next »

[Deusstyles]

One of the best FireFox extensions evar! Seriously though the idea of trusted notaries for Certs is rather awesome, everyone who uses fire fox should try it out. Hopefully they'll be a Chrome and Safari extension soon. And the link: http://convergence.io/

[Seran]

I don't really understand.

The first year of running Chrome on a fresh install I had no security software at all, and after 13 months, finally ran AdAware, and it found nothing.  And my browsing habits lean towards the 'see a link and click it' side.

[Tzu]

The first year of running Chrome on a fresh install I had no security software at all, and after 13 months, finally ran AdAware, and it found nothing.  And my browsing habits lean towards the 'see a link and click it' side.

Yes, but that doesn't mean that you haven't given away tons of information to hundreds of corporations across the world just by giving a "secure" web server your social security number, or even given hundreds of websites your browsing habits, including stores cookies from said "secure" websites that contain valuable information.

Certs are basically the way that your browser verifies that you are on a secure (SSL) website (HTTPS).  If you don't trust a cert, you shouldn't continue to the site, however, by default, if a cert matches what your browser wants, it's generally automatically accepted and takes you to the site without so much as asking if you want to trust the site's security certificate.  It is as if you are going anywhere else on the web, only you see a nice shiny "https" or a lock icon somewhere, so you presume that it's "secure" even though you probably don't even know what that means.

What Convergence does is that it removes the assumption of certificate authority, and allows you to basically choose whom you actually trust.  For instance, you could chose to trust military sites, and thereby ignore the hastle of false hits on certificate checks (ONOZ!  Stop!  This site isn't really HTTPS even though it says it is!  -- Well, actually, yes, yes it is, it's just coded differently so you don't recognize the cert you dumb browser!), or not immeditately trust any HTTPS site that has a valid cert.

If you aren't sure what Convergence does because you don't understand certs, there's a good wiki about the:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_key_certificate

I don't necessarily think anyone really needs Convergence per se, but I can see how it could be a useful plugin, considering the Certificate Authority System is outdated and doesn't really secure you from anything other than eavesdroppers (except the NSA).  It doesn't mean that you should give out any info you want to an HTTPS site and feel safe about it.

Edit:  And apparently I don't need it either, because it crashes every time I install it.  I had it up and running for a minute, but sites woudln't load properly because I deleted the config stuff it assigned automatically.  *sigh*  Oh well.

[Seran]

I fail to see why I should give a damn if anyone knows my browsing habits.  SSN sure, but I don't believe I've ever actually entered that in a website anywhere.

[Tzu]

I fail to see why I should give a damn if anyone knows my browsing habits.  SSN sure, but I don't believe I've ever actually entered that in a website anywhere.

Thereby, you are quite probably not the target audience for this sort of plugin.  Just sayin'.

WARNING:  The following rant is not directed at you--whoever "you" are...ok, maybe it is just a little directed at "you" but not in a confrontational sorta way, because I really like "you".  I'm just ranting! Read at your own risk!

[rant] I fail to see why people feel the need to post things like "I don't understand.  Why is there a need for this sort of thing?" (for instance, a plugin that helps give better individual control over browser security) and then when it is explained why certain users would be interested in something that allowed them more control over said thing (for instance, their browser security), they "fail to see" how it should apply to them in a condescending manner as if they are the only person it could possibly benefit on the planet, and is therefore stupid.  

If it doesn't apply to you, move on, don't use it.  It's that simple.  If someone shares something with a larger community and you don't think it's worthwhile, but you'd like to learn more about it, engage them.  If all you want to do is profess to the world that you'll never use it and therefore you think it's a dumb...whatever-it-is...then please just move on and don't open your mouth.

I see this sort of logic all the time, not just here in {O}, just in general, out there in the world:  

Hey look large community of diverse tech-using habits, I just found a cool new app that does something neat! *posts link*

I don't understand why anyone would need this.  *cites examples of why he himself doesn't think he needs it by incorrectly pointing out things of no relevance to the app*

Well, that isn't really what the app does.  This is what it does and why some people might find it interesting. *cites stuff that explains how stuff works*

I don't care about this one example that was used, and since that is related to why someone might use the app, I'm going to talk about how I never do something with my tech-usage habits that might lead me to have any sort of need to use this app, rather than acknowledge someone else might!

Again, this isn't bitching at you Seran.  Your responses in this thread just remind me of something I see happen everywhere, down to almost an algorithm-like science similar to above, where you can just fill in a few clauses and the entire conversation repeats verbatim.  This happens even in IRL coffee-shop conversations, and about all sorts of things other than just apps.  Hell, I even catch MYSELF do it now and then.  It just really makes me wonder if it's programmed somewhere into the human condition to relate to every tidbit of information received as if it were given on a personal level, and thereby necessary for a feedback response of whether or not one can personally benefit from this information, even if someone just wants to share something neat as a conversational topic.[/rant]

Anywho, it looked like a neat extension, Deus.  Wish it wouldn't crash my Firefox so I could have at least tried it out.    Must be an extension conflict or something.

