Joined March 2010
‼️ Google Search is now hiding where its results lead. Links point to google[.]com/goto?, followed by an opaque string only Google can resolve. You can no longer inspect a destination before clicking it, or copy the address out of the page. Every click now travels through Google first.
314
997
242
9,818
1,201,622
Mike ❌ retweeted
Every age verification system requires linking your offline identity to your online activity. Once that data is collected it can be leaked, hacked or misused. It is documented that these systems do not work as intended. If they don't work, why are they being pushed right now?
5
49
3
156
5,363
‼️ Someone’s Bluetooth headphones kept refusing to hand audio back to their phone. He discovered the cause was an open AliExpress tab that was generating a tone you purposefully never hear, to secretly track you. Alibaba's anti-abuse scripts use a fingerprinting technique with a hidden audio graph on the homepage — a sawtooth tone pushed through the browser's audio engine, then measured on the way out. CPU, OS and browser each process it slightly differently, and that variation results in a fingerprint they can track you with. Gain is set to zero, so nothing is audible. But the audio graph stays wired to the system audio output, so the browser keeps processing live audio. Tab mute can't stop it, there's no media element to mute. Some browsers like Firefox have already flattened the fingerprint itself. For example 99.24% of Firefox users return one of just three values. It doesn't stop the audio graph from running though.
58
692
61
4,658
255,517
Mike ❌ retweeted
Gmail is FREE TikTok is FREE Google is FREE Chrome is FREE YouTube is FREE ChatGPT is FREE Facebook is FREE Instagram is FREE WhatsApp is FREE You pay with your personal data.
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Proton Mail also offers a free plan. It is funded by paid subscribers and does not sell user data or show ads, per the company. proton.me/pricing proton.me/mail
791
2,329
272
17,964
2,643,296
Replying to @Support
@Support An established account belonging to an MTGGoldfish employee was taken over through phishing, and the attacker replaced its 2FA. The original owner still controls the registered email, can reset the password, and X Support has acknowledged that the email remains linked—but every 2FA report returns the same automated response without removing the unauthorized 2FA. Account: @Safffron0live Case: ACCESS-14757247 Could someone please escalate this for manual ownership review and removal of the attacker-added 2FA?
11
29
2
398
30,385
‼️ LG stops sending security updates to TVs if you do not consent to them wiretapping your home and sending your and your household's voice recordings to their AI. And it gets worse. LG's new TV terms quietly turn you into the compliance officer: under section 6(d), it is your "sole responsibility" to get consent from anyone whose voice the set's AI features might capture, and to warn household members and guests, all to satisfy wiretapping and eavesdropping laws. Those voice services ship enabled by default. If a guest objects, LG's remedy is that you go disable the microphone. And owners of older sets who refuse the new webOS terms stop receiving security patches.
132
932
96
3,807
193,684
Mike ❌ retweeted
Privacy has never been about hiding a crime. It's about who holds the power to see into your life, you or someone else. The "nothing to hide" argument was written by the watchers, not the watched. That's why we've always sealed envelopes: not out of guilt, but because the letter belongs to two people, and only two.
23
266
12
1,662
39,851
❗️ Meta just silently opted in every adult Instagram user for their new Muse AI Image generator, which lets anyone create AI images of your likeness by tagging your public handle in a prompt, no notification when your photos are used, and no removal of images generated before you opt out. To opt out on Instagram: Profile > Menu > Sharing and reuse, then switch off the reuse toggles under "Allow people to reuse your content on Instagram and with AI features at Meta."
102
1,930
141
7,643
3,375,448
Why only VPN? Pass giveaway would be also welcomed.
For everyone who has been asking us for free Proton VPN licenses, yes, we see you and we hear you, so here's your chance. Let @davidgpeterson, our @ProtonVPN General Manager know that you're interested in a giveaway, and he might just do it.
2
19
Mike ❌ retweeted
Ever wondered what happens when you disable Google Play services? Your phone breaks, apparently. Use @GrapheneOS.
