Well if I’m already paying for Windows, I might as well use it, right? /s

You say /s, but that’s the literal exact reason that Microsoft has all the market share.

What do you mean I’m out of space? I just bought an external hard drive on Thursday!

Hey now! I can honestly say Microsoft has never done that with any of my computers!

(Why yes, they do all run Linux. How did you know?)

If any of your Linux machines use SystemD, then Microsoft has done that then there’s something to be aware of with those machines. SystemD has a global system ID that can be used like the Windows GDID apparently.

Edit: not MS

Tell me more. I may have to move to a distro without systemdeez.

machine-id

Okay but correlate that with the same methods and usage and by the same threat actor (MS) in this case.

Or any of the combination, as a treat

I’m not saying it’s impossible, but it’s extremely implausible.

Absolutely zero reason a init system needs admin date of birth. Yes separate issue entirely, but it’s showing a trend and the direction things are headed.

blog.bofh.it/debian/id_473

To support and to need are two different verbs. Linux also needs your phone number in the user metadata by the same standard.

To be fair, yeah that shit is egregious.

But that’s not at all what I asked you or what you claimed. Those are technically two different things. And not technically like yes or no. Those are entirely different security fronts.

You’ve got to back that claim up or take it back, and I have a feeling you’ll be taking it back.

It’s okay to be cautious, and it’s especially okay to warn others of trajectories that could lean into privacy or security issues, but it’s not okay to make shit up.

Lastly it’s no longer an init system. It’s a system that happens to handle init.

That’s fair. I didn’t mean MS was the threat actor, just the seed from which this grew. I definitely take that back after reading up more on where machine-id grew out of.

However, I don’t concede that machine-id is theoretical for user fingerprinting. Any software installed can read it, especially a browser. That’s the vector for tracking across the web. Do I have instances of this occurring, no. Seems plausible and the more we can sandbox things, especially “web browsers” (untrusted app runners more like it) the better.

Probably correct. I’m not going to pretend to have the know how, but I would assume that if this was exploited widely, we’d have heard about it.

Would it be a great target? Maybe. Attack it. Show us all the love of contributing in hardening it.

I’m not technically inclined enough to harden against that, nor do ai really have the inclination. But here is a thread on that topic where I even heard about it.

!privacy@lemmy.ml

lemmy.ml/post/49710604

I did just read I think 90% of that, and it just seems like that person is sour about systemd in general.

I agree it’s not unix/Linux philosophy but it’s the best we have.

Does it do too much? Maybe. I haven’t seen that exploited on a large scale in the real world, but it’s definitely a golden key.

There are options. But it’s just one of those things. You’re pissing in the wind unless you’re willing to write it yourself. You can use non systemd distros or even use bsd.

All that said, you’re absolutely right to be concerned, but speaking on it like it’s an active vulnerability is dangerous.

It’s also evident that it’s reliant on the software you run, it’s not systemd that’s giving you away, it’s your application that you chose to install that’s abusing or neglegent of systemd’s access.

I didn’t saw it was dangerous only that it was similar to MS GDID, and it is.

Source?

See discussion below. I’m making it up obviously

Wow, that’s how it managed to find “malware” (not actual malware) in a password protected rar that I shared

To be fair, a lot of platforms just flag any encrypted archive file (not just rar) as malware. Their argument is that those files are commonly used to get past malware detection, which is kinda true. Still a pain for everyone who has a legitimate need for the feature.

Zipping files was never enough to secure them in the cloud. It‘s always recommended to properly encrypt sensitive data properly before you upload it. Whether you use OneDrive, Google Drive, Proton drive or whatever.

Still amazing how far Microslop goes to sniff through your stuff preemptively, though. Your cloud storage should be none of their business but sadly it‘s their entire business now. Privacy laws should definitely extend to digital space you rent no matter the circumstances.

If cloud providers argue that‘s too dangerous then they simply shouldn‘t be in business. If a government says it‘s too dangerous then they shouldn‘t be in power. Obviously they don‘t trust in the people who voted for them. Therefore they don‘t trust democracy and are therefore fundamentally undemocratic and a danger to the people.

ZIP encryption can be pretty strong, as long as you use aes-256 and not zipcrypt. AES256 had been supported for ZIP files since 2003, just not in the built-in Windows zip handling.

Pay for it twice actually, Microsoft charges you to install that spyware on your computer as well.