[Omegamatt Shadowstar]

I don't know if I can take the idea of you really liking "me," Tzu.

[Usagi]

For instance, you could chose to trust military sites, and thereby ignore the hastle of false hits on certificate checks (ONOZ!  Stop!  This site isn't really HTTPS even though it says it is!  -- Well, actually, yes, yes it is, it's just coded differently so you don't recognize the cert you dumb browser!), or not immeditately trust any HTTPS site that has a valid cert.

Not totally relevant, but an amusing aside.  If you have more restrictive certificate standards (like I'm forced to) and frequent military sites you might know that several of the military certificates are expired because they never updated the damn things with whoever the certification authority is!  

**Rant, blahblahblah**

You aren't alone in this observation; I've noticed this tendency in people as well.  I personally find it an irritant on comments threads for things like reviews or informational articles because it tends to totally derail the conversation into this cycle of tons of people cross arguing 'justifications for existence' <--> 'counter-justification' ad nauseum.  In person you can typically bring a conversation back on rails.  

I have a little theory on this matter, actually.  I think this is a failure in logic, which is particular to introverted people, caused by a mental shortcut in answering the question "Do the benefits of this change or additional complexity outweigh the burdens?"  An extrovert would stop at that question and seek opinions from the people surrounding them concerning the validity or usage of a particular subject before reaching a conclusion, while an introvert will run a quick simulation in their head using the experiences of themselves (and perhaps extremely close individuals) and reach a conclusion.  Introverts may request outside data, but rarely outside opinion.  Perhaps a better starting question would be "Who is it that would receive benefit from this subject?"

What do you think?
Just a tangent.

[Seran]

I have a little theory on this matter, actually.  I think this is a failure in logic, which is particular to introverted people, caused by a mental shortcut in answering the question "Do the benefits of this change or additional complexity outweigh the burdens?"  An extrovert would stop at that question and seek opinions from the people surrounding them concerning the validity or usage of a particular subject before reaching a conclusion, while an introvert will run a quick simulation in their head using the experiences of themselves (and perhaps extremely close individuals) and reach a conclusion.  Introverts may request outside data, but rarely outside opinion.  Perhaps a better starting question would be "Who is it that would receive benefit from this subject?"

What do you think?
Just a tangent.

All accurate I think.

Tzu, you were totally right to slap me around, even if 'you' didn't.

[Tzu]

Tzu, you were totally right to slap me around, even if you' didn't.

I'm glad you didn't take offense Seran.  I figured you would be mature enough to handle it (or like it). 

I like your insight Bun, I knew you'd chime in on this and I am really glad you did.  I think you might be onto something.  We should do a sociology or psych study on this or something!  lol

[Tzu]

Yay double posting for stuff I missed that doesn't fit well into an edit.

I don't know if I can take the idea of you really liking "me," Tzu.

Don't worry, I wasn't talking about "you," I was talking about "you".  Yeah you know who you are...you with the eyebrows.

Not totally relevant, but an amusing aside.  If you have more restrictive certificate standards (like I'm forced to) and frequent military sites you might know that several of the military certificates are expired because they never updated the damn things with whoever the certification authority is!  

Also...who the Sith really IS this certification authority, anyway?  The all-powerful Verisign?  And who in the long list of open-source coders at Mozilla decide which certs are authorized?  Here's an interesting throught...are there certs that would be accepted by MSIE that are not trusted in Chrome and Opera?  Maybe some that Mozilla accepts that aren't trusted by Safari?  Or do they all just pull from one big list that Verisign puts out and trust it?  The whole process seems fishy to me.

But yes, I think it's funny that I've yet to go to a single millitary site that hasn't popped up with a warning about not being secure.  lol

[Omegamatt Shadowstar]

Don't worry, I wasn't talking about "you," I was talking about "you".  Yeah you know who you are...you with the eyebrows

Axel?

[Usagi]

Also...who the Sith really IS this certification authority, anyway?  The all-powerful Verisign?  And who in the long list of open-source coders at Mozilla decide which certs are authorized?  Here's an interesting throught...are there certs that would be accepted by MSIE that are not trusted in Chrome and Opera?  Maybe some that Mozilla accepts that aren't trusted by Safari?  Or do they all just pull from one big list that Verisign puts out and trust it?  The whole process seems fishy to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_authority#Providers

[Teo McDohl]

What the fuck happened in here?

[Seran]

What the fuck happened in here?

Not the thread you're looking for.

[Omegamatt Shadowstar]

What the fuck happened in here?

Not the thread you're looking for.

Gollum's Sexcapades Part e^(e*pi)