Skip to content

Signal – an ethical replacement for WhatsApp

Technology
193 120 0
  • How not to lose your job to AI

    Technology technology
    16
    1
    9 Stimmen
    16 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    rikudou@lemmings.worldR
    A nice "trick": After 4 or so responses where you can't get anywhere, start a new chat without the wrong context. Of course refine your question with whatever you have found out in the previous chat.
  • getoffpocket.com, my guide to Pocket alternatives, just got a redesign

    Technology technology
    23
    85 Stimmen
    23 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    B
    I've made some updates. There are many perspectives to view a guide like this. I hope there are some improvements to the self-hosting perspective. https://getoffpocket.com/
  • Firefox is dead to me – and I'm not the only one who is fed up

    Technology technology
    55
    1
    45 Stimmen
    55 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    F
    Never had issue with Firefox in my day to day use, sites load fine, uBlock stops all the annoyances and thankfully youtube works well for me.
  • Mergulhe em Aventuras Digitais com a MerwomanPG

    Technology technology
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 124 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    T
    Premium supported. You get plenty with the free tier, but you get lots more with paid.
  • 2 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    fisch@discuss.tchncs.deF
    If I went to the USA now, they'd probably put me there after looking at my social media activity anyway
  • 1 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    L
    I think the principle could be applied to scan outside of the machine. It is making requests to 127.0.0.1:{port} - effectively using your computer as a "server" in a sort of reverse-SSRF attack. There's no reason it can't make requests to 10.10.10.1:{port} as well. Of course you'd need to guess the netmask of the network address range first, but this isn't that hard. In fact, if you consider that at least as far as the desktop site goes, most people will be browsing the web behind a standard consumer router left on defaults where it will be the first device in the DHCP range (e.g. 192.168.0.1 or 10.10.10.1), which tends to have a web UI on the LAN interface (port 8080, 80 or 443), then you'd only realistically need to scan a few addresses to determine the network address range. If you want to keep noise even lower, using just 192.168.0.1:80 and 192.168.1.1:80 I'd wager would cover 99% of consumer routers. From there you could assume that it's a /24 netmask and scan IPs to your heart's content. You could do top 10 most common ports type scans and go in-depth on anything you get a result on. I haven't tested this, but I don't see why it wouldn't work, when I was testing 13ft.io - a self-hosted 12ft.io paywall remover, an SSRF flaw like this absolutely let you perform any network request to any LAN address in range.
  • 553 Stimmen
    30 Beiträge
    10 Aufrufe
    swelter_spark@reddthat.comS
    Yeah, I don't prefer that. But with some things I feel like it's barely a downside, and I'd put Boxes into that category. It's useful and well-designed enough in terms of functionality that I'm willing to overlook the Gnominess.