davel

joined 3 years ago
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Ever since the Red Scares[1][2] and the Taft-Hartley Act, all labor unions in the US have been yellow, except for the IWW. If you want a militant labor union, you’ll have to create it from scratch.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 hours ago

is ur thingy an innie or an outie

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

Get a real job, NATO shill, one that doesn’t run cover for an ongoing genocide and European race supremacy.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

We’re downvoting because we’re historical materialists, and no political tendency more closely studies history than we do. We know that you and virtually all liberals are fundamentally wrong about what drives history.

History is not predominantly shaped by charismatic leaders. That is ahistorical, idealist Great Man theory. History is predominantly shaped by the material conditions and from the bottom up, from which leaders arise, and their ideas don’t spring from their galaxy brains but from the conditions of the historical moment they happen find themselves in.

 

On October 11, 2026, the DNS root is scheduled to change its key-signing key (KSK) for only the second time ever. This key anchors DNSSEC’s chain of trust, which lets DNS resolvers authenticate answers using cryptographic signatures. The change is called a KSK rollover. Validating resolvers need to trust the new key before the switch, as otherwise healthy websites could become unreachable.

When we wrote about the first root KSK rollover in 2018, we had seen resolvers lose their learned trust in the new key during software upgrades or moves between machines. Publishing the key well in advance was only part of the job. We also needed to know whether resolvers had retained it, and we couldn’t give users a practical way to check.

Most website operators do not need to make any changes for this rollover. If you run a DNSSEC-validating resolver, check that it trusts the new root key, KSK-2024, and follow your software vendor’s instructions to update its trust anchors if the key is missing. If you use Cloudflare for your domain's DNS or rely on 1.1.1.1 and Gateway DNS, you do not need to take any action — our systems already trust KSK-2024.

To check ahead of time, visit our rollover readiness test. It asks the resolver your browser uses whether it trusts the new key. The test uses RFC 8509: A Root Key Trust Anchor Sentinel for DNSSEC, which we’ve implemented in 1.1.1.1 ahead of the rollover.

New key, same algorithm

KSK-2017 and KSK-2024 both use RSA/SHA-256. The rollover replaces the key pair while keeping the same method for creating and verifying signatures.

In our 2018 post, we wrote that a successful rollover would open the door to discussing an algorithm change. Eight years later, the root still uses RSA.

What comes after October

The October 11 switch changes which KSK signs the root’s DNSKEY set. The rollover continues into 2027, when ICANN plans to revoke KSK-2017, remove it from the root zone, and delete its private key. Stopping a key from signing and removing trust in that key are separate steps.

ICANN has also proposed a future root algorithm rollover to ECDSA P-256. ECDSA produces smaller keys and signatures than the RSA algorithm used today. That proposal is separate from this October’s key replacement, and ECDSA is not a post-quantum algorithm.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 day ago

liberal cope is a fuck

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 day ago

That will make the US tech industry sad, because the H-1B visa system serves to suppresses wages. The visa holders aren’t to blame for it of course, despite the two-faced, self-serving right-wing rhetoric.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

Lemmy isn’t Facebook. It’s intentionally pseudonymous. The communist developers created it that way for good reason. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operational_security

First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist

Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist

Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist

Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew

Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

directly benefits the fascist regime in power

My guy, we’re punching right, and both parties in the FPTP duopoly are right wing. They both serve the capitalist class, and always have. No matter how people in the US vote, the outcome serves capital.

I never tell people not to vote, only that we can’t vote your way out of capitalism.

Previously:

The US government was never not captured by the bourgeoisie, because the US was born of a bourgeois revolution[1]. The wealthy, white, male, land-owning, largely slave-owning Founding Fathers constructed a bourgeois state with “checks and balances” against the “tyranny of the majority”. It was never meant to represent the majority—the working class—and it never has, despite eventually allowing women and non-whites (at least those not disenfranchised by the carceral system) to vote. BBC: [Princeton & Northwestern] Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy

The game is rigged. The election cycle’s pomp and circumstance is to divert your energy and attention from the fact that it’s a big club, and you ain’t in it.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I’m just backing up your assertions with evidence.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

You said it by saying you’re a liberal. The right to privately own the means of production is foundational to liberalism.

