I see, thx
but an attacker isn't obliged to take on all the open ports, he could work with some of them - the ones that may seem the most interesting to him
Ok, back to this then:
If everything reports open then what ports do you focus on first?
I don't see an issue here. An attacker would be overwhemed with choise and excitement so that he wouldn't be able to decide which port to choose first, get stuck for a several months unable to decide? He'd toss a coin then.
My ports are always open for you, my son. And doors, and windows.
You can’t pretend-close it and still have that service work.
indeed, a service on a port would no longer properly work. However, pretending that an open port is closed is possible the same way when pretending that's open
- backups, non-incremental ones
- prevent others from viewing information that may be sensitive
- encrypted files and directories will then be copied over to external drives and third-party servers
I don't want to encypt them in-place because I'll be uploading them onto a server, copying them on an external drive.
that's why you should be logged out of Google and also delete your cookies periodically :) To reset the memory of Google
. Some of them could also be implemented with native messaging.
Some? Or all?
uBlockOrigin would still loose some of its features and capabilities nonetheless, even if a sub-set of them could be implemented in other ways. Not?
Not in the direct war - correct. But in a proxy one. But even in it we haven't been to even match Russia's weapon production and which we have also admitted. By the margin of 3-7 times.
But that's about weapons. What about economy? Geopolitics? No major blow-ups for Russia, if not the opposite, either.
The whole point of my question is to avoid this