You keep saying you don't mind timing and volume information known by Tailscale but much more concerningly compared to that is that they can add peers to your tailnet. In fact that's how their optional open-port scanner service discovery feature works. And even if you trust Tailscale, which I generally do, then there is the concern that they only support login through SSO via identity providers. You have to trust them as well.
I have an iPhone. I pretty much have to trust Apple. If you took that over then yes, you could screw me over pretty hard.
And yes, they could add peers to my tailnet. That’s why every time I have talked about TS I say it’s about your threat model. I’m a home user, and while I wouldn’t just open up my network, there’s nothing here that will get me in prison or dead. If I had that kind of info it would never, ever meet the internet in any form.
I would be more cautious if I ran a large multinational corporation. I don’t. I think I can trust Tailscale not to be the operators of an enormous “residential IP VPN” botnet.
In the past, Microsoft named everything ".NET" [1] or "Windows Live" [2]. And before naming everything "Copilot", Microsoft named everything "Microsoft 365" [3].
Yes and you're in a unique position to influence the internal culture. Not saying send emails to executives but talk about things during lunch with coworkers?
Microsoft Commodepilot 365 for Copilot Copilot Copilot Edition now with Copilot 365.
How incompetent must they be not to realize the Copilot brand is now beyond toxic. I wonder who came up with the Copilot name internally that they continue to triple own on that name despite really strong signals indicating it has failed.
Must be nice to live in a world simpler than the one I do. Your broad generalization has so many deficiencies that I actually deleted what I was writing. There are countless exceptions to your hasty generalization.
I do use it, and rewriting the whole file annoys me especially when the storage is not local and the database contains sizable blobs. For storing passwords and short secrets, it makes little to no difference but if I have 10 1MB blobs stored in there, it becomes upsetting.
Well, yes, this is what OP is saying, and I'm not arguing against that. However, this is not what *.kdbx was designed for. And I am only talking about what cryptographically changes for the intended use case if we encrypt every page separately.
reply