/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Proletariat without Borders

catalog
Mode: Reply
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message

Max message length: 8192

Files

Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3

Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules


/leftypol/ is a non-sectarian board for leftist discussion. IRC: Rizon.net #bunkerchan https://qchat.rizon.net/?channels=bunkerchan

comrade rat Board volunteer 03/22/2020 (Sun) 22:13:24 No. 387115
Due to discontent among the users the thread-wise id's have been disabled for the time being again. The mods will discuss what has happened and communicate on the issue with you soon. It had been the opinion of the majority of the mods that thread-wise id would be helpfull against a substantial amount of same-posting that has been going on and derailing threads. Thank you for your understanding.
upvoted. Time for same fagging Edit : Thanks for the gold omgggg
>samefagging Isn't an issue. >>387115 >>387121 All me btw
"what has happened" is complete and utter incompetence *ahem* FUCK MODS AND FUCK JANNIES
How are thread-wise ids assigned? Is there code I can look at? How do ids combat samefagging?
Now that you removed the ID's remove the ability for mods and jannies to see our IPs it's either FULL anonimity or nothing and I don' trust any of the fucking mods after the pyongyang incident
Huh. I kinda missed them now.
>>387397 IP addresses are hashed
>>387324 God what a fag.
>>387419 Meaningless. if you know it's going to be numbers in the format of 1-255.1-255.1-255.1-255 it isn't going to be hard to crack those hashes. i try to be respectful to you people for doing the jobs you do but you're being a misleading cunt and you know it. This is at best incompetence and at worst a malicious glowie.
>>387455 Friend, I believe you are 'avin' a giggle.
>>387469 Lol. We collectively recognize as a society that hashing isn't even a secure method with regards to alphanumeric (plus special chars) passwords. What the fuck makes you think it is anywhere close to secure against something much much weaker in its character-set? You literally don't even have an argument.
(29.38 KB 720x670 yy8iuiuygiuui.jpg)
>>387455 In order to crack the hashes we would need a library of every IP on the planet and we would need a computer powerful enough to brute force the hashes. That's the only way to crack hashes. You go through every hash and line them up with what the hash is with out encryption One by one and with out a super computer it takes months; Cracking ip addresses would be impossible.
>>387476 So the mods are both incompetent and able to crack hashes on a whim?
>>387455 Refer to: >>387485 Not that it matters, since the kind of anonymity you seem to desire isn't possible with server hardware that runs a public forum.
>>387455 >>387476 I think you vastly overestimate how much we care about you
>>387455 >t. doesn't know how hashing works
>>387397 .t technologically illiterate You do realise they are salted as well, right? The ips arent just encrypted as is. Stop talking about things you have no clue about. The source code is publicly available, go read before making baseless accusations that only serve to make you seem silly.
(57.74 KB 720x908 hashcat.png)
>>387490 Yes. a fucking monkey can do hashes... If brute forcing hashes required competence why would every skiddie from here to Bangladesh be able to do it? >>387500 i think yu vastly underestimate how secure hashing is. >>387515 Show me where i'm wrong then?
>>387542 >i think yu vastly underestimate how secure hashing is. Whether or not hashing is completely irrelevant, nobody would want to spend the effort to bypass it to see your IP address anyway.
>>387542 >underestimate You mean to say overestimate, you illiterate manchild
>>387545 Really sums this place up
If there's some really bad samefaggery going on in a thread vols should btfo the samefag by exposing them. I've seen it done b4
>>387555 And hear people whine and bitch about how authoritarian mods are? I heard it all before
>>387558 Ok well here's another suggestion: on 4chan boards without IDs there's a little ticker in bottom right and top right of the thread indicating how many unique IPs have posted in the thread. Could add that?
>>387542 Nigga, get over yourself. If we wanted to get your IP as a site, we could. The server needs to know your IP to deliver a response, idiot. You should know this, hackerman. We, as mods, do not give a flying fuck about your retarded IP. What the fuck do you want us to do with it?? If the feds wanted to know your IP they could either MITM sniff your traffic, which they have demonstrated they already do on the wider internet, or they could just ask the host provider to fork over the information. We do not give a fuck about your IP. Stop spreading misinformation.
>>387561 That doesn't stop or help to spot samefagging or spamming.
>>387568 It helps a little with samefagging, especialy with short threads. If an OP gives himself two samefag replies and the ticker says 1 poster for instance
>We do not give a fuck about your IP. >We do not give a fuck about your IP. >We do not give a fuck about your IP. So wtf do you hash them for, retards? Also, >not symlinkng apache and all other ip revealing logs to /dev/null Who are these fucking pleb sysops/server owners? gods damned...
>>387542 Lmfao: >HERE'S A PICTURE OF HASHCAT BRO I TOTALLY KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. As if any of the mods have the money to afford a processor that can run the infinite number of hashes required to pop some ones ip adress let alone the fact that IPV6 is a thing now God faggots like you objectively are the problem.
>>387576 Extremely ineffective
>>387586 >sym linking to dev null Ah yes this cannot go wrong. Triage? What's that?
>>387586 Lynxchan hashes them by default. What the actual fuck is your problem? If you want to flex about your alleged hacker skillz go to >>>/tech/
ln -s /dev/null /var/log/httpd/access_log See. this really isn't that hard.
>>387609 Incompetent server owners and sysadmins are my problem, tbh.
>>387617 hacker flex
>As if any of the mods have the money to afford a processor that can run the infinite number of hashes required to pop some ones ip adress >implying anyone makes hacking rigs anymore and doesn't just rent amazon servers full of GPU's on the dirt cheap. >>387620 >thinking being able to use ln is hacker flex <being able to linux like a non-noob. My god, new internet users really are the worst. RTFM
>>387631 Bro if youre so worried about your fucking IP leaking, and you have no way of ever verifying we cannot see your ip, why dont you just use a vpn or some shit?
>>387642 i obviously use proxies. vpn's are for plebs the point is the mods claim some semblance of security by claiming they hash our IP's but ignore the fact that it's super ineffective.
>>387631 >what is an FPGA
It was all "C!"'s fault
Nice going mods, real good job guys.
>>387531 post your linkedin
>>387485 This is nonsense >>387531 >You do realise they are salted as well, right? If someone has access to hashed IP's it's not unrealistic they have access to the salt aswell.. >The ips arent just encrypted as is <thinks hashes are encryption >Stop talking about things you have no clue about. The source code is publicly available, go read before making baseless accusations that only serve to make you seem silly. This is i believe irony.
I wouldn't mind them if they didn't look so ugly
>>387899 if we implement them again, they will have no background color.
>It had been the opinion of the majority of the mods that thread-wise id would be helpful against a substantial amount of same-posting that has been going on and derailing threads. Isn't it your job to ban samefags regardless? How do IDs cut down on preventing samefagging when its your job to prevent it in the first place?
(3.63 KB 440x240 deal with it bluesedition.png)
>>387951 I don't really think it should be their job to control it in the first place, unless samefagging is being used to break some more important rule, like a rule against viral marketing/astroturfing. Samefagging is a fact of anonymous discussion.
>>387985 I'm gonna go a step further actually and say that mods should be thinking reducing their amount of labor right now. We have too many dumb, labor-intensive [to enforce] rules at the moment. Work is becoming increasingly precarious as the looming depression envelops us, I know one mod already lost their job. Spending all your time pecking away at granular discussion details here is not good.
>>387985 >unless samefagging is being used to break some more important rule Samefagging is rule breaking you faggot. Its a form of dishonest discussion, and merits a ban in the same way spam or other dishonest discussion is banned. >>388000 >I'm gonna go a step further actually and say that mods should be thinking reducing their amount of labor right now. I'm going to say no to this. We already have to deal with enough /pol/fags and raids, mods should do their job but not go beyond that. The minute its noted that moderation allows for rules to be broken freely is when we get flooded by low effort spam.
(37.40 KB 581x492 over your head.jpg)
>>388133 >Samefagging is rule breaking Yeah, I'm saying it's shit rule.
>>388166 >Yeah, I'm saying it's shit rule. No, its a fine rule that even other imgaeboards have. It falls under the rule of dishonest discussion here. What purpose is there to samefag other then to be dishonest?
>>388206 The issue is more of consistent enforcement, and redundancy with other kinds of rules when it really matters.
Just for future reference, even $150 worth board[1] can bruteforce 2^32(entire range of ipv4 addresses) sha256 hashes under 1 minutes. Salting is a defence against precomputed table not brute forcing in general so it is not a factor when we are considering a scenario where rogue mode (who has access to both hashed value and salt) spend his precious bitcoin miner on revealing identity of poster. With that useless technical quarrel out of the way, I find it quite amusing that most posters complaining here is not giving any constructive feedback about what they hate about 'per thread' identifier beside muh anonymity. Like, why would it be so different from locking your flag per thread like you were somewhat expected to? Wouldn't you try to make bit more of an effort before posting anything if you know that subsequent posters will see how your posting progresses? And if you fluke an argument just ditch the thread and move on. at least you learned something and nobody will shame you and stalk you in other threads for the mistakes you made in other threads ffs [1]https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Non-specialized_hardware_comparison#CPUs.2FAPUs
>>388220 >Just for future reference, even $150 worth board[1] can bruteforce 2^32(entire range of ipv4 addresses) sha256 hashes under 1 minutes. Salting is a defence against precomputed table not brute forcing in general so it is not a factor when we are considering a scenario where rogue mode (who has access to both hashed value and salt) spend his precious bitcoin miner on revealing identity of poster. Thank you. I know it was somewhat off-thread but ppl acting like they know what they're talking about whilst calling others idiots is cringe af. part for the course for leftypol tho, i guess. Also you can narrow it down by what ranges are owned by public telcos and what ranges are in what countries, making it even faster.
>>388220 mods can't see the salt.
>>388220 >With that useless technical quarrel out of the way, I find it quite amusing that most posters complaining here is not giving any constructive feedback about what they hate about 'per thread' identifier beside muh anonymity. Like, why would it be so different from locking your flag per thread like you were somewhat expected to? Wouldn't you try to make bit more of an effort before posting anything if you know that subsequent posters will see how your posting progresses? And if you fluke an argument just ditch the thread and move on. at least you learned something and nobody will shame you and stalk you in other threads for the mistakes you made in other threads ffs yes. quoting this part because it is crucial.
>>388166 Yeah mods are making changes nobody asked for. How about you make the replies that pop up when you hover over post numbers not go off the screen on mobile?
>>388307 Still irrelevant. Especially since this is apparently open source so we can so see how salt is generated. like commentator said just means u cant make rainbow tables. Dictionary attacks are still possible. Also u could narrow the attack further by example doing all At&T IP's in the first pass (https://ipinfo.io/AS20057). We're just getting nerdy now and though I love a good nerd chat i think this derail should end. Would love it if someone wanted to make a hash/hash cracking/whatever related kind of /tech/ thread tho.
>>388310 There has been plenty of constructive feedback about why thread IDs are bad and you can find it in every thread discussing this. Just read the threads.
>>387394 in theory: you have one IP address, so you have a single ID in every thread in practice: everyone knows how to unplug their router, use their phone, use a free VPN service or web proxy, etc, to obtain multiple IPs per thread and continue samefagging with the additional cover of having separate IDs to throw people off.
>>388441 Stop this strawman. IDs can tell you that posts with the same ID were made by the same person, but not that posts with different IDs were necessarily made by different ones.
>>388206 not necessarily samefagging, but it lets you take two approaches to a topic. for example if i think you're an idiot, someone might want to both troll you and have a reasonable argument to try and change your mind. add IDs and suddenly people have to pick - and they're never going to pick the high-effort reasoned argument over low effort trolling. >>388220 >Wouldn't you try to make bit more of an effort before posting anything if you know that subsequent posters will see how your posting progresses? no. perversely it's easier to never make an effort because if you make a mistake it will undermine your entire point for the entire thread. that might be okay if we had threads that last 5 hours, but we have threads that last for weeks. flags are a far superior identity forming system to IDs, particularly because they're totally optional. not unique like tripcodes, they introduce an element of genuine ambiguity to a long-term identity while still letting people guess if they wish. (plus obviously they let people signal their ideology without saying "as a posadist..." awkwardly in every post.)
>>388448 that is essentially useless information. if you want to make discussions easier to track, this site could really do with features like >highlighting your own posts (so you can easily visually identify them) >inline viewing of quoted posts (so if i click the post number below my post, for example, yours will open in a post-box within mine. after i post this reply, i can also click that reply to view it within yours, within mine, like a russian doll, without losing my place in the thread.) >(yous), although they come with disadvantages as well as advantages which would represent a genuine quality of life upgrade, unlike IDs. obviously they might take more programming effort, but something low-effort and overall detrimental has a far worse input-output ratio than high effort and beneficial.
>>388307 Really? There's a lot of it in this thread.
t
>>387419 >>387531 The fact that IPs are hashed is missing the point. It doesn't matter whether a single user is assigned an identity via real IP or hashed IP or fruit icons, it still functions as an identity. Thus the user is at best pseudonymous, which is not the same as anonymous.

Delete
Report

no cookies?