BuoyantCitrus

joined 2 years ago
 

I've blithely assumed that backups / snapshots of my home dir (including my Thunderbird profile) were covering my email. But it occurs to me it may be more difficult than expected.

I have message synchronization on for any folders I care about ("for offline use"). What I was assuming this meant was that if my mail host disappeared or mysteriously deleted an important folder, I would still be able to switch to a backup, start TB in offline mode (via a commandline parameter), and copy those folders to a local folder at which point I could reconnect and drag them back to my new host, a local imapd I use as an archive, or wherever.

But ...would that actually work? Anyone recover email from offline folders? How'd that go?


Edit:

Well, there can never be too many reminders to verify our backups and I'm all for that but that's less what I was after. I was specifically thinking about the scenario when an IMAP host somehow loses an important folder or disappears entirely. How would it go to recover from a sync'd folder in tb? What caveats would there be? Would attachments show up?

But ya, this post was silly, it's easy enough to try. Yes it works, yes the attachments come with. No major issues in my limited test.

However, I did learn one annoying thing: there is no command line option to start Thunderbird in offline mode. So in the case where the folder was deleted on IMAP I'd either have to:

  • disconnect from the network before running the app
  • quickly toggle offline before it finishes connecting and deleting the folder
  • use the pref to prompt if you want to go online every time you start

I think for as rare a scenario as this is it's fine to just disconnect but I'm a bit surprised it really doesn't seem to have a flag for it.

 

My Keychron Q11 showed up recently and I've been super happy with it. Main reason was that my Noppoo Choc Mini finally lost a switch and I don't have any on hand (nor a soldering iron ...yet) but it turns out I actually really wanted the pair of rotary encoders on this and didn't even realise.

Specifically, I've got it bound to Ctrl-PgUp/PgDown so I can scroll through my tabs with it and close them with a click binding to Ctrl-W and that's working out really well.

Anyone else use the knobs like that? I've got the other one set to volume and the vendor had zoom as a suggestion but I wonder what else people do with these?


Bonus newb Q: On the product page they demonstrate binding Ctrl-+ zooming to the encoder via a macro but neither macro13 nor the {KC_LCTL,KC-W} type syntax would let me click "Confirm" when trying to associate it to the knob in Via (eg. it wouldn't let me follow their example). Luckily it was happy with the alternative of LCTL(KC_W) that I stumbled on somewhere but now I wonder how to properly associate a macro to a knob?

 

Last time I needed to add rf to a desktop, Intel AX200 seemed like the chipset to get. But now there are various new standards and the BE200 apparently has issues with AMD systems? So is there something newish from Qualcomm or others that I should be aiming for or would I probably be better off just picking up an AX210?

Since the card might be kicking around a while I'm curious what has the best overall Linux support with as many significant 802.11 standards and Bluetooth codecs as possible for general future-proof-ness. Would also be nice if it had good support for AP mode as that's sometimes handy or I might repurpose it into a router at some point.

[–] BuoyantCitrus@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

One thing that would be useful to understand is the distinction between CMR and SMR

[–] BuoyantCitrus@lemmy.ca 10 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I got a nice deal on the x280 and am happy with it, was also looking at the various X1 carbon. Two criteria I had were I wanted USB-C charging (since I have those chargers around and they can handle these laptops) and a single battery (eg. the T470s I have from work is nice but it has two small capacity batteries that each cost the same to replace as the full size single ones in the carbon and x280). One thing to keep in mind is some of the earlier X1 carbon don't support NVME SSD (I think it started with 5th gen?)

Edit: another thing to consider is soldered RAM. Part of why my x280 was cheap was it's only 8gb and can't be upgraded. Since you're looking at lighter weight things and using FOSS (and perhaps open to tinkering with things like ZRAM) that might be a useful aspect to focus on because there is probably a glut of such machines given how memory inefficient things are lately with every trivial app running a whole browser engine. OTOH, depending how many tabs you tend to have open and how many electron apps you tend to keep floating around, 8gb might start to feel cramped. Especially if you think you might want some VMs around.

