xthexder

This has been one of my worries when I set up my NAS as encrypted. I ended up going through the recovery process a few times before storing any real data, since I wanted to be sure I could get myself back in if the OS drive failed or something gets corrupted and I have to unlock it from a live USB.

I guess we've learned absolutely nothing from putting all the retirement eggs in the Nortel basket and we're about to lose everyone's pensions yet again.

By the same argument, why not just play last year's CoD? It's not really fun playing the same campaign over and over unless you're a speedrunner or something. I want new single player experience, just like I want new TV shows and movies. I don't have time to stay competitive in any online multiplayer games, and it seems like the only ones making single player games anymore are indie devs.

Be careful, you might delete the database if it was designed by Tom.

it kinda looks like they just mistyped "dropping it" and they're actually talking about some streaming service like Disney+

Companies should already be storing password hashes, so the risk of leaking a hash vs a public key is roughly the same. It's just that private keys are generally longer than passwords and therefore harder to bruitforce.

Any company storing passwords in a recoverable format deserves to be hacked.

Lack of adoption doesn't really make password managers a workaround. What's being worked around? People's laziness?

Password managers actually do solve the phishing problem to an extent, since if you're using it properly, you'll have a unique password for every service, limiting the scope of the problem.

Putting TOTP 2fa codes in your password manager behind the same password as everything else actually destroys any additional security added by 2fa, since it puts you back to a single auth factor.

Lol, that print has more creases on it than a homework assignment that's spent all day in my backpack

In an ideal world, there's enough CSS/JS inlined in the HTML that the page layout is consistent and usable without secondary requests.

There might be some CAT6 cable inside somewhere

I've seen several codebases that have a typedef or using keyword to map uint64_t to uint64 along with the others, but _t seems to be the convention for built-in std type names.

This seems necessary if they're to maintain an IP ban list. You shouldn't just be able to unban yourself by submitting an information deletion request.