toad.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
Mastodon server operated by David Troy, a tech pioneer and investigative journalist addressing threats to democracy. Thoughtful participation and discussion welcome.

Administered by:

Server stats:

310
active users

#synchronisation

0 posts0 participants0 posts today

#KIMissbrauch
KI-Stimmen verändern die #Hörbuchbranche. Tools wie der Eleven Reader ermöglichen günstige, KI-generierte #Hörbücher. #Spotify als #Audioplattform ist auf den Zug aufgesprungen.

#Verlage und #Autoren könnten finanziell profitieren, doch die #Jobs professioneller #Sprecher und #Tonstudios geraten in Gefahr.

Die Entwicklung zeigt erneut, wie #KI den Berufen in der #Medienproduktion zusetzt.

#Sprachsynthese #Hörbuch #Synchronisation #ElevenLabs

tino-eberl.de/missbrauch-kuens

Tino Eberl · Hörbuchproduktion zum Spartarif: Professionelle Sprecher in Gefahr
More from Tino Eberl

Synchronsprecherinnen & Synchronsprecher gegen KI

Schützen wir die künstlerische, nicht die künstliche Intelligenz.

Lasst uns gemeinsam die menschlichen Emotionen und unser außergewöhnliches Handwerk schützen und unterstützt eure Lieblingssprecher:innen im Kampf gegen die illegale Nutzung ihrer Stimmen…

NexxtPressKurzperlen | Synchronsprecherinnen & Synchronsprecher gegen KI
More from Mediathekperlen
Replied in thread

I've now added a little bit of UI design ... But mainly focussed on features. It is now possible to add songs to a queue, skip a track, play the track before, pause and play. All of that will be synchronised between all clients of course.
I will add synchronised scrubbing over the weekend.
I've also published parts of the source on #Codeberg, but don't be sad it will always be behind what I am talking of ... I am forgetting to push my stuff often.

Die Partnerin (selbstständige Übersetzerin) sucht immer Arbeit, Englisch-Deutsch oder auch umgekehrt. Bisherige Erfahrungen liegen bspw. im Näh-Bereich vor, aber auch spektakulärere Jobs wie etwa #synchronisation (also Dialogbuch o.Ä.) wären denkbar, wozu sie etwa auch schon ihre Bachelorarbeit schrieb.
Auch Festanstellung wäre möglich (wenn überhaupt jemand soetwas in diesem Business macht).
Hier wartet Herzblut darauf, vergossen zu werden, wenn ihr überzeugen könnt. #FediHire #GetFediHired

Replied in thread

@ellent : wow, that's a lot of snake oil in the FB article that The Verge refers to.

*THE* problem with consumers losing access to their phone (stolen, forgotten in the subway, dropped in the toilet etc.) is typically that *ALL* secrets are gone - except a screen unlock code, while *possibly* the user may remember the password of their iCloud or Google account (or may have access to a rescue code).

B.t.w., passkey synchronisation suffers from the same problem: asking people to remember one or more additional *strong* passwords is doomed to fail in too many cases; fortunately black magic comes to the rescue.

From engineering.fb.com/2024/10/22/:

But losing your phone could mean losing your contact list as well. Traditionally, WhatsApp has lacked the ability to store your contact list in a way that can be easily and automatically restored in the event you lose it.
[...]
If you lose your phone, your contact list can be restored on a newly registered device.
[...]
Certain events [...] trigger the creation of a new cryptographic keypair that is associated with your phone number.

So al the military grade encryption, HSM's and Cloudflare supervision eventually depends on a PHONE NUMBER - with, in modern computer terms, a VERY limited number of possible combinations of digits.

And all that apart from the fact that phone numbers may be spoofed and "SIM-swapping" attacks happen to be a lot easier than most people are aware of.

What could possibly go wrong?

P.S. Of course I may be totally mistaken, for example because additional protections are in place. However, I do not see them mentioned in the FB article.

Engineering at Meta · IPLS: Privacy-preserving storage for your WhatsApp contactsYour contact list is fundamental to the experiences you love and enjoy on WhatsApp. With contacts, you know which of your friends and family are on WhatsApp, you can easily message or call them, an…

Apple führt Web-Version von Apple Podcasts ein
Apple hat am Montag stillschweigend eine Web-Version von Apple Podcasts veröffentlicht, die den Zugriff auf den Podcast-Dienst ohne die Nutzung der Podcast-App ermöglicht. Das neue Web-Portal bietet dieselbe
apfeltalk.de/magazin/news/appl
#News #Services #Abonnements #ApplePodcasts #AppleDienste #Chrome #plattformunabhngig #PodcastApp #Safari #Synchronisation #WebVersion #WindowsNutzer

Replied in thread

Adam, thank you for your (surprising) answer. You seem to agree with me, I'm summarizing what you wrote (quoted at the end of this toot), I joke you not:

——{
If you don't want to risk losing them, don't use ANDROID passkeys!

Instead, use a third party solution (requiring Android 14+)...
}——
 
 
*GOOGLE AUTHENTICATOR MISTAKE*
Please have a look at the weird distribution of ratings of Google Authenticator (play.google.com/store/apps/det); score : aproximate percentage of voters:

5 : 55%
sum of 2,3,4 : 20%
1 : 25% <——— note!

MOST people who voted "1", appear to have done that because, after losing (access to) their smartphone, they ALSO lost access to their (2FA TOTP-protected) accounts.

According to their reactions, most of them are PISSED; nobody warned them beforehand of this risk that TOTP secrets were not being backed up (this was changed last year; however, insecurily according to, in German, heise.de/news/Google-Authentic ).

