exi

joined 1 year ago
[–] exi@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

Of all the replies, this is the first one to actually make a good point instead of random google-bad handwaving.

Thank you

[–] exi@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago

No need to be sorry. English is not my first language. I appreciate the correction.

[–] exi@feddit.de -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

THIS IS A PAID SERVICE.

Dude, they don't only do ads. Google has a whole bunch of payed-for services that are never touched for ad-tracking. This is one of them. You are implying that Google Cloud would also use ad-tracking based on customer data, which is absurd.

Please stop spreading this FUD. Just because the free services are payed for by ads does not mean that everything they do is.

(edit: Paid, not Payed)

[–] exi@feddit.de 13 points 1 year ago (15 children)

I'm super confused by the FUD spread in nearly every comment here.

Pretty much every argument boils down to "we don't trust google does what they say", which is funny because I'd like to challenge anyone to provide evidence that google actually sells any of your data. They sell advertising slots that they promise will find the right people, but your data never leaves google. No advertiser gets to see it.

This VPN service promises and has been independently audited to never log or analyze your traffic and even has built in provisions to anonymize your traffic within Google so they can't reconstruct it.

So apart from the questionable assumption that google is blatantly lying, what's the argument here? Apart from maybe missing some popular VPN Features like country selection.

Also this is for people that already pay for Google storage anyways, so I don't see the problem for the intended target audience, it's sticky an improvement in privacy for them and they get it for free. It sure as hell beats getting your traffic intercepted and ads injected into random http pages like some ISPs do.

[–] exi@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago

Pretty much every alerting system I know also has a filter option to only apply automated discovery rules to certain filesystem types.

But yes, most don't first squashfs or mounted read-only snapshots by default and it sucks.

[–] exi@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How old are you?

[–] exi@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

Are you using zfs?

[–] exi@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's why you do regular restore tests on separate systems. That should be standard procedure for any company. A fully encrypted disk should be noticable immediately.

[–] exi@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If your backups are online and not in a warehouse, you are doing it wrong. Even my own personal backups are on disconnected disks. What a bunch of amateurs.

[–] exi@feddit.de 5 points 1 year ago

You can't trust any full disk encryption without it because only a TPM can verify that your bootloader and initrd are not compromised.

[–] exi@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I get what you mean but please read the study: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41347-023-00304-7

They themselves note that the very small sample size would be an issue. They say they would need 78 people for even remotely confident results, then they initially targeted 74 people, of which 20 dropped out.

Let me be clear that I too want to believe that social networks are bad for people, but studies like this one do very very little to provide any meaningful data to base my opinion on.

view more: next ›