[HOME] [DOWNLOAD] [DOCS] [BLOG] [SUPPORT] [TIPS] [ISSUES] [Priority Support]

Long Wiki Edits Thread


#141

Fixed. Just reject my “Anchor” edits, as I stuffed it up somewhere (too little wiki knowledge).


#142

@Patrick

Well, 6 days, two uploaded pics & 154 edits later the Tor Browser wiki entry is ready for final sign-off. :sweat_smile:

I changed the headings on the “Advanced” topics also, so we could reduce the depth of the entries by one level on the Table of Contents for the wiki entry.

If you put the old version and the new version side-by-side, I think you’ll agree the new one has far better organization & formatting, is better worded, and is more complete re: missing sections and information.

It’s probably easiest to read the new version (with all edits) in one go, sign it off (if you’re happy with it), and then outline to me any small changes or mistakes that need correcting. Will save you a ton of time.

Others awaiting sign-off:

  • Language wiki entry (I fixed it while I was looking at Tor Browser language settings)
  • Do Not wiki entry (only headings mainly to remove the full stops as you requested, I didn’t edit the text which does need some work)

From here, I’ll probably start looking at the Computer Security stuff as previously mentioned around the phabricator item, after resting for a bit. :slight_smile:

Maybe also some bits and pieces of the VPN entry. We’ll see.

Cheers


#143

https://www.whonix.org/w/index.php?title=DoNot&diff=cur&oldid=29414

{{Anchor|I wonder what my site looks like when I’m anonymous}}

Please don’t change any anchors.

The anchor is there to make sure old existing links don’t break. The anchor isn’t visible in the final wiki page seen by users. By changing the anchor in the wiki markup, no one benefits and old links break. Anchors implement page-name/#anchor-name without having to use a headline for that.

Options:

  • restore old anchors
  • restore old anchors and add new anchors (so the links from previous revision don’t break)
  • never mind any old links, remove all anchors and break them all
  • continue to use dots . inside headlines, but add the appropriate anchors so they also work without dot (I did not think about this option earlier)

What do you think?


#144

I vote for deprecating the grsec page as its no longer relevant?

Should I delete or copy to wiki/deprecated first?


#145

Well, I understand the 4.8 and 4.9 grsec kernels will still work with the last patched versions that were made available from coldhak, so maybe it can wait until those are not safe to use?

i.e. we can still git clone those?


#146

Yeah, my mistake. I’ll just go back and undo any anchor changes and resubmit. That’s easiest.


#147

grsecurity page should not be deleted.


#148

Each point release they did required manual tweaking and fixes to sync it with upstream. Since thats no longer happening its pretty much dead and was removed immediately from Arch.

Coldkernel is also dead.


#149

Where is the warning message template that you use?


#150

Not sure where the generic one is, but just use mbox e.g.?

Or you could search special:uncategorizedtemplates, but Patrick will remember if there is one.

{{mbox
| image = [[File:Ambox_warning_pn.svg.png|40px|alt=warning]]
| text =
Security warning: Adding a third party repository allows the vendor to replace any package on your system. Proceed at your own risk! See [[Install_Software#Foreign_Sources|Foreign Sources]] for further information.
}}

Re: Grsecurity. Yeah, really disappointing. Especially the way it happened abruptly - like a kid taking his ball and bat and storming home.

I think if Brad Spengler didn’t have some kind of personality disorder where he annoyed everybody with his “eccentric security genius” routine, kernel devs probably would have adopted a lot more of his stuff years ago.

But, if you read his rants against everyone and everything around him (informed as they may be), he comes off as a real narcissist.

The other factor is Linus himself doesn’t think highly of security/hardening. So, for these two reasons kernel security has been retarded in recent years.

Although, Kees Cook seems to realize the importance, so that’s one good factor at least.


#151

Fixed them back to the original anchors (as below). Should be good for sign-off now (didn’t edit the general text though - can do that later on):

{{Anchor|I wonder what my site looks like when I’m anonymous}}

{{Anchor|Login into your real life Facebook account and think you are anonymous}}

{{Anchor|Never login into accounts you ever used without Tor}}

{{Anchor|Don’t login into your bank account, paypal, ebay or other important personal accounts unless}}

{{Anchor|Don’t alternate Tor with open WiFi}}

{{Anchor|Prevent Tor over Tor scenarios}}

{{Anchor|Don’t send sensitive data without end-to-end encryption}}

{{Anchor|Don’t disclose identifying data about yourself}}

{{Anchor|Do use bridges if you think Tor usage is dangerous/suspicious in your country}}

{{Anchor|Don’t use different online identities at the same time}}

{{Anchor|Don’t log into Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc. longer than necessary}}

{{Anchor|Do not mix Modes of Anonymity}}

{{Anchor|Do not use clearnet and Tor at the same time}}


#152

OK - “Do Not” editing is finished.