158
205
14
2,469
121,301
Mike ❌ retweeted
The UK government spyware demand means that the government decides exactly what should be censored on every mobile device. They say they will start with nude pictures (if you don’t identify yourself as an adult). But it could at any time be expanded to anything the government disapproves of. Today, 30 people are arrested every day in the United Kingdom for writing something online that the government classifies as "grossly offensive". It is obvious that they will use this tool to restrict free speech. Currently, there appears to be no requirement to report findings outside the device. However, with both legal and technological decision-making power taken away from individuals and transferred to the government, that is only a pen stroke away. This means that the government could also use this system for total mass surveillance. And they can do so in secret. The government recently, in secret, tried to pressure Apple (which is now agreeing to client-side scanning) to build backdoors into its end-to-end encrypted cloud service. They can do this under the Investigatory Powers Act 2016, also known as the "Snoopers' Charter" – a law that makes it illegal for tech companies to disclose secret demands from the government.
106
1,367
40
6,198
196,458
Mike ❌ retweeted
Researchers just unveiled FROST (fingerprinting remotely using OPFS-based SSD timing), a technique that exploits your SSD's timing to silently detect every site and app you have open. No clicks. No interaction. Just visit a page. Let's have a look at how it works... 1/7
26
86
12
636
51,751
‼️ Google is about to disable all adblocker extensions in Chrome. Instead of letting the adblocker inspect traffic itself, extensions now have to hand Google's browser a limited list of filtering rules and hope for the best. This leads to weaker blocking and more ads getting through. Google makes the vast majority of its money selling ads. The company that profits from every ad you see also controls the browser most people use, with Chrome 149 being the last version supporting adblockers. For example, under the new rules, uBlock Origin cannot exist. For millions of people, that extension is the only thing standing between them and a wall of ads, trackers, and autoplay garbage. One user put it bluntly: "The web is literally unusable without uBlock Origin."
704
1,212
556
7,142
1,696,941
Mike ❌ retweeted
Our statement on the UK government’s demand that all content on all devices sold or used in the country be scanned, on the presumption of nudity, using a dystopian combination of age verification and content scanning. This proposal will not safeguard children. It endangers us all. signal.org/blog/pdfs/2026-06…
720
8,245
501
40,468
2,952,007
Mike ❌ retweeted
This is what the UK spyware proposal means. There must be government spyware on every mobile device. It shall watch everything that happens, including always watching the screen, looking for things the government disapproves of. When anything is flagged by the software as something the government doesn't like, the software must block it from being sent or displayed (in realtime). The user of the device must not be able to shut this watching and blocking off. The only way to shut it off would be to ask the government or its proxies to do so for you, at their discretion. Therefore the whole device must be locked down. Administrator rights and the decision of what software or operating system to run or not to run must be taken from the owner/user and handed to the government and its proxies. Apple and Google are themselves working hard to lock down the devices they are involved in to shut out competition and establish a duopoly. The UK government says it is "working closely" with Apple and Google and currently they synchronise and coordinate their communication on this subject. The UK government is now proposing to mandate what would otherwise be illegal anti-competitive practices. @GrapheneOS on the Apple and Google duopoly: xitter.cf/GrapheneOS/status/2053… Statement from @signalapp xitter.cf/signalapp/status/20640… @ReclaimTheNetHQ on the state spyware: reclaimthenet.org/starmer-ca… The government announcement: gov.uk/government/news/new-p…
Our statement on the UK government’s demand that all content on all devices sold or used in the country be scanned, on the presumption of nudity, using a dystopian combination of age verification and content scanning. This proposal will not safeguard children. It endangers us all. signal.org/blog/pdfs/2026-06…
226
3,253
335
13,821
1,561,679
‼️🚨 BREAKING: Sony PlayStation's age-verification partner Yoti is reporting GrapheneOS users to authorities for using GrapheneOS, due to "past security concerns."
