Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #221123 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Anil F Duggirala <anilduggirala@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2020-04-09 15:00 +0200 |
| Last post | 2020-04-10 20:00 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 118 — 23 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user
geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Anil F Duggirala <anilduggirala@fastmail.fm> - 2020-04-09 15:00 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-04-09 16:50 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-04-09 16:50 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Anil F Duggirala <anilduggirala@fastmail.fm> - 2020-04-11 16:50 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-04-11 17:00 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-11 17:40 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-04-11 18:00 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-11 18:10 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2020-04-13 15:50 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-04-13 23:10 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Brad Rogers <brad@fineby.me.uk> - 2020-04-11 18:00 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2020-04-11 20:50 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-12 01:20 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2020-04-12 02:40 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-04-12 09:20 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-12 20:20 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Anil F Duggirala <anilduggirala@fastmail.fm> - 2020-04-11 17:00 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-11 17:50 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Brad Rogers <brad@fineby.me.uk> - 2020-04-11 18:00 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-11 18:20 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps rhkramer@gmail.com - 2020-04-11 22:10 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-11 22:20 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps rhkramer@gmail.com - 2020-04-12 02:30 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-12 10:10 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-04-12 10:20 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-04-12 10:50 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-12 11:50 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-04-12 16:20 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-12 17:00 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-04-12 12:20 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-04-12 12:30 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-04-12 12:40 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-04-12 13:10 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-04-12 15:40 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2020-04-13 01:50 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-04-13 07:50 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-04-13 10:20 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-04-13 12:00 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-04-13 12:10 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Liam O'Toole <liam.p.otoole@gmail.com> - 2020-04-13 13:20 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-04-13 15:30 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Liam O'Toole <liam.p.otoole@gmail.com> - 2020-04-13 17:20 +0200
Re: DOH John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-13 17:40 +0200
Re: DOH "Liam O'Toole" <liam.p.otoole@gmail.com> - 2020-04-14 22:10 +0200
Re: DOH Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-04-14 22:50 +0200
Re: DOH Liam O'Toole <liam.p.otoole@gmail.com> - 2020-04-14 23:30 +0200
Re: DOH Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2020-04-15 00:00 +0200
Re: DOH John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-15 01:10 +0200
Re: DOH Liam O'Toole <liam.p.otoole@gmail.com> - 2020-04-15 01:30 +0200
Re: DOH Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-04-15 09:00 +0200
Re: DOH John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-13 17:30 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2020-04-14 00:50 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-04-14 08:20 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2020-04-14 13:10 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) nito@dismail.de - 2020-04-14 13:50 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-04-14 14:10 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-04-14 15:30 +0200
Re: DOH John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-14 17:40 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2020-04-14 05:40 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2020-04-14 11:50 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2020-04-14 19:00 +0200
Re: DOH John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-14 19:20 +0200
Re: DOH Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2020-04-15 00:00 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-04-13 09:20 +0200
Re: DOH John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-13 17:20 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2020-04-14 01:10 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) tomas@tuxteam.de - 2020-04-14 10:10 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-04-14 13:40 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-04-14 16:40 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2020-04-15 01:20 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-04-15 13:50 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-04-15 16:50 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2020-04-17 05:30 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2020-04-12 13:40 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-04-12 15:40 +0200
Re: DOH Michael Howard <mike@dewberryfields.co.uk> - 2020-04-12 15:50 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2020-04-12 18:10 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2020-04-12 14:40 +0200
Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-04-12 15:50 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-12 15:00 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2020-04-11 23:40 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-12 10:00 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2020-04-13 16:00 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2020-04-13 16:40 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Michael Howard <mike@dewberryfields.co.uk> - 2020-04-13 16:40 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-11 17:10 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-09 18:20 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps "Anil Felipe Duggirala" <anilduggirala@fastmail.fm> - 2020-04-10 15:30 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-04-10 15:50 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-10 16:30 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Anil F Duggirala <anilduggirala@fastmail.fm> - 2020-04-11 16:40 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Anil F Duggirala <anilduggirala@fastmail.fm> - 2020-04-11 16:30 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-10 16:30 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-04-10 17:00 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-04-10 17:20 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-10 17:40 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-04-10 17:50 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-10 18:10 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-10 20:00 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-04-10 18:00 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-10 18:20 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-04-10 18:40 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-04-10 18:40 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Anil F Duggirala <anilduggirala@fastmail.fm> - 2020-04-11 16:40 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps tomas@tuxteam.de - 2020-04-11 16:50 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Anil F Duggirala <anilduggirala@fastmail.fm> - 2020-04-11 16:40 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-11 17:30 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-10 17:20 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Anil F Duggirala <anilduggirala@fastmail.fm> - 2020-04-11 16:30 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-04-11 17:20 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-04-13 13:40 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-04-10 17:20 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-04-10 20:00 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-04-11 09:40 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-11 10:30 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Anil F Duggirala <anilduggirala@fastmail.fm> - 2020-04-11 16:50 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> - 2020-04-10 19:00 +0200
Re: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-04-10 20:00 +0200
Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next page →
| From | rhkramer@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-11 22:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <zUuBY-kN-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221211 |
On Saturday, April 11, 2020 11:48:00 AM Curt wrote: > BTW, I fed my IP address to this site > > https://www.maxmind.com/en/locate-my-ip-address > > and it nails my location approximately within a 50 meter radius (I > entered the latitudinal and longitudinal coordinate output into Google's > search engine, which brings up the spot in their Maps app). > > I found this surprising (in my vast ignorance). Do you have your own static IP, or do you use an IP from your ISP?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Curt <curty@free.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-11 22:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <zUuLE-o8-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221231 |
On 2020-04-11, rhkramer@gmail.com <rhkramer@gmail.com> wrote: > On Saturday, April 11, 2020 11:48:00 AM Curt wrote: >> BTW, I fed my IP address to this site >> >> https://www.maxmind.com/en/locate-my-ip-address >> >> and it nails my location approximately within a 50 meter radius (I >> entered the latitudinal and longitudinal coordinate output into Google's >> search engine, which brings up the spot in their Maps app). >> >> I found this surprising (in my vast ignorance). > > Do you have your own static IP, or do you use an IP from your ISP? > Yes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rhkramer@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-12 02:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <zUyFA-2K7-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221232 |
On Saturday, April 11, 2020 04:09:46 PM Curt wrote: > On 2020-04-11, rhkramer@gmail.com <rhkramer@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Saturday, April 11, 2020 11:48:00 AM Curt wrote: > >> BTW, I fed my IP address to this site > >> > >> https://www.maxmind.com/en/locate-my-ip-address > >> > >> and it nails my location approximately within a 50 meter radius (I > >> entered the latitudinal and longitudinal coordinate output into Google's > >> search engine, which brings up the spot in their Maps app). > >> > >> I found this surprising (in my vast ignorance). > > > > Do you have your own static IP, or do you use an IP from your ISP? > > Yes. Did I ask the wrong question? I don't understand -- you have both?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Curt <curty@free.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-12 10:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <zUFQK-7j3-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221243 |
On 2020-04-12, rhkramer@gmail.com <rhkramer@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Do you have your own static IP, or do you use an IP from your ISP? >> >> Yes. > > Did I ask the wrong question? I don't understand -- you have both? > > I have a static ip (I think) attributed by my ISP (the one not precluding the other). This site nails me equally well: https://whatismyipaddress.com/ Surely there must be a way of stracing the Maps app in Gnome to determine what it is doing and how, with a view to seeing whether the OP's privacy settings are being respected or not. It does appear, though, at any rate, that a 50 m radius geolocational precision is feasible by IP address alone.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-12 10:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <zUG0p-7mm-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221257 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 08:05:49AM -0000, Curt wrote: [...] > Surely there must be a way of stracing the Maps app in Gnome to > determine what it is doing and how [...] Shudder. I just had some quality time stracing Firefox -- and don't want to imagine how stracing Gnome is like. I have some nebulous images akin to trying to empty a slurry pit with a teaspoon. At dawn. But, in despair, we humans are capable of feats ;-D Cheers -- t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-12 10:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <zUGts-7wd-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221257 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Du, 12 apr 20, 08:05:49, Curt wrote: > > Surely there must be a way of stracing the Maps app in Gnome to > determine what it is doing and how, with a view to seeing whether the > OP's privacy settings are being respected or not. It does appear, > though, at any rate, that a 50 m radius geolocational precision is > feasible by IP address alone. Just to clarify, the privacy concern here is the software accessing the internet without explicit user consent, regardless of what it is using this information for (internal only or providing it to other software). Unless one is using technologies like VPNs or Tor *any* site you access on the internet will have your IP information and consequently also your (aproximate) location. Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Curt <curty@free.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-12 11:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <zUHpv-86z-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221265 |
