You can check out Mail-In-A-Box. Its a pretty good self-hosting email solution thats easy to install and maintain.

https://mailinabox.email/

Thats is unfortunate for those citizens with no access to a VPN.

Do you have an example of an app that lets a device with no Miracast capabilities act as a receiver? Im curious if its possible.

Miracast typically takes priority. It will ask for permission to allow it to display. It will then return to your previous input once the wireless display is disconnected.

Looks like Miracast and Wi-Fi Direct aren’t just some software you can tack onto a product. It’s a certification for a product that has proper software and hardware support to handle these tasks.

You can find some implementations of Android TV devices that have Miracast capabilities, such as the Nvidia Shield. Other than that, youll have to find another device that is certified for it.

https://www.wi-fi.org/discover-wi-fi/miracast

IP-based internet relies on so many corporations, organizations, governments, etc., to play nicely. They hoard IPv4 ranges and let you “rent” out blocks of IPs if you pay them enough. This is not free and open access to the internet.

In order to connect to the internet, you are required to pay an ISP. They then dictate how you can use your service. For some residential ISPs, you aren’t allowed to use certain ports, so you cant host your own services like email, websites, etc. You also have to monitor how much bandwidth you are using to make sure you don’t go over your “data cap”. This is why these centralized services are so big for things like email and web hosting. We’ll get more into data collection here in a bit.

IP-based internet is flawed in that it allows DDoS attacks to take out a server that might be limited on protection. There is no redundancy or self-healing properties built-in that will protect the little guy. You can always subscribe to services like CloudFlare, who will then Man-In-The-Middle your internet traffic. You then have to abide by their terms of service, which is not desirable (especially if new hostile leadership were to come in and take over the company). Also, unless you are paying multiple ISPs for redundant connections to the internet backbone, you are vulnerable to Sybil attacks on your network. If subscribed to a single ISP, and it has downtime, you will have downtime along with them.

Any data sent between one IP to another is not encrypted by default. You have to bolt-on entirely different protocols to have that capability. As a result of that, we ended up with a very splintered implementation of encrypting data-in-transit. There are thousands of messenger applications, transmissions protocols, certificate authorities, etc., that often aren’t compatible with others. They also individually have their own set of issues.

Data collection… Ads… Trackers. Oh my! The end user of most modern websites are connecting to multiple servers, even though they visited a single site. Those users are tracked as they hop website to website. Often, these companies keep a profile on anyone matching that fingerprint. You have no control over that data. If you turn off connections to those servers, the website can become unusable. You can’t seriously say this is the best we can do. Why not have a network that prevents you from being tracked?

No, the solution is to rid ourselves of the Plain Old Telephone System, as well as IP-based internet, and move to something that doesn’t rely on a corporation to communicate, is secure for everyone, and is free and open source.

https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-news-12-21-2023-7d9718b32bf0d308c44c7c9e3c4e0deb

To add to this, you arguably cant have privacy or anonymity without security first.

If there are any vulnerabilities or design flaws for your device or its OS, you shouldn’t fully trust your device to handle sensitive tasks.

https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/network/wan/multiwan/mwan3

Security concerns can vary between traditional Linux distributions and rolling release distributions.

Traditional Linux Distributions:

1. Stability: Traditional distributions like Ubuntu LTS tend to prioritize stability over the latest software updates. While this can reduce the risk of new software vulnerabilities, it may also mean that security patches for certain software components are not as up-to-date as in rolling releases.

2. Delayed Updates: Security updates for software packages may take longer to reach users in traditional distributions because they go through a more extensive testing and validation process. This delay could potentially leave systems vulnerable for a longer period.

3. Predictability: Traditional distributions have predictable release cycles, making it easier to plan and apply security updates. However, this predictability can also make it easier for attackers to anticipate when certain software versions will be in use.

Rolling Release Distributions:

1. Up-to-Date Software: Rolling releases like Arch Linux or Manjaro provide the latest software updates as soon as they are available. While this ensures access to new security features and patches quickly, it can also introduce new bugs and vulnerabilities.

2. Frequent Updates: Rolling releases typically require more frequent updates, which can be time-consuming and potentially introduce compatibility issues if not managed properly.

3. User Responsibility: Users of rolling releases have a greater responsibility to stay informed about security updates and apply them promptly. Failure to do so can leave systems vulnerable.

4. Testing: Rolling releases often have a testing phase where updates are evaluated by the community before being rolled out to all users. This helps catch issues, but it can still result in occasional instability.

In summary, the main security concern with traditional Linux distributions is the potential delay in receiving security updates, while rolling releases offer up-to-date software but may require more user vigilance and can occasionally introduce instability due to frequent updates. The choice between them should depend on your specific use case and your willingness to manage updates and stability.

Not yet…

Its a rolling release, so will always have the most up to date and patched packages the fastest. That concept is the antivirus.

Can’t infect your machine if the vulnerabilities are already fixed.

Honestly, the best antivirus for Linux is Arch.

Awesome. Now leave it there and don’t let anyone touch it 😁

Its going to get more and more difficult to be flexible as this company locks in their entire development pipeline into a single browser.

It will probably be more expensive to move away from Chrome if you DONT develop for other browsers now. All it will take is the company that owns Chrome deciding to exercise their Terms of Service and Privacy Policies to the best of their abilities. If you sprinkle in support for other browsers now, it wont take as much work when the huge overhaul is needed later.

The money guys are blinded by the dollar signs though.

If we keep having to justify any development for other browsers, well end up with Chrome having all the market share!

You could ask them when they are going to support uploading through a modern browser like Firefox.

This is solid advice.

Only thing I would add is if you use a different OS that doesn’t support secure boot during install, go ahead and disable it. After you install linux, then go through the sbctl setup, and it’ll tell you when you should re-enable secure boot.

You can leave on secure boot nowadays if you install and configure the sbctl package. It can use the Windows secure boot method, and you’ll have a successful dual boot deployment.