theamigan

Yes, unless they are OPAL, in which case it's done the same way as SSDs: throw away the key.

Laughing at all the Hollywood shit in this thread. A single pass erase (or ATA Secure Erase, if they are SSDs that support the command) is more than enough. Nobody is going to waste time and money recovering data of unknown provenance from a landfill.

Imagine if Pirate Bay or Napster were considered completely above-board businesses just because they took down torrents if explicitly requested by the copyright holders.

That's kind of exactly how the DMCA works. That's the bargain, you take down offending content and make an effort to ensure it does not return and you are allowed to continue to exist and not be sued directly. The problem is that this goes against torrent sites' entire raison d'etre (usually under the argument that they don't even host offending content, just a torrent file) and so it never happens this way.

Just playing devil's advocate (I hate the DMCA for many other reasons), but if service providers were directly liable for what their users did, the Internet never would have grown up to what we know it is today.

Not all cheeses are funky, and funk that is not characteristic of a certain style of cheese is considered a defect.

They are also packed per slice because they last a lot longer. Plastic cheese or not, cheese slices have a lot of surface area and get funky relatively quickly. Also, every time you reach into a regular bag of deli sliced cheese, you introduce funk-generating organisms.

If you run a server...

#!/bin/sh
INSTANCE=myinstance.com
psql -U lemmy -c "SELECT (person.name || '@' || instance.domain) AS user, 
('https://' || instance.domain || '/u/' || person.name) AS their_instance_url,
('https://${INSTANCE}/u/' || person.name || '@' || instance.domain) AS url,
comment_like.score
FROM comment_like
JOIN person ON comment_like.person_id = person.id
JOIN instance ON person.instance_id = instance.id WHERE comment_id = $1;"

Edit: lol@ the downvotes. Do people think lemmy operates on the principles of magic? Sorry my SQL offends you.

Sir, this is an Arby's.

Again, a one time pad is safer in that instance. Security by obscurity is not security.

I fail to see your point. Of course it is not merely "encrypting your shit." But a constructed language is more dangerous than using existing crypto. It is subject to frequency analysis and many other analyses. And aside from the point of "if you can memorize it's flawed," you might as well just use a one time pad at that point. Generally, if you are not a cryptographer and you design a cipher, that cipher will be flawed. The human element of being suspicious of a surveillance state is certainly valid, and you are right, it is not something I generally worry about on a daily basis, mostly because I am not presently engaged in any such high risk activities. I am saying nothing about this not changing and never becoming something to worry about, but you bet your ass I will be employing cryptography designed by experts if that day comes.

And anyway, all my webservers are https, I am an avid user of gpg, and I've been working in "cybersecurity" for over a decade now, so I like to think my opsec isn't total garbage. After all the Snowden stuff came out, it just reinforced my existing practices and birthed new ones. Also, wireguard is the shit.

In the context of modern communications security, yes, it is absolutely fucking loony. You have encryption available to you, as a private citizen, that is better than any crypto any state actor had in WWII and for the price of $0. The Navajo codetalkers were employed because that was the best way to solve the problem at the time. It is no longer.

Then why are you wasting your and our time with this ridiculous thread? This is a solved problem, it's called encryption. But you continuously reject people's suggestions in favor of your own loony proposition.