this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2023
888 points (99.9% liked)

196

16436 readers
1954 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

unless it means you are using your work laptop to game.

Why is this a bad thing? Why would you have separate computers, when you can have one good one?

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Security issues. It's standard security policy for most companies to separate private and work.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So have a drive for work and one for play. Bill the laptop to work but spec it for what you want at home.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Not even that. She could be dual booting windows with windows on two separate encrypted partitions. There's going to be someone at work who knows how to set it up.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And why can't she know how to set that up if she chooses? Because she's a girl? You people are gross. If you want to criticize her for something, let it be for representing Trump in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, she can't know it because she is a lawyer that represents Trump. Why did you though we have a problem with her gender?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

She's clearly too young to have her own practice. Whatever firm she works for placed her on his case. Her intelligence cannot be defined by the client she represents. She's smart enough to pass the bar. I'd wager she's also smart enough not to hand her personal laptop to some neckbeard to set up for her. It's highly questionable at this point whether Trump can even get a firm big enough to have in house IT to work for him.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Nothing to do with their sexual identity or gender. It's the fact that the average person doesn't know how to do it. Most people working in a company stuff have IT that sets things up for them. If they can do it themselves, then hell, that's great and I'm happy for them. But I wouldn't assume anything because of someone's gender or sexual identity. I think that's silly.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you care for a personal example, the company I work for has IT which give us work phones. The IT department set the phones up themselves. Because of the way the phone has been set up, there's incredibly little that can go tits up and there's a lot of security built in (no admin, enforced long passwords, probably more that I'm forgetting).

I'm more than capable of setting up my phone and having it be secure myself without IT doing it. Maybe she can too. Is it a usual thing for IT to thing up in a business setting, (unless you're a programmer) probably.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Even if she works for a firm, which is likely as she looks a bit young to own her own practice, they did not provide that laptop. That is clearly hers. And unless they are a fairly large law firm, they do not have a dedicated IT guy, let alone department. I'd bet Trump would be hard pressed to get a large firm to work for him, given his reputation.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I mean, this is all speculation. How can you be sure that she couldn't just request that laptop? I don't know the circumstances.

As far as institutions go, there's even fairly small ones that have at least 1 person who's job is IT, not to mention it is also possible to outsource that position entirely.

I don't know. Maybe I'm wrong about this entire situation but that doesn't make me a sexist like you implied :/

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This can slow a hacker down, but still a bad bad bad security practice.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How so? If you have 2 partitions encrypted separately with, say, Veracrypt, the worst thing the infected partition could do is copy the other encrypted partition. Unless I'm missing something?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can download a copy of the encrypted partition and attempt to crack it locally.

Which depending on how deep your cascade encryption goes can require a huge amount of computation. If you're a small business owner running a restaurant or a student, that's plenty of security. If you're the lawyer for a former POTUS in a history-defining trial that might decide the future of the entire planet, I hope to God you're not relying on that encryption.

Then again it might be the same dirt that foreign intelligence already has on Trump, so maybe it doesn't matter either way.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

My friend, I hope you realise that cracking a Veracrypt partition is going to take longer than the heat death of the universe even if we use every computer ever produced. It's not feasible to crack a partition with brute force. The one way to break it is if they have some password lists or something.

I've actually been thinking about this. Another very hard but possible way that I can think could work would be to take the targeted partition in its entirety, then alter the boot process in such a way where the user is tricked into producing their password at boot to the encrypted partition. The password would then be sent over the air to the attacker where they can simply decrypt the partition. I'm not sure what that would entail though.