On 2020-04-12, Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Du, 12 apr 20, 08:05:49, Curt wrote: >> Surely there must be a way of stracing the Maps app in Gnome to >> determine what it is doing and how, with a view to seeing whether the >> OP's privacy settings are being respected or not. It does appear, >> though, at any rate, that a 50 m radius geolocational precision is >> feasible by IP address alone. > > Just to clarify, the privacy concern here is the software accessing the > internet without explicit user consent, regardless of what it is using That's not my understanding. I understood the OP explicitly "ran" the Gnome Maps program, which kind of connects to the Internet by definition (and performs fun functions other than eventually pinpointing the user on a map). OP: "... when I enter the Gnome Maps application, it determines and shows my location on the map." https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Maps About Maps Maps gives you quick access to maps all across the world. We use the collaborative OpenStreetMap database, enabling our users to make smaller changes to places and points-of-interests. If your privacy settings allows, Maps will use the GeoClue service to find your location. And if you have a Facebook or Foursquare account we allow you to check-in there. https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/geoclue/geoclue/-/wikis/home The aim of project is to utilize all possible sources of geolocation to best find user's location: WiFi-based geolocation (accuracy: in meters) GPS(A) receivers (accuracy: in centimeters) GPS of other devices on the local network, e.g smartphones (accuracy: in centimeters) 3G modems (accuracy: in kilometers, unless modem has GPS) GeoIP (accuracy: city-level) GeoIP. Is that simply guessing his position via his IP address or something else, maybe some database? https://help.gnome.org/users/gnome-help/stable/privacy-location.html.en Geolocation, or location services, uses cell tower positioning, GPS, and nearby Wi-Fi access points to determine your current location for use in setting your timezone and by applications such as Maps. When enabled, it is possible for your location to be shared over the network with a great deal of precision. One notes that the above description of location services doesn't include GEOIP (certainly a loophole for one of the many Philadelphia lawyers in the group), and thus turning them off would not in principal preclude GeoIP, though the accuracy maybe isn't constrained as asserted to the "city-level."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-12 16:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <zULCN-2lP-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221276 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Du, 12 apr 20, 09:43:08, Curt wrote: > On 2020-04-12, Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Just to clarify, the privacy concern here is the software accessing the > > internet without explicit user consent, regardless of what it is using > > That's not my understanding. I understood the OP explicitly "ran" the > Gnome Maps program, which kind of connects to the Internet by definition > (and performs fun functions other than eventually pinpointing the user > on a map). Obviously I failed at my attempt at clarity :) I was only trying to point out that just querying an external geoip database has similar privacy implications as any regular internet access (the server will learn your IP and can, at will, get your aproximate location from a geoip database). The above point is unrelated to whether the software in question does more than that (I don't know) or if the OP should care about it (his choice). Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Curt <curty@free.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-12 17:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <zUMfw-2zk-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221308 |
On 2020-04-12, Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote: > > I was only trying to point out that just querying an external geoip > database has similar privacy implications as any regular internet access > (the server will learn your IP and can, at will, get your aproximate > location from a geoip database). > > The above point is unrelated to whether the software in question does > more than that (I don't know) or if the OP should care about it (his > choice). It's a bug and geoclue queries location.services.mozilla.com regardless of user settings to the contrary. "Upstream said it was intentional to not be able to disable location sharing." And the user is hoodwinked into believing he can indeed disable it. Hard to believe, but true. I think Bigonville's use of the term "misleading" is a euphemism. But maybe I'm wrong again somehow. https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=924516 https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-control-center/issues/885 > Kind regards, > Andrei(that doesn't look like it's going to be fixed anytime
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-12 12:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <zUHSy-8vY-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221265 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 11:48:40AM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: [...] > Just to clarify, the privacy concern here is the software accessing the > internet without explicit user consent, regardless of what it is using > this information for (internal only or providing it to other software). What do you expect? A big Rube-Goldberg machine made out of javascript will access the internet without even being aware of it ;-D > Unless one is using technologies like VPNs or Tor *any* site you access > on the internet will have your IP information and consequently also your > (aproximate) location. That's why you better solve that part at the machine's network level. That's why I cringe at the idea that browsers want to start doing name resolution over HTTPS. Cheers -- t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-12 12:30 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) |
