259
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] someguy@pleroma.someotherguy.xyz 127 points 1 month ago

@return2ozma @technology
10 years ago, the Feds wanted backdoors to all of phones so they could read all of our text messages. Now, the Feds want everyone not to use software that has backdoors so the Chinese cannot read our phones. The Feds don't want competition.

[-] Godnroc@lemmy.world 56 points 1 month ago

The backdoors they use are there for freedom and justice, the backdoors the "others" use are tools of evil and security risks!

[-] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 month ago

"They're the same picture"

[-] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago

Why do you hate America’s children?

[-] whostosay@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

For real, I bet this guy didn't back the "Definitely Don't Maybe Not Almost Probably Save The Children ACT."

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[-] bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de 66 points 1 month ago
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 41 points 1 month ago

Been saying that for years. It's about damn time.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] metaStatic@kbin.earth 27 points 1 month ago

in other news grass is green

[-] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 24 points 1 month ago

Didn't this happen quite awhile ago? I don't see anything new in this article

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 37 points 1 month ago

The novelty is the fact that it's ongoing. They haven't mitigated the hack. The threat actors are still inside the networks, which is why the government is telling people to switch to E2EE apps.

[-] rarbg@lemmy.zip 21 points 1 month ago

Oh man it sure would be nice if the feds had the power to regulate something like this /s

[-] da_peda@lemmings.world 16 points 1 month ago

They did. That's the reason for this hack, they wanted Lawful Interception, they got their backdoor. It's what professionals and privacy advocates said all along, if it exists it will be abused.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 21 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Thank god, give me my HMAC hash please.

Nothing more terrifying than losing your phone number these days because of all the accounts tied to it via 2FA.

[-] communism@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 month ago

I wish Signal stopped using it. I know you can set a Signal PIN but a lot of the non-techy friends I speak to on Signal probably wouldn't think to, or look through the settings (not that you need to be "techy" to set it, but you know the kind of learned helplessness most people have about tech). At least a prompt for all users to set an account PIN so their account can't just be stolen by anyone with their SIM card.

[-] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 1 month ago

I thought they abandoned SMS a couple years ago??

[-] ChillPill@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago

They abandoned letting you use the Signal app to send and recieve SMS. You still need to get a code via SMS to activate your Signal account. I believe this is what they are referring to.

New Clipper Chip mandatory in new phones for "security" 😉

[-] BigLime@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 month ago

I coulda told you that for free. And sooner

[-] randon31415@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Authentication for my work email: Enter 28 character password, receive sms, enter message, log in

Authentication for my Battle.net account:

-Enter email made before 2000 because they don't let you change email

-Enter password

-Get rejected

-Solve CAPTCHA

-Try backup passwords, get rejected

-Request new password

-Send request to 24 year old email

-Try to log on to 24 year old email, email is suspicious and sends Authentication request to my newer email

-Open newer email, Authenticate older email

-open old email, Put in code to battle.net

-Battle.net requests Authenticator code from Battle.net app

-Open battle.net app (no requests)

-Try manual code, doesn't work

  • Realize Battle.net app Authenticator not connected

-Try to connect Battle.net app Authenticator to account

-Realize you cannot connect Authenticator without signing in AND signing in requires Authenticator

-Close Battle.net app

-Open Blizzard Authenticator

-Close warning that this app got depreciated in January

-Enter manual code

-it works

-Attempt to change password to password I first attempted

-Won't let me use same password

-Try logging in using that password

-Still doesn't work - Solve one more CAPTCHA

-Change password to backup password and back to original password - have to solve 2 more Captchas

-Finally works

-Log in

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

So many services still don't even offer 2FA at all. Any service that stores payment information and PII without any 2FA options, let alone a secure one, at this point are a disgrace.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

NIST has been saying since 2016 not to use SMS for MFA. It's always been horribly insecure.

[-] Routhinator@startrek.website 1 points 1 month ago

The problem for me is that most Canadian Banks give you the choice of SMS or their shitty adware filled bank app that relies on Google Play Services and wont implement TOTP so I can use a true MFA app. And Im done with being forced to accept user policies I don't agree with to do shit, and most of all done with Google Play Services on my device 😑

load more comments (13 replies)
[-] altima_neo@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 month ago

Ive been slowly hearing about this over the last week or so, and I couldnt tell if it was real news or just over exaggerated.

And everyone has been on an on about iphone to android RCS, but no word on if anything is being done to fix the vulnerability.

[-] Scolding7300@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

What vulnerability? I thought RCS is encrypted on transit

[-] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

RCS doesn't really do a whole lot of anything. It's a step up from SMS/MMS, but not by much.

All the features people think they mean when they're talking about RCS are proprietary Google extensions that only work if you go through Google's servers. They're basically exactly the same as Apple putting iMessage on top; Apple just brags about it while Google tries to trick you into thinking incompatibility is someone else's fault for not giving them control.

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago

of course it is. forced 2fa BY SMS OF ALL THINGS is one of the stupidest ideas

[-] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Since when was sms ever secure? My understanding is that messages are sent in the clear, meaning your carrier and the recipient's carrier both have the opportunity to intercept messages.

I mean that's the message content, not the authentication, but still, sms is the opposite of secure, always has been.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2024
259 points (97.4% liked)

Technology

60830 readers
1424 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS