When I read this through 25 years ago I learned more about networking than I think I knew in total up until that point, and that was nearing the end of an A level (English further education) Computing course. It's a really comprehensive guide that laid it out exactly the way I needed it for me to absorb it. I still recommend it to people that might be new to network programming as the sockets API really doesn't change that much whether you're using C or Python or some other language.
It's pretty upsetting that we've got India's UPI and China's UPI (UnionPay International) and they're both doing exactly the same thing and without geographical context you don't know which one it is.
That's nonsense. There are somewhere between 2 and 8 million users of Tor every day. The vast majority of Tor users are ordinary people that want a little more privacy. What a waste of resources it would be to try to identify and track each of them.
Yeah I'd like to think that too, but the article mentions in its first paragraph that this aid was announced by the 'Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian.'
So in this case it doesn't seem like they're different.
I know the title is the title on the actual article, but it's the Chinese Red Cross, not China itself. National Red Cross Societies are independent of the country's government. They may receive government funding but they decide what they do with the money themselves.
"The Movement is independent. The National Societies, while auxiliaries in the humanitarian services of their governments and subject to the laws of their respective countries, must always maintain their autonomy so that they may be able at all times to act in accordance with the principles of the Movement."
The current president of the Chinese Red Cross is currently vice-chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, and previously the Minister of Health.
Very hard to believe this is something that could happen without the CCP’s politburo approval
I think there is a distinction to be made here. It seems unlikely that the politburo would bother approving such a small item as 5m yuan (Less than a million dollar. If you see this as the action of China the country, then a million dollar is basically a symbolic gesture.). However he would not have dared do it if he thought it would have landed him consequences. He made the call that the CCP would let him get away with this.
This might or might not have been a line item in a meeting for the politburo, but it would have come across their desk in one way or another. Maybe in a form of item in a list for a bigger strategy (authorize those 10000 organizations to support Ukraine etc.). The foreign ministry spokeman is the one who announced it after all
I don't think you understand how detail oriented they are. Even things as small as international student nights get cancelled at Chinese universities because any form of organization might lead to potential opposition. They simply try to oppose any form of organizing.
Same here. China won't even allow local western politicians to meet with a local Taiwenese politician (yes they have such influence, Amsterdam Politicians are not allowed to be on photo with Taiwenese politicians). 100% sure they care about the actions of such a prestigious institute as the Chinese Red cross.
That reinforces the parent's point. If such a large gesture was approved, then it reflects the position of "China". Alternatively, it reflects that a single official thinks they can get away with it, which means someone in China thinks "China" is not against it.
Or the unfortunate larger truth, that China doesn't care.
Maybe they'll give the speeches. Lament the tragic loss of human life. Say whatever polite society expects them to say. But they really don't care when it comes down to it.
Someone tried to tell me that a long time ago about a potential war between Iran and Israel. China would make the speeches. Show up at all the meetings. But they really wouldn't care.
It wouldn't be a cultural misunderstanding leading it to appear to us that they don't care.
It wouldn't be a feigned indifference they act out to gain some negotiating advantage in some other area.
They Truly. Wouldn't. Care.
They may participate in memorial ceremonies. Perhaps contribute to the reconstruction of affected nations. But for the most part, yeah, they'll just keep marching off to Africa and extracting resources to build China.
In essence, maybe they're like us in the West, but with less pretense.
People think because China and Russia are both opposed to the USA, then they must be friends. They are not. Especially not if Russia tries to revive the Soviet Union as a concept which hurts China's independence worse than US-type globalism.
> I know the title is the title on the actual article, but it's the Chinese Red Cross, not China itself. National Red Cross Societies are independent of the country's government.
The Chinese government does not tolerate independent power centers. Civil society organizations are either tiny or work extremely closely with the Party-State. The same is true of private companies. If it’s a big company it follows government directives.
> have plausible deniability with their Russian allies perhaps
Russia is China's biggest permanent enemy, with its size and ambitions, together with the fact that it is the only foreign country that still occupy lands traditionally owned by China, you'd need a bullet in the brain to believe that Russia is China's ally. It is the single largest threat to China's security & future stability.
Seeing the poor performance of Russia troops in the last two weeks offered huge comfort to many Chinese like myself - a weak Russia & an incapable Russian armed forces is a solid foundation of the peace of our generation.
No disrespect but, isn't CCP the biggest enemy of Chinese as a people in the long run. I mean even if Russia occupies China, what can it do that CCP hasn't already done.
You have 2 facts: 1. the CCP made average Chinese citizens 30x richer in 30 years. 2. somehow everybody in the West thinks CCP is bad and believes Chinese people hate their government.