[–] BuoyantCitrus@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Next time I look for a small laptop to have handy one thing I'm going to be sure to prioritise is: how much battery does it use while suspended? I'd really like to not need to have it switch to hibernate after 30m of sleep or w/e and ideally just plug it in overnight like a phone.

 

Apparently, while it's closed for new donations, liberapay is still going to renew existing ones.

[–] BuoyantCitrus@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago

Big fan of that one, been using it for years.

[–] BuoyantCitrus@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

The app, in the scenario where we're trusting the author/store, is only part of the surface to the extent it's exposed to a potentially malicious payload. eg. a trusted solitaire game using a vulnerable API doesn't exacerbate that vulnerability because it doesn't expose it to untrusted input whereas a PDF viewer would because the PDF could be coming from anywhere...

[–] BuoyantCitrus@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Really appreciate you taking the time to write that. I have a sense of most of that ("defense in depth" and "threat model" are good lenses to think about such things through for sure!) but what I was trying to get a better grasp on was how much risk from automated attack was a normal person without worries of an "advanced persistent threat" taking on by using a device past EOL. Like you say, "Quantifying how much of a difference it makes is not trivial" so I feel less conflicted to know that you're comfortable with your dad taking that risk.

I would think that the main thing at stake for a typical user isn't just browsing history or email though but rather identity theft since a successful attacker can use the device to get through 2FA.

[–] BuoyantCitrus@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago

It seems like the attack surface is limited to RF (bluetooth/wifi can be turned off if one is willing to make that compromise), app install (many just use a small selection of well-trusted apps), and messaging/browser which are regularly updated if the device is properly configured. Apps that aren't pulling in random untrusted content are far less of an attack vector (eg. one's bank app isn't connecting to everything, just to the bank, pinterest is hopefully escaping user content, etc.)

Based on helpful details at the other thread (eg. Project Mainline, baseband isolation) I’m beginning to form the opinion that it is not unreasonably foolhardy for someone to continue to use an unsupported device if they are willing to make the compromises necessary to limit their exposure. Which wouldn't necessarily mean "giving up bluetooth entirely", just not using it when you're in bluetooth range of an untrustworthy party eg. if you just use your headset to make zoom calls at home and are fine not having it on the subway.

Thanks for the reply. Definitely appreciate the point that lacklustre updates mean we need to pay attention even if we're vaguely covered by our vendor. I think you've convinced me to subscribe to CVEs for android too, I've only had alerts for my browser. Really too bad they don't make smaller Pixels.

[–] BuoyantCitrus@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I don’t think they are things that can be fixed on the app level?

Indeed not. So I'm trying to better understand how vulnerabilities at the system level are exploited. It seems like the attack surface is limited to RF (bluetooth/wifi can be turned off if one is willing to make that compromise), app install (many just use a small selection of well-trusted apps), and messaging/browser which are regularly updated if the device is properly configured.

Based on this thread I'm beginning to form the opinion that it is not unreasonably foolhardy for someone to continue to use an unsupported device if they are willing to make the compromises necessary to limit their attack surface.

[–] BuoyantCitrus@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Thanks, that's encouraging and very relevant. Looks like it was introduced in Android 10 and aside from "Project Mainline" is referred to as "modular system components": https://source.android.com/docs/core/ota/modular-system

Can you shed more light on what someone would be risking by continuing to use an EOL device? You say you don't advise it, but it'd be helpful to elaborate on why.

It seems like the increased vulnerability would be relatively limited: I presume the browser and messaging are by far the most common vectors and those would be as up to date as ever but I can see how exploiting an unpatched vuln there on an unsupported device could have more impact as it would give more options for privilege escalation.

