- #UPGRADE TO BRAINA PRO IN ORDER TO DICTATE IN THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE AND WEBSITE CODE#
- #UPGRADE TO BRAINA PRO IN ORDER TO DICTATE IN THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE AND WEBSITE PC#
Unless you use Docker Swarm, in which case you'll lose access to simple orchestration that's not overengineered, unlike Kubernetes which you'll now be forced to use. > Simply use alias docker=podman and you’ll never know the difference. The private key (even encrypted) should never leave the server. You will still have the unencrypted private key in RAM, but that's inevitable and also the case with your current method. You would however need to provide the encryption key every time you start the server. The safest solution if you don't want to store the private key unencrypted is to generate an encrypted private key with openssl.
#UPGRADE TO BRAINA PRO IN ORDER TO DICTATE IN THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE AND WEBSITE PC#
Either way, now, if your PC gets infected or your server gets hacked they will have the private key, while if you only have it on your server they won't necessarily have it when your PC gets infected. It adds another location where you could mix up, hackers now have 2 possible attack targets, and it's more likely that your PC gets infected than your server. You will think that will never happen until it happens.Ī bigger security threat, I think, is that you have the private key both on your server and on your computer.
#UPGRADE TO BRAINA PRO IN ORDER TO DICTATE IN THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE AND WEBSITE CODE#
I can't see any purpose it serves other than to start a flame war.Īside from improvements with organization and environment separation when you separate the configuration from the code (and also not having to roll your own solution), one of the security risks is that you accidentally mix up binaries. To be honest, avoiding criticism by whining about entitlement adds no more to the conversation than pure entitlement itself. I have no problem with my browser updating itself that way, as I never notice if something broken and got rolled back in the canary stage. They could have kept the feature as-is and worked on making sure new releases were solid, while also having a mechanism to revert.
There is clearly something missing in their development and QA process that causes this auto-updating to be so visible and painful. They could make the whole damn thing paid-for instead and I'd be happier with that. To my mind, the decision here shouldn't have been to make people pay protection money to stop a new release breaking their setup. So they pushed people to an older, stable version they didn't want to support. The team has released new versions with major issues on a fairly regular basis, and this was exacerbated by having a forced auto-update that could only be resolved by dropping down to v2.5. When I hear of a new convenient feature, or smart-iot thing, I think that it will benefit the business and compromise the user.īut I still believe - I think linux phones and tablets will be important checks and balances that can return control to the user and return to a more positive future. To me, the promise of computers got sort of tarnished - it's a little bit of a dark age.
I think this was initially done for security/piracy/etc, but the power grab self-propagated.Īpple thinks they are responsible for your iphone, but now they think they own it.Īnd when control was reverted to apple, they decided it was not important for people to see what was running on their phone, what it was doing, and who it was talking to.Īt that point, software companies had more control over your phone than the users. I think it was basically the iphone that started a lot of bad precedents by removing the ability for the user to run his own software - both through he app store, and strict control by apple of what software could run on the phone. New capabilities made things faster, easier and smarter.īut sometime around the early 2000's businesses started exercising more control over the users. Honestly, I remember getting into computers because everything was getting better.