Unfortunately, Google is making the same mistake with passkeys.
 
 
*RELIABLE LOGIN CREDS BACKUP*
Note that some security-aware people (such as I try to be) make backups of their TOTP secrets, which is POSSIBLE (I save QR-code screenshots in a password manager).

However, users CANNOT make backups of their Android passkey secrets. Therefore, if there is even the slightest chance of losing passkeys, users should ensure that a -usually PHISHABLE- alternative exists for logging in to each of their passkey-protected accounts.

Unfortunately, way too many people forget or lose "rescue codes" etc. because they hardly ever use them.
 
 
*PROMISING PASSKEY SECURITY*
The PROMISE of passkey security is relatively good, in particular for users who don't know how to choose, install (and properly configure autofill in order to prevent phishing) and use a third party password manager, and know how to backup its database (and actually make sure that this happens).

Therefore I fail to understand why it would be more important to provide an "optimal experience" to SECONDARY users of Android devices, rather than that PRIMARY users risk losing their passkeys.

Also, passwords are NOT deleted on my device when I tap "clear data"; why not?
 
 
*ARNAR WROTE*
Arnar Birgisson wrote in security.googleblog.com/2022/1 :
——{
Passkeys in the Google Password Manager are always end-to-end encrypted: When a passkey is BACKED UP, its private key is uploaded only in its encrypted form using an encryption key that is only accessible on the user's own devices. This protects passkeys against Google itself, or e.g. a malicious attacker inside Google. Without access to the private key, such an attacker cannot use the passkey to sign in to its corresponding online account.

Additionally, passkey private keys are ENCRYPTED AT REST ON THE USER'S DEVICES, with a hardware-protected encryption key.
}——
 
 
*MISLEADING DOCS/INFO*
Google's passkey documentation and your statements are incomplete, confusing and extremely inconsistent.

If passkeys are "encrypted at rest on the user's devices, with a hardware-protected encryption key", why would I care if they are synced to somebody else's account, if the other person DOES NOT POSSESS the hardware-protected encryption key?

Also, you wrote: "when they sign in on a device", "someone else signs in on their device": What Do You Mean?

Maybe someone else using the owner's screen unlock code, or signing in to an alternative Android account, or "sign in to Chrome" (whatever that means - I can imagine "signing in to" (unlocking) a /password manager) and/or switch the Google cloud account associated with the device?

As if granting another user access to your Android account on your Android device is not an extremely stupid thing to do (from a security perspective) anyway?
 
 
*JUST DON'T*
That is, unless you can trust the other user for 100% (which you never can): DON'T DO IT!

For example, your kid or grandchild may obtain access to content that your phone claims the owner is old enough for; spoofed "age verification" is just one of the increasing risks of storing "electronic passports" in smartphone "wallets". They may also steal your identity in many more ways, such as sending emails or messsges in your name, or add their credentials to your accounts (including banking apps).
 
 
*IN FACT, ARNAR AND DIANA WROTE*
Arnar Birgisson and Diana K Smetters wrote in security.googleblog.com/2023/0 :
——{
In fact, if you sign in on a device shared with others, YOU SHOULD NOT CREATE A PASSKEY THERE. When you create a passkey on a device, anyone with access to that device and the ability to unlock it, can sign in to your Google Account. While that might sound a bit alarming, most people will find it easier to control access to their devices rather than maintaining good security posture with passwords and having to be on constant lookout for phishing attempts.
}——
 
 
*CONCLUSION*
When/where did Google forget about KISS?

Why did (when Android 14 was not even available), and does Google promote passkeys - if there are even multiple ways of -unexpectedly- losing them (in my FD article I provided 3 examples) without being able to backup them by yourself?

Suppose a user, now knowing this, wants to switch from Android passkeys to, for example, Bitwarden: how do they transfer them?

Why are you not even interested in the rest of my findings?

Unbelievable.
 
 
On Feb 28, 2024, 23:30, Adam Langley (@agl) wrote:
——{
The other side of having data live on devices and using the account as a sync channel is widespread user confusion when they sign in on a device and are upset to find that their data remains on the device even after they've signed out. Or when someone else signs in on their device and their data syncs up to the other person's account.

I understand that one model isn't going to work for everybody, and Android 14 supports pluggable passkey providers so that nobody is locked into using Google Password Manager. But GPM passkeys are conceptually part of the account and clearing the account does clear them. I'll continue to try and push that our wording is consistent on this point. We'll be replacing the reset flow for passkeys in the coming months to be more specific and narrower in scope. Given that, we can be very clear about the consequences of resetting things. But while we might disagree about how Google Password Manager passkey should work, I know we do have a bug for accounts with custom passphrases. It is at least not causing data loss, but it does make the credentials inoperable. And we just need to damn well fix that and any other issues. We knew about it prior to your report but thank you for the report anyway: clear bug reports are rare.
}——

Meine Versuche #todoist durch eine #foss Lösung "aus einem Guss" zu ersetzen, waren nicht erfolgreich. #joplin ist kein Ersatz, es fehlt im Detail sowohl auf Desktop, als auch smartphone an Funktionalität. Das gilt auch für die vielen #opensource #Taskplaner.

Mein neuer Ansatz:

• Mailpostfach mit Kalender & Aufgaben (DSGVO konform & verschlüsselt)
• caldav für #Synchronisation
#Evolution auf dem Desktop
#OXTasks & #simplecalendar auf dem phone incl. widgets

Läuft gut, ist aber komplex.