So now that hes been proven right, have you made the switch to GNU + Linux?

So now that hes been proven right, have you made the switch to GNU + Linux?

Even before the CIA leaks hes been sperging out in camera to raise privacy awareness. And we didn't listen.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/tAb7OID5lt8
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>not using TempleOS
ishygddt

this
schizophrenia>autism

What is the point in switching to GNU + Linux? If you're using the internet, you're also being watched.

Out of curiosity, are air gap computers safe or has the progress of technology made that capable of being spied on too.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called “Linux”, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use.
Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

not really, even then its a lot safer than using windows which guarantees you are being spied on even while offline because it simply logs the data until it can send it later

Many users do not understand the difference between the kernel, which is Linux, and the whole system, which they also call “Linux”. The ambiguous use of the name doesn't help people understand. These users often think that Linus Torvalds developed the whole operating system in 1991, with a bit of help.
Programmers generally know that Linux is a kernel. But since they have generally heard the whole system called “Linux” as well, they often envisage a history that would justify naming the whole system after the kernel. For example, many believe that once Linus Torvalds finished writing Linux, the kernel, its users looked around for other free software to go with it, and found that (for no particular reason) most everything necessary to make a Unix-like system was already available.
What they found was no accident—it was the not-quite-complete GNU system. The available free software added up to a complete system because the GNU Project had been working since 1984 to make one. In the The GNU Manifesto we set forth the goal of developing a free Unix-like system, called GNU. The Initial Announcement of the GNU Project also outlines some of the original plans for the GNU system. By the time Linux was started, GNU was almost finished.
Most free software projects have the goal of developing a particular program for a particular job. For example, Linus Torvalds set out to write a Unix-like kernel (Linux); Donald Knuth set out to write a text formatter (TeX); Bob Scheifler set out to develop a window system (the X Window System). It's natural to measure the contribution of this kind of project by specific programs that came from the project.

If we tried to measure the GNU Project's contribution in this way, what would we conclude? One CD-ROM vendor found that in their “Linux distribution”, GNU software was the largest single contingent, around 28% of the total source code, and this included some of the essential major components without which there could be no system. Linux itself was about 3%. (The proportions in 2008 are similar: in the “main” repository of gNewSense, Linux is 1.5% and GNU packages are 15%.) So if you were going to pick a name for the system based on who wrote the programs in the system, the most appropriate single choice would be “GNU”.
But that is not the deepest way to consider the question. The GNU Project was not, is not, a project to develop specific software packages. It was not a project to develop a C compiler, although we did that. It was not a project to develop a text editor, although we developed one. The GNU Project set out to develop a complete free Unix-like system: GNU.
Many people have made major contributions to the free software in the system, and they all deserve credit for their software. But the reason it is an integrated system—and not just a collection of useful programs—is because the GNU Project set out to make it one. We made a list of the programs needed to make a complete free system, and we systematically found, wrote, or found people to write everything on the list. We wrote essential but unexciting components because you can't have a system without them. Some of our system components, the programming tools, became popular on their own among programmers, but we wrote many components that are not tools. We even developed a chess game, GNU Chess, because a complete system needs games too.

FPPB

By the early 90s we had put together the whole system aside from the kernel. We had also started a kernel, the GNU Hurd, which runs on top of Mach. Developing this kernel has been a lot harder than we expected; the GNU Hurd started working reliably in 2001, but it is a long way from being ready for people to use in general.
Fortunately, we didn't have to wait for the Hurd, because of Linux. Once Torvalds freed Linux in 1992, it fit into the last major gap in the GNU system. People could then combine Linux with the GNU system to make a complete free system: a Linux-based version of the GNU system; the GNU/Linux system, for short.
Making them work well together was not a trivial job. Some GNU components needed substantial change to work with Linux. Integrating a complete system as a distribution that would work “out of the box” was a big job, too. It required addressing the issue of how to install and boot the system—a problem we had not tackled, because we hadn't yet reached that point. Thus, the people who developed the various system distributions did a lot of essential work. But it was work that, in the nature of things, was surely going to be done by someone.
The GNU Project supports GNU/Linux systems as well as the GNU system. The FSF funded the rewriting of the Linux-related extensions to the GNU C library, so that now they are well integrated, and the newest GNU/Linux systems use the current library release with no changes. The FSF also funded an early stage of the development of Debian GNU/Linux.

Today there are many different variants of the GNU/Linux system (often called “distros”). Most of them include non-free software—their developers follow the philosophy associated with Linux rather than that of GNU. But there are also completely free GNU/Linux distros. The FSF supports computer facilities for two of these distributions, Ututo and gNewSense.
Making a free GNU/Linux distribution is not just a matter of eliminating various non-free programs. Nowadays, the usual version of Linux contains non-free programs too. These programs are intended to be loaded into I/O devices when the system starts, and they are included, as long series of numbers, in the "source code" of Linux. Thus, maintaining free GNU/Linux distributions now entails maintaining a free version of Linux too.
Whether you use GNU/Linux or not, please don't confuse the public by using the name “Linux” ambiguously. Linux is the kernel, one of the essential major components of the system. The system as a whole is basically the GNU system, with Linux added. When you're talking about this combination, please call it “GNU/Linux”.