The first sentence from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism; emphasis mine:

Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, right to private property, and equality before the law.

The second sentence from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property:

Private property is foundational to capitalism, an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit.

There are two philosophies of capitalism: liberalism, when capitalism is running smoothly; and fascism, when late capitalism is in crisis.

 

Also,

For the uninitiated:

spoilerhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goatse.cx

 

Summary

  • Judge says complaint fails to show ongoing civil rights violations
  • Harvard had called claims 'pretextual and retaliatory'
  • Lawsuit sought to recover billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies, court papers show
 

A series of issues in Apple’s web browser engine — the tech underlying all browsers on iOS — means that Apple’s iCloud Private Relay tool, which is supposed to hide a user’s IP address, in many cases doesn’t actually work. Instead, the issues mean a malicious attacker can set up a website to learn a Private Relay user’s real IP address, or that many websites have also already collected this information incidentally. The issues also impact OnionBrowser, an iOS app for browsing the web through the Tor anonymity network, the researchers who discovered the issues say.

The Private Relay leak is the second issue to recently impact Apple’s paid-for privacy products. Last month 404 Media reported a bug in Apple’s Hide My Email feature was actually revealing peoples’ real email addresses. Apple knew about that issue for more than a year before fixing it.

“In short: any website that supports, or pretends to support, passkeys can see the user’s real IP address despite having iCloud Private Relay on,” security researcher Tommy Mysk, who discovered the issue along with Talal Haj Bakry, told 404 Media.

The researchers developed a site that lets Private Relay users check if the issues impact them. In 404 Media’s tests, the site did return the real IP address of a user that was supposed to be protected by Private Relay.

122
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by davel@lemmy.ml to c/memes@lemmy.ml
 

 
 

About 60,000 migrants crossed from Morocco into Spain’s tiny Ceuta territory in the past 24 hours, Ceuta’s president said Friday, a figure that is equivalent to 70% of the population of the city in North Africa. At least 57 migrants died on the journey.

But roughly half of the people who made the crossing soon made their way back voluntarily, the Spanish government said, after the sudden arrival of so many migrants triggered chaos and a humanitarian crisis.

Some migrants swam several miles through the sea and faced down authorities who tried to turn them back with water cannons, tear gas and warning shots. Those who died included some who drowned or were killed in a stampede to cross a breakwater barrier near a border checkpoint.

Spain deployed its armed forces and additional police to restore order in Ceuta, which sits on the Strait of Gibraltar at the entrance to the Mediterranean Sea and has been a Spanish possession since 1580. On the Moroccan side of the border, security forces clashed with migrants.

“The situation that Ceuta is going through is absolutely unsustainable,” Ceuta President Juan Jesús Vivas told journalists.

Meanwhile, migrants from Morocco also attempted to cross into Melilla, Spain’s other territory at the tip of North Africa, where they clashed with police.

Border surge linked to Supreme Court ruling

The authorities in Ceuta and Madrid have linked the border surge to a recent decision by the Spanish Supreme Court, which ruled that migrants arriving by sea could not be summarily deported, unlike those who cross by land or climb the border fence.

Sánchez said migrant smugglers misinterpreted the ruling.

The interpretation of the Supreme Court’s ruling “spread like wildfire over the past few hours through the networks of human trafficking organizations,” triggering the surge, Sánchez said.

Spanish prime minister has bucked anti-immigration trend

Sánchez has bucked the anti-migration trend that has gained ground across Europe and in the U.S.

Earlier this year, his government moved to give residency and work permits to hundreds of thousands of migrants already living in the country without permission.

Sánchez, a Socialist, argued that it would be good for the economy and the demographics of an aging Spain. Migrants who entered irregularly after Jan. 1 this year were not included.

His critics have jumped at the opportunity to attack his policy, saying it encouraged more migrants to come.

Sánchez on Friday defended his migration policy and distanced it from the events in Ceuta.