Although those anchors are still off (where do they go, below/above the == section?). I think we should just nuke them and fix up any broken refs later.

So if/when that gets signed off (along with Tor Browser entry), I’ll just re-organize the Do Not bullet points by category e.g. “Logins” etc. Too many bullet points right now in a big block.

So, what’s your next editing priority - fix up the FAQ first or finish the “Computer Security” section towards the phabricator goal?

I don’t care, either is fine.


#153

The anchors are above the == headlines, right. There are just there to not break old links. They’re not visible in the final wiki page that users see. Why remove them? Because they mess up the wiki markup? Fixing them all could be hard since they are often used in the forums and perhaps on third party pages as well.

I don’t know either. Somewhat has the same priority. Perhaps computer security guides reorganization has more importance.


#154

https://www.whonix.org/wiki/Computer_Security_Education#Safer_Upgrades is rather VirtualBox specific and hard to grasp. Whatever I must have thought when I wrote that back then… Do you know what we suppose to say there?

In Qubes terms: shut down as many VMs as possible before you upgrade your TemplateVMs. And “don’t run VMs of different domains at the same time”. Probably not realistic anyhow. Perhaps better for advanced security guide.


#155

No problem.

Let me just edit the full wiki entry text first, then we can re-organize the Computer Security & Security Guide & Advanced Security Guide to something nicer (also gotta edit Advanced Security Guide text; gulp).

At that stage, I’ll sketch out the proposed sections here first for your okay.


#156

@torjunkie your editing work is always appreciated however the massive re-do of the TBB page is excessive. Also there is no need to quote overly technical details on what FF architectural features the TBB patches change as that read Greek to new users and detracts form the main purpose of the page of explaining safe use guidelines.

Please point to a single edit that includes typo, grammar fixes only.


#157

Hi,

Doesn’t exist.

The easy solution ->

Just approve it, then I’ll create another page called “Tor Browser Design Features” or “Hidden (Onion) Services” and similar.

Then, where I have War and Peace around adversary stuff, and functions of Tor Browser etc. I’ll chop those sections straight out and shift them, with a one-liner pointing to the design doc. “For more information, see blah blah”

BTW the Whonix docs are not consistent around level of detail.

For example, I could easily argue that the one pager on “Out of band Management Features” that I just edited today in the Computer Security Education entry is also excessive, since most users don’t care how/why Intel ME and AMT is a danger. Especially since it’s meant to be aimed at beginners.

That is, it could be reduced to one paragraph basically saying “Intel ME bad. Just got pwned with exploits proven this month.” “Don’t buy hardware supporting it”.

Ditto “Windows Hosts” and so on.


#158

True but we don’t quote data from outside sources whenever we can. Simply referring to an archived copy of the TBB technical spec is enough.

No because this oversimplification was a cause of confusion and FUD. It led users to think “all hardware is phoning home to intel so why bother” which is not true and what I spent time clarifying to those who care. There is a difference between AMT and ME and it matter a lot. Also those paragraphs contain a lot of original content I spent time researching, combining and making recommendations based on them - not copypasta (no offense).


#159

Like I said, Adversary stuff and Tor design functions is easily moved to a “Technical Design” page.

Yes, this part was a lot of copy-pasta. But, even there, the Torbutton and Tor Browser design docs have different information (Tor Button is more detailed for its functions), so combining that provided a more comprehensive list of what those options actually do.

But, regarding the 6 days I spent rewording the document, re-organizing the text which was a dogs breakfast, finding pics that were missing, re-sizing pictures that were ridiculously large, formatting text/titling for consistency, clarifying intent of the sub-chapters, and fixing errors in instructions; that wasn’t a lot of “copy-pasta”.

If it doesn’t meet the grade, simply reject all the edits. In that case, I’m happy to do a Spender and pass the baton, since all this time spent on Whonix can be used pursuing other interests.


#160

We haven’t been consistent with how much content is okay per page. Even
before the edit I did not like all the advanced stuff on the Tor Browser
page.

We can keep it all, just needs to be properly split into multiple pages.