Wtf??? “All GNU/Linux”??? This guy made me think Linus personally had to descend to Kernel-land and fix perhaps the most horrendous memory bug in existence. But no, surely CUPS IS ON EVERY MACHINE, RIGHT???

Fuck you for blowing this out of proportion.

Eww no. Gives me plenty of trouble on RedHat already

You’ll have to desolder the WiFi card inside. Check teardowns of TVs from now when deciding to buy a new one

It’s a bit difficult, you’ll need be good with your solder.

Deblobbed wife, happy life

You have an amazing wife. Now install Gentoo on her device

Which distro does she have installed?

Thank you

To be safe: paper wallets.

The rest: YMMV

I’m switching off my internet until this gets fixed holy shit

That’s exactly what I do

Shared key??? PGP works on a public-private key-pair, and unless you’re giving out your private key, it’s not shared with anyone. This is blatant misinformation

And using these apps is not always an option. I like simplex, but sometimes email is one of the only options. PGP can be used agnostic of the technology used for transmission, and that’s exactly what we need to keep more people private instead of forcing them into a few select applications. If Diffie-Helman can’t be used in a transport-agnostic fashion then I do not see much progress in this direction.

OpenVPN -> I2P.

I2P has been around for 20 years, it is plenty battle-tested. I do not see why you’re wanting to put down I2P in favor of TOR, I still do not see how I2P is in anyway inferior in its privacy (and for the most part, anonymity) features compared to TOR. The OpenVPN addition solves your need for something akin to snowflake/TOR bridges. It is not what I2P was meant for but there’s a way if you want to use it.

If your complaint is about I2P needing some configuration and time to use properly; that’s a trade-off the end-user needs to decide. This doesn’t have any effect on its features regarding anonymity in the I2P network. Please give me technical reasons why you think TOR can preserve your anonymity better on the TOR network than I2P can do so on its network (I have arguments in favor of I2P that I would like TOR to implement but I don’t think they can)

This is a good read. I think it’s a good solution if it can be implemented properly. Are there applications you know of that allow you to personally (manually) encrypt text and communicate with another person like GPG does?

Use OpenVPN configured to look like HTTPS if you really need it. I2P is meant to be its own network, not a gateway to the clearnet. I still do not see how it has less measures in place for privacy and anonymity.

TOR is obvious too to someone snooping on your network, unless you’re using bridges (and that’s hit or miss). If you don’t want someone to know you’re using I2P, use OpenVPN and mask your traffic as HTTPS.

You’re going to have to explain better about “I2P not masking your traffic” and especially about “someone identifying you” - timing attacks are possible in both cases and the I2P Devs have mitigations against it. Please provide sources which define how I2P is weaker and more susceptible to TOR against network forensics

Please mention the “advanced features” it lacks compared to TOR. I have read the FAQ

I don’t think I understand what you’re implying. Are you arguing that PGP implements less secure operations because it doesn’t have perfect forward secrecy? As far as I know there’s not much out there in terms of encryption schemes for data at rest which includes PFS. Even AGE didn’t have it last time I checked. If you know about something that does provide PFS for data at rest, let me know

PGP is the protocol, GPG is the implementation. People tend to use GPG because it is FOSS.