all my personal computers and privacy respecting ROMs on phones, and Pi-Hole, but a part I haven't really taken a look at is my network at home.

I currently have my ISP's smart router in bridge mode connected to a brand name Wi-Fi 6 router with a wireless "mesh" range extender. I really like the range extender because it has an Ethernet port so it's basically a "free" Ethernet plug for that room connected to a high power Wi-Fi transceiver that's faster than a lot of on board Wi-Fi antennas.

But I feel like it's probably not the best thing privacy and security wise? I already don't use the app and luckily it still has a web interface for management, but I don't know how secure the firmware is or if it has any corporate "analytics" or not. I'm thinking a PFsense or similar router software on Linux box to connect to the bridge port of my ISP's router since I was told the "Ethernet" cable connecting from it to the fiber modem won't work with a store bought router, I assume it has some kind of DRM?

I already have an old PC in mind to convert to a router. I assume I could just use the onboard Ethernet port to talk to the router and add my own USB NIC to connect to the main switch?

I don't know what to do for Wi-Fi though, could I buy two dedicated access points and put them on different floors, and have them both connected to the wired network? How hard would it be to have those be the same Wi-Fi network and have devices actually switch between them depending on location?

Also, most of my NICs and switches are from the thrift store or eBay for higher end used server parts. Is that bad? As in how worried should I be about the firmware running in those being tampered with by whoever owned it last?

I'm running a NAS on Fedora Server with LUKS encrypted Btrfs hard drives in a USB-C multi-bay enclosure. I noticed that one or both of the hard drives keep making the same sound as when I'm lightly reading or writing files from it (the closest it sounds like to my ear is something like copying to a Wi-Fi connected device where there is a bottleneck somewhere other than the hard drive, so it has bursts of activity a few times a second between idle time). Using iostat -x on my two main hard drives, I do see periodic activity every 10 or so seconds but I'm definitely not accessing anything in them, and the activity indicators on the USB enclosure are still and not blinking to indicate activity.

Should I be worried about this? To my paranoid mind it feels like something is slowly reading my files with some exploit to bypass the indicator light to fly under the radar. But I just did a clean install of Fedora Server 43 (over the previous installation which was 42) and I never installed anything outside of the official package manager and Docker registry. I've also never had this issue on Fedora Server 42 as far as I know, and the NAS is on my desk so I feel like I would have heard it ages ago if it was something frequent. There's also no unexpected network activity on the Cockpit dashboard that would indicate that files are being uploaded, though I feel like if some malware can suppress the indicator light on a USB enclosure it can probably also hide its network traffic.

Is there something standard it's doing that could explain this? Like does Fedora 43 more frequently tell the drive's controller itself to do things like defragmentation or bit rot prevention when it's idle? That's the only explanation I can think of where the drive is clicking but no data is actually being transferred that would trigger the indicator light, since the operation would be entirely within the drive itself.

cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/6498963

About 100 people packed into the Smithers courthouse on Friday to show support for three Indigenous land defenders being sentenced for attempting to halt work on the Coastal GasLink pipeline in 2021 in defiance of a court-ordered injunction.

Sleydo’ Molly Wickham, Shaylynn Sampson and Corey Jocko will avoid jail time after B.C. Supreme Court Justice Michael Tammen handed the three suspended sentences, rejecting a Crown submission that they spend time in jail.

The trio were arrested, along with several others, along the Coastal GasLink pipeline route on Nov. 19, 2021.

The sentencing closes a chapter in the years-long conflict over construction of the Coastal GasLink pipeline through northern B.C., which sparked solidarity protests that shut down transportation corridors across Canada and made international headlines.

Construction on the 670-kilometre gas pipeline was completed in late 2023 after years of opposition by Wet’suwet’en hereditary leaders and several high-profile police actions. Earlier this year, the LNG Canada export terminal in Kitimat began shipping gas transported through the pipeline.

Inside the courtroom, some supporters became emotional as Tammen acknowledged the Wet’suwet’en hereditary leaders’ decades-long fight to affirm the nation’s rights and title — and the B.C. and Canadian governments’ failure to engage meaningfully in negotiations over the outstanding claims.

But instead of sending the three to jail, Tammen suspended the sentences on the condition that they complete 150 hours of community service work, abide by a court injunction issued to the pipeline company and be on good behaviour.

After the decision, Sleydo’ — a member of the Wet’suwet’en Gidimt’en Clan — thanked the Dini ze’ and Ts’ako ze’ (Hereditary Chiefs) who have stood up for the nation’s land rights.

“What they did and how hard they fought and the fact that we still have lands and territories... today, that really showed,” she said outside the courthouse.

“It feels really good today to not be going to jail,” Sleydo’ added, to cheers from those gathered.

Full Article

I'm not that knowledgeable on networking, but I do remember that if a device is connected to a wired network, it can end up receiving packets not meant for it because switches will flood all the ports for packets they don't know how to route. But I also heard that Wi-Fi is supposedly smarter than that and a device connected to it should never receive a packet not meant for it.

Is this true? And in practice, does this mean it's preferable should keep computers with invasive operating systems (which might decide to record foreign packets sent to it in its telemetry) on Wi-Fi instead of on the wired network?

Also, how exactly does Wi-Fi prevent devices from receiving the wrong packets when it's a radio based system and any suitable antenna can receive any Wi-Fi signal? Does each device get assigned a unique encryption key and so is only capable of decrypting packets meant for it? How secure is it actually?