I'm not very familiar with this type of stuff. Can you or anyone answers this part of my question?

>Out of curiosity, are air gap computers safe or has the progress of technology made that capable of being spied on too.

What exactly does an air gap computer even mean? I saw them mention that on HBO Homeland, but is it just removing the wifi card, bluetooth, sound card, and any hot spot stuff from a computer?

back to Sup Forums richard fat freetard
back to your failing board populated by nothing but generals managed by redditors

I'll gladly answer your question but I have no idea what "air gap computer" means. Wifi perhaps?

>> Sup Forums

Kill all CIA niggers

It contains nothing that can communicate with the outside world. Yes, no wifi, ethernet, bluetooth, whatever. You want to communicate with it, you have to use a USB stick or something like that.

Didn't you read the papers?

Everything with a Wifi or Internet connection is hackable for them no matter what OS do you use.

Also how do you don't know some programmer in the Linux project work for the secret services?

Has been on linux for ten years already. I do have windows computer for games though. As for air gap - i dont do anything that illegal that will require physical isolation.

Do you work on military research or something like that to be that afraid of being hacked so you disable internet access? I mean, it's rather silly, you usb-stick can be infected too, the only reliable secure communication would be to use paper.

There are a lot of paranoid skitzos on pol.

I can see someone like a journalist using an air gap computer or something like that. That's how they brought it up on HBO's Homeland.

>Also how do you don't know some programmer in the Linux project work for the secret services?
There are thousands of contributors from all over the world.
But the changes are reviewed by many people and are all archived. When a vulnerability is found they know which revision it came from.
I remember some people tried to sneak in an exploitable vulnerability that looked like an ordinary typo ("=" instead of "==") but was also pretty damn suspicious. They got caught. But yeah there's no guarantee some of those didn't find their way in. Linux and opensource projects do have vulnerabilities and the intelligence agencies are known both get them fixed and exploit them.
Just exposing the TCP/IP stack has had a good security track record though (but there has been vulnerabilities even with just that). Sandboxed applications have also been doing OKay-ish it seems (but as soon as code-injection becomes possible, the CPU itself becomes exposed that those have vulnerabilities too (especially now that they are so complex and possibly backdoored)). It just takes one vulnerability and they can exploit it as much as they want until it get fixed.
Only security-focused software written in safe languages with the whole thing designed to be non-exploitable from the start could conceivably be safe from the CIA/NSA, and most opensource software is not that.

>Do you work on military research

Of course not goy, don't be silly.

> I mean, it's rather silly, you usb-stick can be infected too

So what?
If there is no connection to the outside world they can't do shit.

DO IT FAGGOT
youtu.be/tAb7OID5lt8

There are no job listings on monster.com for HolyC. Did I learn the wrong language?

>If there is no connection to the outside world they can't do shit.

That doesn't sound accurate...The US spends like 500 billion on our military budget. I am sure we have some way of infiltrating computers that have their wifi and bluetooth card removed

It doesn't make sense that the US would be like, oh shit this guy doesn't have wifi or bluetooth, we better pack it up boys!

>wifi and bluetooth card
>implying there was one in the first place

okay. so there is no wifi, no bluetooth card, no ethernet, no sat

i'm sure they have some crazy radio shit like turning your sound card or video into a hot spot that connects to a computer in your house to transmit to some place.

Maybe you're right tho. I didn't even know what an air gap computer was until today.

> radio shit like turning your sound card or video into a hot spot that connects to a computer

Yes that would be possible.
But they need to be near the signal and know the location of the pc.

holy fuck is that shit really possible? i thought that was just hollywood bullshit

They did have a remote viewer for CRT monitors within 20 ft

I've made the switch. I'm running Arch with TRESOR/grsec kernel patches on a LVM over LUKS installation with /boot on a hardware encrypted USB key.

I made the switch to Linux from Windows XP (not because of the CIA leaks).
I kinda want to go back to Windows XP.

>holy fuck is that shit really possible?
Not as Hot spot but they could locate the computer. Every Hardware does noises, depending on how powerfull it is and could be tracked.
The Problem is you have to be very close to the signal to locate it.

Honestly, unless your running with something totally un-newb friendly, stick with Linux. Just about every distro is a considerable upgrade from XP and you'll have more control and customization over your computer than you've ever had before. I'm on macOS right now and I miss messing around with my computer outside of a VM. If nothing else, you'll learn more about your computer just by using it than anything else you can ever do outside of programming.