Jean_le_Flambeur

Spotydown.media worked for me, but sometimes it gets stuff so wildly wrong that i am guessing he pulls the stuff from another library and takes the closest match for the name. Doesnt seem to be YouTube though, never had intros, outros or music video noises

Well opressivs governments dont work by serving good policys to the people, they work by blaming a part of the people for all problems and then promsing to get rid of them/punish them. A scapegoat basically. The opressors don't make it better for the people, but the people are happy because the ones they think causing their suffering get punished.

Historically this has been the communists in Nazi Germany, or faschist italy, modern faschists try to make gay people and people from the far east this scapegoat atm.

The problem is: the scapegoat is never the real cause of the problem. After taking them all to the kz, and life for people still not getting better you need a new one. For Nazi Germany those where Jewish people, just because of their religion, has Hitler proposed the "kommunistisch-jüdische-weltverschwörung" (world conspiracy of Jews and communists) When after the pogromes stuff still would get better, they would blame everyone not arian. (Not blonde, blue eyed, northern heritage)

If a fascist government tries to exclude you or not is just a matter of time, at some point they will rum out of scapegoats and come for you.

You never know which aspect someone picks to exclude you (gender, political view, haircolor, Parents, lastname, sexual preferences, religion, mental health, physical health etcpp.) So it's better to not have someone gather all that info about you in the first place.

I envy you. Had to discuss with esos way to much

Calibre has an Export Funktion which may ve of use

You keep referring to concepts like "Keys encrypted with itself" "Tpm are by design encrypted"

When you don't really say anything from value.

Not every "encryption" is the same.

When we talk about safe encryption we talk about file system level encryption of a system with safe algorithms like aes and a long enough random password (the key). this is safe.

If you store the key unencrypted on your phone, this encryption is no longer safe.

If you don't know the 16 random digit key it HAS to be on the phone and it CAN'T be encrypted "by itself" because you would no longer have any means to decrypt it.

It could be encrypted with a pin, but again, then its only as strong as the pin, and I don't know how long an only numeric pin would need to be to withstand modern brute forcing, but I doubt a relevant percentage of people have that kind of pin.

You can't explain how this would be safe, so you just come at me with russels teapot and say "well you can't prove its not safe" (which is true because I'm no security expert, but someone with enough knowledge could certainly) and lash out at me "acting in bad faith" because I don't jump through your hoops of passive aggressive misunderstanding.

All I can do is refer to experts, who found things like CVE-2022-20465 - a bug which allowed lockscreen bypass.

As you could have googled that yourself, but you ask this just to throw me off.

But if you want to keep using your google android and bitlocker win and feel safe, its not my problem.

How do you think encryption works?

What do you think does a lockscreen?

If you think TPMs are always encrypted, a key can be encrypted "with itself" and still be any use to you and android system pin is secure you are right. Might also believe in santa

The device needs to be physically accessed and modified and then unlocked in order to exploit it.

Exactly the service the company offers

Yes it is a vulnerability but with those steps you could also just solder a keylogger to the keyboard.

This is not a hot take at all!

Sure thing, it is equally hard to confiscate/steal a device (if the user notices you just shrug) and open it no user input required And Stealing the device without the user noticing Solder a keylogger, get it back to the user without them noticing and having them put in their password, then steal the device again so you can use said passwort

I totally agree

You are right in a sense of: If the TPM holding the keys were itself encrypted with a strong password, this would be still be considered secure. You are wrong in the sense of: lenovo sells a device, tells its users its encrypted, their data is safe. None can steal their data

in reality the data can easily be accessed, which could be considered as "cracking the device/bypassing the encryption" because what lenovo prevent was someone ripping your ssd l, but not just decrypt it because the encryption was not implemented securely.

I don't want to debate the security of a luks Linux volume or veracrypt windows laptop, (even though even those are in theory vulnerable to highly targeted and skilled things like cleverly exploiting e.g the logofail bug)

My point isn't that there are no ways to have a secure system, my point is that the percentage of truly secure systems is low

Dude what encryption are you talking about? Hardware storage encryption is just by now getting more widely adapted, the phone I used till a year ago didn't even support any encryption.

Sure, aes-256 with secure password only stored in your mind is quasi 100℅ safe, but that is not how most devices handle their "encryption".

If the key for the encryption is on the device, and either stored in an unencrypted TPM or unencrypted storage, its not a matter if breaking the encryption (quite impossible) but breaking the software/hardware (quite possible for someone with good enough forensics and skilled programmers)

Also also: encryption only helps if the device is off, which is seldom the case with phones.