127
821
142
5,979
582,535
👉 Yoti, plateforme de vérification d'âge, aurait "signalé" un utilisateur aux autorités pour détection d'usage de @GrapheneOS Voici ce qui s'est passé. Un utilisateur tente de vérifier son âge sur PlayStation Network via @getyoti . Son appareil tourne sous GrapheneOS. Le scan échoue à répétition, 8 à 10 fois. Il contacte le support Yoti pour comprendre. La réponse arrive de help@yoti[.]com : "Due to past security concerns, Yoti automatically flags multiple verification attempts and any devices running GrapheneOS. These instances are automatically reported to both the authorities and our security team." Traduction : "En raison de problèmes de sécurité passés, Yoti signale automatiquement les tentatives de vérification multiples ainsi que tout appareil fonctionnant sous Gra…"En raison de problèmes de sécurité passés, Yoti signale automatiquement les tentatives de vérification multiples ainsi que tout appareil fonctionnant sous GrapheneOS. Ces cas sont automatiquement signalés aux autorités ainsi qu'à notre équipe de sécurité." L'utilisateur avait fourni ses vrais documents d'identité. Il n'a pas contourné quoi que ce soit. C'est le système de Yoti qui semble avoir échoué à les traiter. Pourquoi ? GrapheneOS restreint les APIs caméra et biométriques. Un scan qui fonctionne sur Android stock peut échouer en boucle sur GrapheneOS. L'échec répété n'est pas une fraude. C'est une incompatibilité technique. Evidemment, il est très facile de détecter qu'un smartphone utilise GrapheneOS. GrapheneOS n'est interdit nulle part. C'est un Android open source durci, utilisé par des journalistes, des avocats, des chercheurs en sécurité, et des gens comme vous et moi, soucieux de leur sécurité. Mais pour Yoti, l'utiliser suffirait à vous classer comme suspect. En vertu de quoi ? Soit Yoti signale effectivement quelqu'un, quelque part, pour avoir utilisé un OS légal. Soit c'est une formule boilerplate conçue pour faire peur. Dans les deux cas, c'est un problème. Si c'est réel : aucun texte n'impose à un prestataire de vérification d'âge de signaler aux forces de l'ordre un utilisateur détecté sous GrapheneOS. C'est une politique unilatérale sans base légale identifiable. Si c'est un bluff : menacer un utilisateur d'une procédure légale fictive est une pratique commerciale déloyale dans la plupart des juridictions. En revanche, ce que ça révèle, c'est que petit à petit, utiliser des OS alternatifs va entraîner des restrictions, des suspicions, pour mieux permettre de déployer leurs systèmes de régulations. Et demain, ce ne sera pas seulement GrapheneOS. À chaque étape, on nous dira que c’est pour la sécurité, pour les enfants, pour la lutte contre la fraude, pour la conformité. Mais à la fin, le résultat sera le même : l’utilisateur qui cherche à se protéger devra se justifier, tandis que l’utilisateur entièrement traçable sera considéré comme normal. C’est cette inversion qu’il faut refuser. La vie privée ne doit pas devenir une circonstance aggravante. La sécurité numérique ne doit pas devenir un marqueur de suspicion. Et les infrastructures de vérification d’âge ne doivent pas devenir des postes-frontières privés où des entreprises privées décident, dans l’opacité, quels appareils sont acceptables et quels utilisateurs méritent d’être signalés. Si Yoti confirme cette pratique, il faudra demander sur quelle base juridique repose ce signalement, quelles autorités sont destinataires, quelles données sont transmises, combien d’utilisateurs sont concernés, combien de temps ces informations sont conservées, et quels recours sont offerts aux personnes faussement signalées. Et si Yoti ne la confirme pas, il faudra expliquer pourquoi son support a pu écrire une telle chose à un utilisateur.
