Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)C

curious_dolphin

@ curious_dolphin @slrpnk.net

Posts
2
Comments
31
Joined
1 yr. ago

  • How to skirt websites that block known domains of email forwarding services? [SOLVED]

    Jump

  • if you use catchall and later run into spam issues, it gets much harder to get rid of it, as you cannot turn off the catchall if you don’t even have a list of aliases to still let through.

    If the forwarding/aliasing service automatically creates an alias when the first email is received, then that skirts this problem, right?

  • How to skirt websites that block known domains of email forwarding services? [SOLVED]

    Jump

  • I forward those emails to an address which is random. For example: [email protected].

    Can you elaborate on the benefit of using a random string for your secret/true inbox? Is it so that if it's ever compromised you can just spin up a new random string as your new inbox, point all your aliases to the new one, and burn the old one?

    Each alias looks like this: company_name-[eight random character/numbers]@example.com.

    Same question, how do the random characters after the company name benefit you? Is it so that if you want (or need) to continue using that particular service after a data leak, then at least you can update your profile to company_name-[different set of random characters]?

  • How to skirt websites that block known domains of email forwarding services? [SOLVED]

    Jump

  • This is very helpful - thanks a lot!

  • How to skirt websites that block known domains of email forwarding services? [SOLVED]

    Jump

  • Makes sense. Follow-up question: Is there any particular reason why you use the [email protected] or [email protected] as opposed to just [email protected] or [email protected]?

    If I understand correctly, the plus sign helps you see which organization has compromised your info, but the drawback of the plus sign is that a savvy spammer can figure out what your true email address is (the part before the plus sign), whereas aliases such as [email protected] or [email protected] conceal your true email address.

    Am I thinking about this correctly?

    ETA I've also encountered sites where a plus sign in the email address is disallowed, which is another downside of the plus sign approach.

  • How to skirt websites that block known domains of email forwarding services? [SOLVED]

    Jump

  • Okay, I think I'm following, thanks for the detailed explanation.

    mail-eage

    Nice!

  • How to skirt websites that block known domains of email forwarding services? [SOLVED]

    Jump

  • Gotcha, so then without a catch-all, is it still possible to make up something on the fly or will I need to predetermine my aliases before I give them out? I guess it's kinda rare, but I'm thinking about the odd circumstance where I need to come up with something on the spot and I'm away from my computer.

  • How to skirt websites that block known domains of email forwarding services? [SOLVED]

    Jump

  • I've seen this approach mentioned in other threads. Where does one configure catch-all, is that in the settings for the mail provider or the domain registrar?

  • How to skirt websites that block known domains of email forwarding services? [SOLVED]

    Jump

  • Going forward, this approach checks out, but I'm also looking to unfuck my existing accounts. Beginning to think a custom domain is the way to achieve that.

  • Privacy @lemmy.ml
    curious_dolphin @slrpnk.net
    SOLVED

    How to skirt websites that block known domains of email forwarding services?

  • Privacy friendly keypad/electronic door lock at home?

    Jump

  • I had not thought of this. Thanks for the idea.

  • Privacy friendly keypad/electronic door lock at home?

    Jump

  • Good to know there are models compatible with Home Assistant. Thanks for the info.

  • Privacy friendly keypad/electronic door lock at home?

    Jump

  • Thanks for the idea. In your case, do you still need a phone app to program the various PINs or are they all programmable "on board?"

  • Privacy @lemmy.ml
    curious_dolphin @slrpnk.net

    Privacy friendly keypad/electronic door lock at home?

  • Look ma, no proprietary apps!

    Jump

  • Oh, I see. I must've misread a tutorial at some point then. I did not realize one could install an app directly into profile #2, I thought root had all the apps and then specific apps had to be pushed to the other profiles. Thanks for clarifying that.

  • Look ma, no proprietary apps!

    Jump

  • Got that part, but what throws me is, in order to install a Google app on that secondary "google" profile, don't you have to first install the Google app on the main profile so that you can then push it to the secondary profile?

  • Look ma, no proprietary apps!

    Jump

  • What does maintaining a separate profile for Google stuff buy you? I'm familiar with GrapheneOS, but haven't internalized the separate profile thing yet.

  • Wikipedia loses UK Safety Act challenge, worries it will have to verify user IDs

    Jump

  • I do kind of relish the images, though. Picture's worth a thousand words and all. But it's great to have that choice.

  • Wikipedia loses UK Safety Act challenge, worries it will have to verify user IDs

    Jump

  • Yes and no. Sometimes a company or organization can serve as a force for good. That said, absolutely a double edged sword. It's not fair to expect private businesses and organizations to be held hostage by scummy legislators. At the end of the day, no one is entitled to a business's or organization's services, so... Don't want to chase businesses and organizations away? Don't pass shitty legislation.

  • WhoFi: Unique 'fingerprint' based on Wi-Fi interactions

    Jump

  • Excerpt from the article:

    The researchers... call their approach “WhoFi”, as described in a preprint paper titled, "WhoFi: Deep Person Re-Identification via Wi-Fi Channel Signal Encoding."

    Who are you, really?

    Re-identification, the researchers explain, is a common challenge in video surveillance. It's not always clear when a subject captured on video is the same person recorded at another time and/or place.

    Re-identification doesn't necessarily reveal a person's identity. Instead, it is just an assertion that the same surveilled subject appears in different settings. In video surveillance, this might be done by matching the subject's clothes or other distinct features in different recordings. But that's not always possible.

    The author asserts that re-identification doesn't necessarily reveal a person's identity, although I suppose this is similar to how a single fingerprint or DNA sample doesn't necessarily reveal a person's identity, right up until somebody can connect your fingerprint to your identity, say, by correlating your location with other tracking methods or something.

  • End of 10 — Windows 10 is reaching the end of its support. Time to make the switch to Linux.

    Jump

  • There are tools for enabling one to save a bunch of ISOs on a single USB thumb drive so that you don't need a whole fleet of thumb drives. One such tool is called Ventoy, and there's another one out there, although its name escapes me atm.

  • What to do if border police ask to search your phone

    Jump

  • Profit