That’s cool. Mine is just an interpreter for execution but it has breakpoints, watchpoints, and save states. I’ve thought about trying to do some form of JIT or at least AOT but I haven’t yet made an attempt. Besides for a debugger that’s counter productive.

🤔 that reminds me of the brainfuck debugger I wrote. Good fun

I love how mastodon is on here as if that is trivial to block. Guess you can block the official upstream distribution but blocking all instances would be a nightmare

LMAO this is really amusing. I hope it does some good but I doubt it

Glad to see I’m not the only one checking for a AAAA. Looked like a cool and useful site /s but I only use sites with v6.

Page claims to be IPv6 ready…does not actually have an IPv6 address. This isn’t a meme, this is a crime

This reminds me of prop 65. It’s so broad that everything is labeled as causing cancer to the point of being a worthless label. I suspect this will have a similar problem on top of the privacy ones

The reason for initramfs is because if you build your block or filesystem drivers as modules the kernel can’t boot without loading the modules and can’t load the modules without said modules and therefore causing a chicken and egg problem. Reading a folder without all necessary boot drivers just isn’t possible. That’s why the bootloader is responsible for loading initramfs into system memory, the kernel can read it with 0 drivers required. Getting rid of it can be done but ALL of your boot drivers need to be statically linked into the kernel image so that the kernel doesn’t need any modules to get the rootfs mounted. Ironically EFI can be used to obsolete initramfs in theory since the kernel can read data from the ESP without any drivers being required so putting modules in a folder on the ESP would work for EFI enabled systems

You definitely can do this. Unless this is an extremely recent change or only done outside the US

Yeah I saw that but that doesn’t tell me her name so I’d have to scroll through all the models and try to find her

EDIT: Worse than that it’s not a professional site with models so finding it is impossible

Source?

XZ was also open source…albeit less eyes on it probably. Point is we take “open source” for granted and assume it means “secure” but the person running a project, even an open source one, can do real damage.

Assembly being obsolete has to be the funniest joke in here. It fundamentally never will be even if its use is niche

Yeah, I’m just pointing out that OpenVPN has a kernel implementation since it does seem to make quite a large performance difference when available.

Yeah sounds about right. The only reason I’m even running graphene right now is because I heard he left the project. Otherwise I wasn’t sure I wanted to be dependent on it

Didn’t he leave the project though?

OpenVPN operates in kernel space as of 6.16. Well specifically for the data channel. Control channel is still managed in userspace so you don’t have to do asymmetric TLS in the kernel. This also reduces the overhead and increases performance substantially. It is slightly more complicated to setup but barely tbh (I’m speaking from the server side). Is the crypto outdated? Not as far as I’m aware.

The big thing for public VPNs is the server can push the configuration to the client rather than having it be static. Config push, specifically for addressing is basically the only viable way to do a NATless VPN. Additionally while unrelated to public VPN providers wg does not have the ability to bind to individual IPs which is a headache for my internal VPN use case.

It isn’t in a lot of ways

Why must everyone be removing OVPN 🙁