| Message-ID | <zUI2e-7E-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221279 |
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 12:10:45PM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: > That's why I cringe at the idea that browsers want to start doing > name resolution over HTTPS. This simple one line of dnsmasq configuration will disable this problematic feature for good for Firefox (basically it creates a bogus NXDOMAIN response for this particular site): local=/use-application-dns.net/ Chromium does not do it *yet*, but I'll implement something akin to the previous once it'll get there. So, as long as you control your network - it does not concern you. Reco
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-12 12:40 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) |
| Message-ID | <zUIbT-aJ-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221281 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 01:21:08PM +0300, Reco wrote: > On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 12:10:45PM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: > > That's why I cringe at the idea that browsers want to start doing > > name resolution over HTTPS. > > This simple one line of dnsmasq configuration will disable this > problematic feature for good for Firefox (basically it creates a bogus > NXDOMAIN response for this particular site): > > local=/use-application-dns.net/ I don't quite understand [1] how the dnsmasq config has a say on whether the browser resolves things over HTTP (it won't ask the resolver in the first place, would it?), but thanks for the pointer anyway. Cheers [1] That's not a rhethorical flourish, it's genuine. I know too little about DNS-over-HTTP to be of any use at this point. -- tomás
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-12 13:10 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) |
| Message-ID | <zUIEV-A8-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221282 |
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 12:35:44PM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 01:21:08PM +0300, Reco wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 12:10:45PM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > That's why I cringe at the idea that browsers want to start doing > > > name resolution over HTTPS. > > > > This simple one line of dnsmasq configuration will disable this > > problematic feature for good for Firefox (basically it creates a bogus > > NXDOMAIN response for this particular site): > > > > local=/use-application-dns.net/ > > I don't quite understand [1] how the dnsmasq config has a say on > whether the browser resolves things over HTTP (it won't ask the > resolver in the first place, would it?), but thanks for the pointer > anyway. > > Cheers > [1] That's not a rhethorical flourish, it's genuine. I know too > little about DNS-over-HTTP to be of any use at this point. The questionable idea behind DOH is that the browser makers do not trust your local resolver. As usual, main arguments here are: 1) One can use a local resolver with the ability *not* to resolve certain DNS queries, which refer to the sites which just happen to contain advertisements, fingerprinting, tracking, cryptomining etc. Since all two major browser makers (Google and Mozilla) happen to rely on revenue generated by advertising *and* users' browsing habits this obviously can not be tolerated. 2) ISPs can intercept DNS queries, and modify them at their leisure. Usually considered a first step to a censorship, implemented in this particular form at certain European countries. 3) Bad guys and gals can hijack DNS too, to the usual hilarious results. With the advent of HTTPS all this may be seen as moot points (if you're redirected elsewhere the certificate validation should fail), but nevertheless DOH is forced upon the collective throat of Firefox users as we speak (and Chrome users are likely to follow them Soon™). Currently a Firefox user is supposed to trust Cloudflare to do DNS queries for them, and HTTPS is used for this purpose because Security™. In its current form DOH has a huge gaping hole that every system administrator worthy of the title is familiar with - local name resolution - because Cloudflare cannot resolve hosts in your Intranet, although they probably want to. And yes, your dirty /etc/hosts tricks won't work here, because DOH simply skips parsing the contents of hosts file. Hence the trick. What Firefox does first is trying to resolve use-application-dns.net on the assumption that if it local DNS does the resolving then the user's host is connected to the Internet. Because if it does not - then it's most probably a corporate Intranet so DOH should be disabled for the duration of this browser run. I won't go into the details here on how many levels this logic is flawed or outright broken. I'll just say that it's enough to use it for your own good and to disable DOH without rebuilding Firefox from the source. So, as I wrote earlier - if you controlling your network DOH is just another questionable thing that can be rid of. Reco
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-12 15:40 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) |
| Message-ID | <zUL05-1Ss-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221283 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 02:03:55PM +0300, Reco wrote: > On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 12:35:44PM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: [...] > > [1] That's not a rhethorical flourish, it's genuine. I know too > > little about DNS-over-HTTP to be of any use at this point. > > The questionable idea behind DOH is that the browser makers do not trust > your local resolver. As usual, main arguments here are: [...] Ah, OK. Thanks. Sounds a bit... fragile. Now I know a bit more! Cheers -- t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lee <ler762@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-13 01:50 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) |
| Message-ID | <zUUwp-7EI-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221283 |
On 4/12/20, Reco wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 12:35:44PM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 01:21:08PM +0300, Reco wrote:
>> > On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 12:10:45PM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
>> > > That's why I cringe at the idea that browsers want to start doing
>> > > name resolution over HTTPS.