Otherwise it'd be something RF based. Aside from widely publicised things like BlueBorne (that we should be keeping an eye out for anyway), is it a reasonable concern that there are identify theft rings employing people with modified hardware wandering around subway systems trying to exfiltrate credentials from devices with specific vulnerable basebands? Seems like Android also offers some defence in depth there that'd make it unlikely enough to ensure it wouldn't be worth their while?

There are a few technologically disinterested people in my life that I advise (as is no doubt the case for many here) and I don't know how strongly to push for them to get new devices once theirs fall out of support. Most of them are quite content with what they're using and are not in the habit of installing apps (and will reliably ask me first) so they really would be replacing the device solely for the updates. In some cases it's not only the time and effort to decide on a replacement and get things transferred over but the expense can also be a burden. So I don't want to raise the alarm lightly.

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/1926125

Too many perfectly usable phones are put into a questionable security situation by lack of vendor support for keeping key software up to date.

But what's the actual risk of using an Android phone on a stock ROM without updates? What's the attack surface?

It seems like most things that'd contact potentially malicious software are web and messaging software, but that's all done by apps which continue to receive updates (at least until the android version is entirely unsupported) eg. Webview, Firefox, Signal, etc.

So are the main avenues for attack then sketchy apps and wifi points? If one is careful to use a minimal set of widely scrutinised apps and avoid connecting to wifi/bluetooth/etc. devices of questionable provenance is it really taking that much of a risk to continue using a device past EOL?

Or do browsers rely on system libraries that have plausible attack vectors? Perhaps images, video, font etc. rendering could be compromised? At this point though, that stack must be quite hardened and mature, it'd be major news for libjpg/ffmpeg to have a code-execution vulnerability? Plus it seems unlikely that they wouldn't just include this in webview/Firefox as there must surely be millions of devices in this situation so why not take the easy step of distributing a bit more in the APK?

I'm not at all an Android developer though, perhaps this is very naive and I'm missing something major?

 

Too many perfectly usable phones are put into a questionable security situation by lack of vendor support for keeping key software up to date.

But what's the actual risk of using an Android phone on a stock ROM without updates? What's the attack surface?

It seems like most things that'd contact potentially malicious software are web and messaging software, but that's all done by apps which continue to receive updates (at least until the android version is entirely unsupported) eg. Webview, Firefox, Signal, etc.

So are the main avenues for attack then sketchy apps and wifi points? If one is careful to use a minimal set of widely scrutinised apps and avoid connecting to wifi/bluetooth/etc. devices of questionable provenance is it really taking that much of a risk to continue using a device past EOL?

Or do browsers rely on system libraries that have plausible attack vectors? Perhaps images, video, font etc. rendering could be compromised? At this point though, that stack must be quite hardened and mature, it'd be major news for libjpg/ffmpeg to have a code-execution vulnerability? Plus it seems unlikely that they wouldn't just include this in webview/Firefox as there must surely be millions of devices in this situation so why not take the easy step of distributing a bit more in the APK?

I'm not at all an Android developer though, perhaps this is very naive and I'm missing something major?

[–] BuoyantCitrus@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Aren't you sorta trusting whoever wrote any package you install with root? I mean, you should have that attitude anyhow as packages have a huge attack surface so privilege escalation bugs are way more common than remote execution but still, flatpak and snap at least offer a bit of a sandbox which might improve...

 

I noticed that Jeroba didn't seem to switch to a different site the way Relay passed through to Reddit so I could log in and link it via OAuth. From that I take it that when I authenticate in Jeroba I'm entrusting it with the cleartext password for my lemmy account which it's storing on my phone?

I'm sorta okay with that especially for now (eg. alpha) so I proceeded with things but maybe it should be more clear up front that's what's happening? And really, any of the other apps could probably have faked that OAuth page anyhow so it's dubious if you were really trusting the app all that much less in that case.

However, one thing OAuth had going for it was that would make it a lot harder for someone who steals my phone to permanently take control of my Reddit account whereas they could extract my password from Jeroba and use it to take over my lemmy account?

view more: next ›