Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)M

Muehe

@ Muehe @lemmy.ml

Posts
16
Comments
182
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • [Solved] Can't connect to host after enabling WireGuard tunnel

    Jump

  • Oh yeah, can't use the same IP range as your LAN, that will lead to problems. :D Glad it's fixed.

    Out of curiosity, does forwarding work now without the output (-o) command in PostUp?

  • Rule

    Jump

  • PSA for my fellow colour blind people, you can use inspect element option of your browser to add a filter: saturate(100); rule to the element for this kind of image:

  • [Solved] Can't connect to host after enabling WireGuard tunnel

    Jump

  • Like I said in another thread on this post, I'm pretty sure that's because they are forwarding input but not output in the PostUp rules. Setting a /32 in AllowedIPs works fine for me.

  • [Solved] Can't connect to host after enabling WireGuard tunnel

    Jump

  • What are you trying to say? That reply also shows AllowedIPs set to a /32 on the server side.

  • [Solved] Can't connect to host after enabling WireGuard tunnel

    Jump

  • I don't think that's what the setting does. Anyway, I have them set to a /32 IP in my server config and it works nonetheless. I get full access to the /24 behind the server from the client.

  • [Solved] Can't connect to host after enabling WireGuard tunnel

    Jump

  • You have ALL traffic being routed over Wireguard here.

    Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the other way around? All Wireguard traffic is forwarded to the local interface.

  • [Solved] Can't connect to host after enabling WireGuard tunnel

    Jump

  • I think the problem might be your PostUp/PostDown lines have an in-interface (-i) but are missing an out-interface (-o) for the forwarding. Try this:

     
        
PostUp   = iptables -A FORWARD -i %i -j ACCEPT; iptables -A FORWARD -o %i -j ACCEPT; iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o ens3 -j MASQUERADE
PostDown = iptables -D FORWARD -i %i -j ACCEPT; iptables -D FORWARD -o %i -j ACCEPT; iptables -t nat -D POSTROUTING -o ens3 -j MASQUERADE

  • How would your codebase (personal projects, work projects etc.) look as a burger?

    Jump

  • Max Speed Limit by State

    Jump

  • President 360 No Scope...

    Jump

  • That it was offered is nigh impossible to prove if the offer is only made verbally though. And conversely, if they make the offer an "official act" they are immune again.

  • President 360 No Scope...

    Jump

  • Yeah but like I said, if you promise some other form of compensation on the level or above what they lose in benefits, you will still find people willing to follow these illegal orders. Hell you could find people willing to follow illegal orders even before this ruling, but now that the presidents right to give illegal orders is explicitly enshrined in constitutional jurisprudence this pre-existing problem is much worse. I doubt those people will care about a dishonourable discharge, on the contrary it will make them martyrs to "the cause" and they will be worshipped for it. And it remains to be seen how all this would play out in court, I guess it's quite possible for the defence to argue that if the president has immunity for giving orders, their subordinates have immunity for following those orders.

  • 'Before marrying Melania in 2005': What new documents claim about Trump-Epstein

    Jump

  • That’s not a link … it’s a download.

    Any link is a download... I mean that's what happens even when the link target is displayed in the browser, the browser downloads a file (actually a collection of files usually) that is then interpreted and displayed in the browser. A download of data still happens though.

  • Tethered Bottle Caps

    Jump

  • The number of littered bottles, with or without a cap, is greater than the number of loose caps,

    That smells like survivorship bias. Your dataset is skewed by loose caps being way harder to find due to being smaller. It stands to reason that all those bottles without a cap you find will have also had their cap littered in the vast majority of cases.

  • President 360 No Scope...

    Jump

  • All good points if true. However I will say that to my limited understanding a crime under a specific law having been pardoned, that same law can then not be used to prosecute this crime anymore. Meaning states would have to find a different (preferably state) law under which the same offence is punishable.

    And that is all disregarding other issues like packed courts, republican controlled states, the vagueness of double-jeopardy in this regard, and the general chilling effect a presidential pardon would have on prosecutors to even press charges in the first place.

    The loss of benefits is easily circumvented by promising a golden parachute along with the pardon, so I could still see a lot of fanatics doing the crime "for country and freedom" or whatever they tell themselves.

    Overall this seems like a potentially dangerous erosion of checks and balances that is easily abused when put in the wrong hands. As the dissenting opinions in the ruling openly state.

  • President 360 No Scope...

    Jump

  • Ok yeah fair enough, that sounds reasonable. But to my knowledge the UMCJ is a federal law, not a state law, so how does that line of argument factor in there? You cited that as an example of checks and balances that would prevent people from following illegal orders, but it being a federal law still means the president could circumvent it with the official order plus pardon combo, at least if my understanding of this new supreme court ruling is correct.

  • President 360 No Scope...

    Jump

  • IANAL, but there is the presidential power to pardon. So the president could in theory give an illegal order (as long as it is an official act they have immunity) and promise a presidential pardon once the order is fulfilled (therefore extending immunity to the perpetrator). Meaning the president can entirely circumvent the UCMJ.

  • People doing the 30 days linux Challenge are having several problems because of Mint's old packages and technology. Why people still recommend it when there is Fedora and Opensuse with KDE and Gnome?

    Jump

  • Linux users can’t even agree [...] so how am I supposed to pick one with any confidence?

    Easy. You make a post like the OP, count the positive mentions of distros in the comments, and bam, you have your distro of choice. It's called the Linux newbie roulette and works kind of like the magic hat in Harry Potter that sorts you into your house.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • It has already been removed again

    Jump

  • So, I think it’s pretty stupid to argue whether “convicted felon” should be in his opening lede line for Wikipedia.

    True though that may be, I don't think it's surprising that this would happen, and since making the post I have been falling down a rabbit hole of finding out how Wikipedia is handling situations like this, partly through taking more than a glancing look at the talk pages for the first time ever, and it's fascinating.

    Currently my deepest point of descent is this sub-thread on the Admin board about the "consensus" boxes on top of talk pages being an undocumented and unapproved feature.