>> >
>> > This simple one line of dnsmasq configuration will disable this
>> > problematic feature for good for Firefox (basically it creates a bogus
>> > NXDOMAIN response for this particular site):
>> >
>> > local=/use-application-dns.net/
>>
>> I don't quite understand [1] how the dnsmasq config has a say on
>> whether the browser resolves things over HTTP (it won't ask the
>> resolver in the first place, would it?), but thanks for the pointer
>> anyway.
>>
>> Cheers
>> [1] That's not a rhethorical flourish, it's genuine. I know too
>> little about DNS-over-HTTP to be of any use at this point.
>
> The questionable idea behind DOH is that the browser makers do not trust
> your local resolver.
Mozilla claims it's a privacy issue:
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-dns-over-https
Benefits
DoH improves privacy by hiding domain name lookups from someone
lurking on public WiFi, your ISP, or anyone else on your local
network. DoH, when enabled, ensures that your ISP cannot collect and
sell personal information related to your browsing behavior.
Altho I suspect "cannot" should be changed to "has a slightly harder time to"
> As usual, main arguments here are:
>
> 1) One can use a local resolver with the ability *not* to resolve
> certain DNS queries, which refer to the sites which just happen to
> contain advertisements, fingerprinting, tracking, cryptomining etc.
> Since all two major browser makers (Google and Mozilla) happen to rely
> on revenue generated by advertising *and* users' browsing habits this
> obviously can not be tolerated.
Wasn't there a fairly recent kerfluffle about an upcoming change to
chrome that would break things like the uMatrix addon? hrmm... ok,
found it
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=896897&desc=2#c23
If this (quite limited) declarativeNetRequest API ends up being the
only way content blockers can accomplish their duty, this essentially
means that two content blockers I have maintained for years, uBlock
Origin ("uBO") and uMatrix, can no longer exist.
If firefox wasn't a viable alternative to chrome, what are the chances
that change would have been implemented?
> 2) ISPs can intercept DNS queries, and modify them at their leisure.
> Usually considered a first step to a censorship, implemented in this
> particular form at certain European countries.
along with ISPs can monitor DNS queries and sell the info.
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/9kembz/comcast-lobbying-against-doh-dns-over-https-encryption-browsing-data
Ellen Canale, director of corporate communications at Mozilla, wrote
in an email, "This is part of a pretty aggressive campaign we've seen
from the ISPs to protect their control over DNS traffic and the
tracking opportunities it provides them."
> 3) Bad guys and gals can hijack DNS too, to the usual hilarious results.
And the bad guys and gals can use DOH to "hide" their traffic and
circumvent things like pihole. I just did a quick search and couldn't
find anything for smart TVs using DOH. Probably because my search
skillz sux :(
> With the advent of HTTPS all this may be seen as moot points (if you're
> redirected elsewhere the certificate validation should fail), but
> nevertheless DOH is forced upon the collective throat of Firefox users
> as we speak (and Chrome users are likely to follow them Soon™).
> Currently a Firefox user is supposed to trust Cloudflare to do DNS
> queries for them, and HTTPS is used for this purpose because Security™.
For some values of "security", DOH _is_ more secure. How many people
use a dnssec validating resolver? At least Cloudflare resolvers have
dnssec enabled.
^shrug^ there's lots of trade-offs to be made in this area. I'm
certainly not a fan of DOH and I do my best to block it on my
network.. I just think there are some privacy/security arguments for
DOH that you're minimizing.