Middle East Monitor: Ceuta crisis sparks online speculation over Israel’s role in pressuring Spain

The speculation intensified after social media users resurfaced articles published earlier this year by pro-Israel analysts who argued that Israel and the US should aid Morocco over its claim to Ceuta and Melilla as a means of pressuring Spain.

 

More than six years later, there is still no “smoking gun” proof for either of the two prevailing hypotheses of Covid-19’s origins, that SARS-CoV-2 emerged from a laboratory accident at the Wuhan Institute of Virology or from a natural jump from an infected animal. Nor is there direct evidence linking Fauci, or research at the WIV that NIAID funded while he was director, to the pandemic.

In the last few months, however, a release of new documents, some partly declassified by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence under Tulsi Gabbard, and some obtained by Senator Paul’s committee through subpoenas, show that, even as leading scientists and certain government officials, including Fauci, publicly argued against a lab leak, in private, at various times, they deemed it credible and even equally likely.

Their assessment came in part due to unusual features of the virus. Those include a furin cleavage site, a distinctive segment of SARS-CoV-2’s genetic code that makes the virus more infectious by allowing it to more efficiently enter human cells, raising the question of whether the virus was engineered.

Since 2023, both the Department of Energy and the CIA have shifted their assessments towards a lab leak as the likelier origin, joining the FBI, which was the first intelligence agency to assess with moderate confidence that SARS-CoV-2 originated from a laboratory accident. Four intelligence agencies, along with the National Intelligence Council, assess a natural origin for Covid-19.

One thing that also clearly emerges from the documents: as the world was engulfed by crisis, and the American public needed transparency, the effort by Fauci and scientists allied with him to obscure or downplay the U.S. government’s entanglement with the Wuhan Institute of Virology likely weakened America’s ability to pressure China to release more information.

On January 26, 2020, as the virus was emerging, Fauci wrote in his journal, “Now we know the [Huanan seafood] market was not the source, it was the amplifier. Having said that, somewhere the virus jumped from animals to humans.” The scientists allied with him would later argue that the market was the pandemic’s origin, serving as the spot where the virus first leapt from an infected animal to humans. (No infected animal has ever been identified.)

In his diary, Fauci then mentions a February 1, 2020 conference call, one that later became the subject of intense scrutiny. He had gathered top virologists to discuss the origin of the virus. His entry makes clear that the majority on the call “felt that deliberate insertion” of a furin cleavage site “was possible” due to the type of risky research the WIV had been pursuing. “We could not let this go.”

Yet by March of 2020, they had let it go. Four of the scientists on the call, all of whom had raised concerns about a lab leak, and a fifth author, published a scientific letter in Nature Medicine, “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2,” asserting that “any type of lab-based scenario wasn’t plausible.”

Emails obtained through freedom of information later showed that Fauci had worked behind the scenes to help shape the publication. But at the time, his role in the letter was not publicly known.

On April 17, 2020, at the White House podium, Fauci fielded a question from a reporter: Could SARS-CoV-2 have come from a lab? He responded that a recently published analysis from a “group of highly qualified evolutionary virologists” had concluded that the virus was “totally consistent with a jump of a species from an animal to a human.”

That positioning of the Proximal Origins letter played a significant role in relegating even factual questions about the possibility of a laboratory accident to the conspiracy-theory dustbin. To this day, there remain unanswered questions about what led the scientists involved to shift their assessments between the February 1 call and the publication of their lab-leak disavowal some six weeks later.

“These guys were messaging each other about how the virus looked like it was engineered and then after speaking with Fauci, switched gears quickly and published the Proximal Origins letter,” Jason Bannan, the FBI scientist who led the Bureau’s investigation into Covid-19’s origin, tells Rolling Stone. Meanwhile, he says, “Fauci was advising [the intelligence community] to listen to those experts, so he continued to promote them.”

In May 2020, one month after Fauci touted the Proximal Origins paper and its conclusion of a natural origin from the White House podium, the Z division of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory — an elite group of federal government scientists who advise the intelligence community — issued a classified report which argued that an accidental lab leak was equally possible.

view more: next ›