PhormTheGenie

Phorm The Vixdjinn

@PhormTheGenie

Vixen. Genie. Vixdjinn!

Hi! I'm Phorm, and I'm a Vixdjinn!

A Friendly Vixdjinn Says Hello!

I'm a genie girl, who really likes being a genie, and really likes everything about genies (really)! I'm a bit confused, lost, and trying to find my way, but I always enjoy interacting with folks here. (Trans🏳️‍⚧️, occasionally NSFW, Be 18+ or please be gone.)

A Genie Bottle, With A Rising Wisp of Pink Smoke In The Shape Of a Heart

See here for the Genie Lore Index!

Profile Art credit to CinnamonSpots!

Avatar by DVixie
Banner image by BlackShirtBoy

log inask
Dreamwidth Page
phormthevixdjinn.dreamwidth.org/
Mastodon
dragon.style/@Phorm
PhormTheGenie
@PhormTheGenie

Smart screen: Protecting You From Yourself (And Useful Software)

So lately I've found that just about any software I snag from itch (or similar) will prompt this notice from Microsoft Defender. Usually VirusTotal comes back clean, but for whatever reason this happens.

From what I can gather, it's mostly because the software in question doesn't have a proper digital signature - Which, honestly, I wouldn't expect to be very affordable for small software developers.

So... It's probably fine? I guess? But my brain sees this prompt and just thinks "DANGER!! DANGER!!! WARNING!!!! FUCK, THIS WILL DETONATE YOUR COMPUTER AND SET YOUR DOG ON FIRE!!!"

You must log in to comment.

in reply to @PhormTheGenie's post:

garudina
@garudina

your assessment is accurate to my understanding - it's solely about having the executable be signed. most programs that most people run are distributed by huge corporations that can afford to sign the executables, and living your life entirely within the confines of signed binaries makes a lot of sense as a basic security measure for most people, and the blue box is pretty good at keeping them safely within that boundary.

but it doesn't have any specific security implications, just that the contents of the executable binary were not attested to by anyone in particular. virustotal is a good thing to check!

as a Nerd it can be hard to remember that the context for almost every bit of text shown to you by Windows is that it's for someone other than yourself who is likely to be actively falling for a phone virus scan scammer when they see this popup (and will just click through it anyway)

login to reply
PhormTheGenie
@PhormTheGenie

I mean, I know 100% what you're saying is correct. I acknowledge it, and I recognize it, and I know it to be true in my mind.

But there's still some part of me that always just says "Nope, not worth the risk". As if VT were wrong, this were always a day 0, or I somehow got redirected away from itch without understanding that it happened.

So, I miss out. Again. And maybe that's shitty (it is) but as least it's safe? I don't know. As always I find these junctures tend to be a point where I tell myself "If this goes bad, I have only myself to blame".

But meanwhile, as you say, 97% of other users just click right through - then link their account credentials to untrusted software, enter their CC numbers in clear text, and install rootkits at the behest of AAA gaming studios...

login to reply
garudina
@garudina

that's not really what I said though - for 97% of users, the thing they're downloading that sets this off is "something someone told them to download, usually with an implication of urgency, because it's part of a specific scam"

if you're in the 10,000 person global target demographic for Girl Kisser 2099, you're completely off the radar of any of this. the people who have and use zero-days are nation-states targeting influential individuals, you'll know somebody is targeting you when they call you on the phone and insist they are court-martialing you over delinquent federal taxes

AAA game studios install rootkits primarily for the reason that they want to make sure you're buying name-brand lootboxes, via various indirect measures. people aren't getting owned through Easy Anti-Cheat even though it's scummy and weird that it exists

So, I miss out. Again.

unclear to me why this conclusion should be foregone. simply do the thing anyway. you take so few risks that it's hard to justify avoiding even more of them, because "it will go wrong" is an assertion with little basis

login to reply