Regards,
Lee
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-13 07:50 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) |
| Message-ID | <zV08N-2Ko-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221356 |
Hi. On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 07:46:38PM -0400, Lee wrote: > > The questionable idea behind DOH is that the browser makers do not trust > > your local resolver. > > Mozilla claims it's a privacy issue: > https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-dns-over-https It's a privacy issue along with the other things. With the default settings the Firefox user is handing all DNS resolution to Cloudflare. Not an equivalent to complete browsing history, but close enough. > > 1) One can use a local resolver with the ability *not* to resolve > > certain DNS queries, which refer to the sites which just happen to > > contain advertisements, fingerprinting, tracking, cryptomining etc. > > Since all two major browser makers (Google and Mozilla) happen to rely > > on revenue generated by advertising *and* users' browsing habits this > > obviously can not be tolerated. > > Wasn't there a fairly recent kerfluffle about an upcoming change to > chrome that would break things like the uMatrix addon? There was, indeed. > If firefox wasn't a viable alternative to chrome, what are the chances > that change would have been implemented? It is implemented already, it's just there are alternatives to declarativeNetRequest that are working - so far. > > 3) Bad guys and gals can hijack DNS too, to the usual hilarious results. > > And the bad guys and gals can use DOH to "hide" their traffic and > circumvent things like pihole. There is tor or i2p for *that* already. > I just did a quick search and couldn't find anything for smart TVs > using DOH. Probably because they aren't there yet. A typical smart TV is based on the Android, and Google haven't said their word about DOH so far. > > With the advent of HTTPS all this may be seen as moot points (if you're > > redirected elsewhere the certificate validation should fail), but > > nevertheless DOH is forced upon the collective throat of Firefox users > > as we speak (and Chrome users are likely to follow them Soon™). > > Currently a Firefox user is supposed to trust Cloudflare to do DNS > > queries for them, and HTTPS is used for this purpose because Security™. > > For some values of "security", DOH _is_ more secure. As far as the "last mile" is concerned - maybe. As far as the whole Internet goes - not so much as overall security of DNS queries depends of DNSSEC implemented in every zone (and it ain't there yet). > How many people use a dnssec validating resolver? See above. Besides, DNSSEC is for integrity of zones, not privacy. You need DNS-over-TLS if you need last one. > At least Cloudflare resolvers have dnssec enabled. *And* the ability to see users' DNS queries. Neat, right? Reco
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-13 10:20 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) |
| Message-ID | <zV2tX-4iB-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221362 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Lu, 13 apr 20, 08:47:22, Reco wrote: > On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 07:46:38PM -0400, Lee wrote: > > > How many people use a dnssec validating resolver? > > See above. Besides, DNSSEC is for integrity of zones, not privacy. > You need DNS-over-TLS if you need last one. > > > > At least Cloudflare resolvers have dnssec enabled. > > *And* the ability to see users' DNS queries. Neat, right? Whether DoH or DNS-over-TLS, you have to trust the DNS server. Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-13 12:00 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) |
| Message-ID | <zV42K-55n-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221368 |
Hi. On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:16:02AM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > On Lu, 13 apr 20, 08:47:22, Reco wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 07:46:38PM -0400, Lee wrote: > > > > > How many people use a dnssec validating resolver? > > > > See above. Besides, DNSSEC is for integrity of zones, not privacy. > > You need DNS-over-TLS if you need last one. > > > > > > > At least Cloudflare resolvers have dnssec enabled. > > > > *And* the ability to see users' DNS queries. Neat, right? > > Whether DoH or DNS-over-TLS, you have to trust the DNS server. Yup. That's why I have my own, and every Debian user can have their own too, using only free software. Reco
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-13 12:10 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) |
| Message-ID | <zV4cp-5oa-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221379 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 12:57:54PM +0300, Reco wrote: > Hi. > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:16:02AM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: [...] > Yup. That's why I have my own, and every Debian user can have their own > too, using only free software. ...and that is why I want the apps on my box to take my DNS and not theirs [1]. Cheers [1] "theirs" being the one their developers deemed the right one for me. -- t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Liam O'Toole <liam.p.otoole@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-13 13:20 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: DOH (was: geolocation services disabled and Gnome maps) |
| Message-ID | <zV5i9-61l-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #221379 |
On Mon, 13 Apr, 2020 at 12:57:54 +0300, Reco wrote: > Hi. > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:16:02AM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: [...] > > Whether DoH or DNS-over-TLS, you have to trust the DNS server. > > Yup. That's why I have my own, and every Debian user can have their own > too, using only free software. > Pray tell us more. I use dnsmasq for clients on my LAN, but even that has to use an upstream name server --- in my case the one provided by my ISP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web