"GrapheneOS user reported to authorities for using GrapheneOS" discuss.grapheneos.org/d/361…
61
554
45
1,838
151,926
Mike ❌ retweeted
So-called age verification for social media is spreading across the world, framed as an effort to create a safer internet for children. In reality, age verification lays the foundation for a fully controlled internet. The age verification rush must be slowed down, and politicians need to recognize the consequences of different types of legislation and systems. Age verification is the wrong approach to fix “the social media problem” The big tech social media companies are bad. Their business model is bad; it is based on mass surveillance and manipulation, and they cooperate with governments in mapping entire populations. But age verification is fundamentally the wrong approach to preventing children from using big tech social media platforms. Introducing age verification is based on coercion; the state forces social media companies to verify their users’ identities. But the big tech social media platforms already know which of their users are children. Their business model depends on knowing this. They know how old users are, and they know exactly what type of person they are. As age verification is based on coercion, politicians could instead force platforms to stop doing the things politicians consider harmful to children, or force them to block children (again, they know who they are) from using their services. But instead, politicians seek to massively invade everyone’s privacy and undermine democratic rights on a global scale. In other words, the latter is the real objective – they do not want to protect children; they want to impose control. Slippery slope of age verification It is undeniable that age verification threatens freedom of expression, risks increasing mass surveillance, and is likely to lead to censorship. It will not only shrink the online world and reduce young people’s right to privacy (for example, if VPN services were to be restricted); but also risks becoming a significant step toward a controlled internet for everyone. Most age verification is identity verification Most countries are now considering introducing age verification systems, meaning that everyone would have to identify themselves either to the service/website they want to use or to a third party capable of linking them to their activity on that service or website. This is not age verification but identity verification, and the consequence is therefore that freedom of information is restricted (you can no longer visit regulated websites anonymously) and that you can no longer post anonymously on social media. This is a major problem in countries like the UK and Germany where the police conduct raids on people’s homes for posting content on social media that the authorities dislike. Or in the United States, where authorities are trying to pressure tech companies into revealing the identities behind accounts protesting ICE. Social media identity verification removes important tools for activists in countries where criticizing those in power is dangerous. Restrictions on app store or operating system level Some countries are looking to impose identity verification at the app store level or even within the operating system itself. This is an exciting experiment, since this is possible to circumvent using open-source operating systems. Some countries are already looking to include open-source systems. Since open-source systems cannot be controlled, politicians would ultimately need to ban devices that are not controlled by the state. The end point: telescreens like those in Orwell’s 1984, devices that both monitor you and broadcast only the information approved by the state. The Zero-Knowledge Proof (ZKP) alternative and the EU The EU has presented its own age verification app as “completely anonymous”. The idea is to use Zero-Knowledge Proof (ZKP) cryptography to break the link between the age credential issuer (EU governments) and the regulated services/sites. Currently, the EU app does not have ZKP functionality, contrasting Ursula von der Leyen’s claim that the app ”is technically ready to be used”. But more importantly, the app is currently designed to always function without ZKP technology; if ZKP is unavailable, the app falls back to a non-ZKP model. Even if fully developed ZKP technology could be implemented in the future, it would remain an optional extra feature that countries may choose to disable and that the EU could remove at any time. Read more on our site. mullvad.net/blog/age-verific…
74
838
41
2,959
76,476
Mike ❌ retweeted
The EU age verification app is presented as “completely anonymous”. But the risk is that member states (the countries are supposed to create their own versions of the open-source EU app) use it to introduce identity verification that makes it impossible to post anonymously on social media. The idea behind “completely anonymous” is to use Zero-Knowledge Proof (ZKP) cryptography to break the link between the age credential issuer (EU governments) and the regulated services/sites. Currently, the EU app does not have ZKP functionality, contrasting Ursula von der Leyen’s claim that the app ”is technically ready to be used”. But more importantly, the app is designed to always function without ZKP technology; if ZKP is unavailable, the app falls back to a non-ZKP model. Even if fully developed ZKP technology could be implemented in the future, it would remain an optional extra feature that countries may choose to disable and that the EU could remove at any time. This means that the EU could decide at any time that ZKP may no longer be used, and in one stroke the app would fall back to its default mode, meaning that every post on social media carries an ID tag. By that point, an infrastructure will already have been rolled out; people will have gotten used to it, and it will be harder to roll it back. More details on mullvad.net/blog/age-verific…
68
727
42
3,049
295,012