Lost/Stolen Camera (lemmy.conorab.com)
 

Hi all!

I left my camera bag on the train on Sunday and when I tracked down the Airtag to a bin at Railway Square in Central somebody had already thrown the tag in the bin and kept the camera/lens/etc.

Doubt it'll be much help but figured maybe posting the redacted serial numbers here might help:

Body SN (according to app/metadata): [5 characters preceding]00138

Lens SN (according to receipt): [22 characters preceding]6660

The camera is a Canon EOS R6 Mk2 and the lens is a 24-105mm LISU lens.

Already put in a police report with all the details of course.

Thanks for your attention!

[–] 2 points 1 month ago

I might be mistaken but I don’t think Signal uses SMS alone to gain access to a chat so the attack vector for the Signal part based on what the article is saying is that the police are just getting access to a device that’s already authorised (and has the keys) then just adding in another device which they control. This sounds like Signal functioning as expected. The article does refer to police not wanting to give away too many details to maybe there’s something that hasn’t been disclosed, but the cited methods (assuming SMS is off the table for Signal) sound like normal behaviour.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Most effective method for me has been to use 1 e-mail address alias per service. If that address starts receiving spam then you know who is to blame for the leak, can move that service to a new e-mail address and then blackhole all e-mails sent to the old address. That obviously means having to setup a new address for every service though so I usually setup 20 at a time and hand them out as needed.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    The delay makes intuitive sense especially since it will give the target a chance to complain about it to their friends and family who will hopefully stop it from there.

    However, I’m not sure if it’s worth it. I imagine this would stop exfiltration apps which scan the users device to useful data and maybe passive screenshots but this pales in comparison to apps with subscription dark patterns, gambling and apps that harvest and sell your data legally already. If this was a case of apps prompting the user to enter sensitive information into a form then they could just use a browser.

    I don’t know. I think this is a good measure to prevent scams. I’m just uncomfortable about Google’s motivation.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    I recall spreadsheets being particularly painful on mobile when I’d try to select multiple rows and it would select way more at a time but would need to fouble-check that or find a screen recording if I made one at the time.

    The main issues is there was a bug where if there is an open session for a document in Collabora (including dead sessions say from mobile) and that Collabora server is shut down in the wrong order, then all changes including if you click “Save” will be lost. A bug was opened for this and closed by making sure the servers shut down in the correct order, but I don’t know if that fixes cases where the servers a hard shutdown.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    You would need a way of verifying that the SHA256 is a true copy of the site at the time though and not a faked page. You could do something like have a distributed network of archives that coordinate archival at the same time and then using the SHA256 then be able to see which archives fetched exactly the same page at the same time through some search functionality. I mean if addons are already being used for doing the crawling then we may be mostly there already since said addons would just need to certify their archive and after that they can discard the actual copy of the page. You need need a way to validate those workers though since a bad actor could just run a whole bunch at the same time to legitimise a fake archival.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Until the other penny drops and makes federation impossible: making it so users on other instances are treated as your users if they interact with your instance. If such a law was introduced I’d imagine they’d carve out an exemption for e-mail since that would cause utter chaos.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  •  

    This seems like a sensible but odd carveout. The law is essentially legalising e-scooters on shared paths, and bike lanes on roads with no more than 20km/h. The proposition does not allow them on footpaths, which you’d think would be the most relevant place. Personally, I’m surprised they wouldn’t allow them on footpaths but no more than 5 km/h in heavy pedestrian areas (anywhere a car would have to do 40 km/h or less), especially since you could potentially require shared e-scooters to enforce this speed with GPS.

    view more: next ›