These 2 facts don't match, and you should think why, maybe some propaganda is at work.
Edit: crap I forgot I'm green, which looks so bad when I make this kind of arguments.
The party controls China’s Red Cross. We were highly encouraged to donate during certain events (eg the wenchuan earthquake), to the point that it didn’t really feel optional. And their is a lot of corruption in the Chinese Red Cross that is wrapped around party officials (eg the Guo Meimei incident during the just mentioned earthquake).
It is $700,000, which in 2022 is not really a significant amount of money. Why the last time I spent that much on something it didn't make the news? I am not China?
> Why the last time I spent that much on something it didn't make the news?
Humblebrag much?
And no, you're not China, whose government is actively supporting Russia; which means that any humanitarian support flowing from China to Ukraine is news.
I'm a little surprise that this is even a news. The amount is toot small, not proportional though.
The invasion of Russia put China in a dilemma
that China can not condemn Russia but on the other hand it does not support the invasion. There are a few reasons:
1.Ukraine has a very friendly relation with China . Not only this government but also earlier ones before the war (Now it might be different). Probably because Ukraine is not ideological. It's only hostile to Russia but not China as it's a "Regime". As a comparison there's another democratic country did the other way
2.The invasion is against China's historic position in UN so not condemning Russia is already a embarrassment.
3.The invasion is against China's interest.
Just a some facts:
* The trade and exchange of student between 2 countries are quite significant.
* The first negotiation between Russia and Ukraine was after a online meeting between Xi and Putin, along with phone call between Foreign ministers of China and Ukraine. There's a speculation but as history shows China like to do things quietly because It's often a more effective way.
SSH keys authenticate you. They are an identity. You probably don't need more than one or two identities (maybe personal and work). You can just get a couple of YubiKeys and configure the OpenPGP applet, or the PIV applet, with an authentication key/certificate and use that for SSH. Take the token with you and you've got some pretty strong authentication.
More modern SSH servers will let you use U2F security keys in the same way, which are cheaper than the full YubiKey.
I've learned recently that YubiKey has really good documentation for how to set up their tokens to achieve different goals, it would be worth reading their docs if you're considering getting a hardware token for your keys.
It looks like 2fa is not required for 1password, and also that even if you did enable 2fa you can only use TOTP. Both TOTP and passwords are vulnerable to phishing as there's no cryptographic protocol going on there, you are just typing in the numbers from your phone.
This seems like an excellent way to ensure that you reduce the security of your SSH login to either having a single-factor (password) or at best single-factor + TOTP, where you previously had a phishing-resistant cryptographic protocol.
Is this really an improvement for security, or is it just a usability improvement (i.e. sync of keys) intended to work around policies trying to improve security (i.e. required use of keys)?
(The other option is I skimmed the docs badly and maybe I've misunderstood something, it's possible.)
1p has some native support for hardware keys (https://support.1password.com/security-key/), but you can always use Yubico Authenticator for any applications that force you to use TOTP.
I see. They didn't mention it on the two factor authentication page I was reading because they've split the security key and TOTP documentation and not made it obvious (enough for me to see it while skimming) how to find the former from the latter.
1Password is different than other password managers in that it bakes in a form of 2FA via it's secret key. However, it's not quite the same as normal 2FA like TOTP since it doesn't change - but, it's also never transmitted over the wire like normal 2FA. We found it's good enough for our needs to not require 2FA on top of it.
Whenever I hear "oh but this 2FA is vulnerable to phishing" then why did security people annoy everybody and pushed for it before considering this factor?
I'm happy to use only a password for some sensitive things, because I can remember it.
Of course security is a spectrum and 2fa does help for a lot of stuff. Especially against websites that don't know how to hash your passwords properly (usually the ones from where passwords leak the most).
I was going to comment something similar - I think the messaging around this needs to be more clear. It feels like I’ve been seeing serious security folk push the unqualified use of password managers for years now. Better hope granny never needs to use SSH.
I literally just enabled this 1 hour ago, for unrelated reasons.
However, for those reading along, initially the 1Password web interface for my account only offered the choice of setting up a TOTP authenticator. I completed that, and still saw no option for enabling a FIDO/YubiKey device. I then went into the 2FA settings for my account, toggled the option for YubiKey support off and then on again, and returned to the 2FA settings page. Only then did I see the option to enable a YubiKey.
I was then able to add my YubiKey and I can confirm that it's working with my 1Password account as a 2FA source.
In modern TLS this just doesn't work, because you generate a shared key. You can verify what you've received from the server because you know you didn't generate it, but someone else cannot verify if any content was generated by you or the server, only that it was part of an exchange between you and the server.
