BW06: Icon URL Item Decryption. Items can include a URL field, which is used to autofill the credentials and display an icon on the client. The client decrypts the URL and fetches the icon from the server, including in its request the domain and top-level domain of the URL. For instance, if the URL is “https://host.tld/path”, the client request includes “host.tld”. This means that the adversary can learn (part of) the con- tents of URL fields. Using Attack BW05, an adversary can place the ciphertext of sensitive item fields, such as a user- name or a password, in the encrypted URL field. After fetch- ing the item, the client will then decrypt the ciphertext, confus- ing it for a URL. If the plaintext satisfies some conditions (i.e. containing a ‘.’ and no !), it will be leaked to the adversary. A URL checksum feature was deployed in July 2024, mak- ing the clients store a hash of the URL in another encrypted item field, therefore providing a rudimentary integrity check and preventing this attack. Note that old items are never up- dated to add such a checksum: this feature only protects items created after its introduction. Furthermore, URL checksums are only checked if a per-item key is present for the item. As we will see, an adversary can prevent per-item keys from being enabled with Attack BW10.

IMPACT. The adversary can recover selected target ciphertexts in the item, such as the username or the password.

REQUIREMENTS. The user opens a vault containing items that do not use per-item keys (i.e., items created before July 2024, or after Attack BW10 is run). The target plaintext must satisfy some additional conditions, detailed in Appendix

– from the paper the article is discussing

So you could potentially expose your passwords to a compromised server or some kind of MITM. If they meet the conditions for the validation check, anyway.

A permanent utopia free from geopolitical influence has yet to be established under any system of government, therefore no system of government has ever worked.

You don’t need to apologize. It’s a good game worth recommending as long as you don’t pay that guy for it.

They’re just doing meow sounds for the cats. It’s not even worth the controversy he caused by doing it. Could have literally recorded himself meowing as he suggested and no one would have known or cared.

The only reason I even checked out a game named “Mewgenics” was because it was Edmund. I put up with his (literal) shit in Isaac because both it and this game are very well designed from a gameplay perspective. Not gonna reward putting murderers, rapists, and genocidal zionists in a game about doing cat eugenics though.

humor of a twelve year old with the morals of a south park character.

I’d pirate Mewgenics if you’re interested in it. Dipshit edgelord author used Ethan Klein and Chris Chan for VO work in the game, then justified it with some lame centrist fence sitting. Incredibly tone-deaf response for a game literally named after eugenics, so fuck him.

Letting them win because you’ve conceded before even playing is also a losing formula. Even if they don’t get awarded monetary damages they can probably at least get their legal expenses covered.

Libel. Taking it down doesn’t undo the damage to reputation which libel is concerned with. They might not get any monetary damages awarded but could maybe force Ars to put out a retraction.

Replying isn’t disengagement. I used the knife as an example because it makes it clear that putting someone in immediate danger with no concern for their safety is a kind of “intent”. If I juggled the knives near you instead would the humorous contrast make the analogy more palatable? Im just an amateur knife juggler, playing with his knives in your personal space after we had an argument, no hostile intent here.

Does the jury use it’s psychic empathy to determine what was in my heart at the time the knife perforated your larynx or do they use the circumstances leading up to the murder to determine if I had intent to kill you or not?

If I bring out a knife and kill you with it but only because I tripped while holding it at your throat, did I intend to kill you or not? Does it matter?

If you have a better way to explain their motivations and reasoning I’m all ears. I’m sharing my view in hopes to refine it when presented with counter arguments, in an effort to help both of us reach a more accurate understanding of the situation we are in. If we hope to prevent their plans we must understand what they’re thinking, and discussing their behaviors seems to be more useful for doing so than trying to reconcile some kind of coherence between their actions and statements.

The horse is also sensitive about it’s incontinence, please just try to pretend he’s not here.

Anyone who hasn’t “picked a side” yet has had more than enough examples of hypocrisy to convince them if that were something that mattered to them. The fence sitters who remain aren’t interested in examining the validity of the MAGA movements “reasoned arguments”. They are vibes based morons who are more influenced by their feelings and peer pressure and they probably aren’t on Lemmy.

Do what you want man, just leave my horse and his height out of it; he’s very sensitive about it.

There’s a point to itemizing their crimes and stating them publicly.

Pointing out hypocrisy is about trying to make someone understand a flaw in their reasoning. There is no flaw in their reasoning because they did not use reason to reach their conclusions.

Edit: It’s like pointing at someone in the midst of a schizophrenic delusion and saying “woah can you believe this guy?! He thinks the CIA is gonna crawl out of the sewer and carry him off to the KGB headquarters in Obamas secret underground lair! Doesn’t he know that’s stupid and makes no sense!?” You’re criticizing madness as if it were a legitimate reasoned argument.

deleted by creator

It leads to the exact same material result as pointing out the hypocrisy does: nothing. Point it out all you like, I don’t care if you get off on wasting your time.

Every single day.

That’s not an excuse to refuse to vote against full-blown fascism, but there needs to be a reckoning against neoliberalism and capitalism in general before anything will change.

Why would they stop putting up neolib candidates if you’ll vote for them regardless?

My dad got a pack of sugar-free Werther’s caramels for christmas. Explain that one please.