👻
@0x0.stonking.com
Security. People matter most. Get off X, fool.
stonking.com/waitlist 👀 Signal: Zero.999
stonking.com/waitlist 👀 Signal: Zero.999
Reposted by 👻
It's better to keep it secret, dynamic, easily changed, and not let a person know in advance that something like this is in place.
February 13, 2026 at 6:25 PM
It's better to keep it secret, dynamic, easily changed, and not let a person know in advance that something like this is in place.
It's better to keep it secret, dynamic, easily changed, and not let a person know in advance that something like this is in place.
February 13, 2026 at 6:25 PM
It's better to keep it secret, dynamic, easily changed, and not let a person know in advance that something like this is in place.
Reposted by 👻
That's very flawed.
Trusted contacts can become untrusted in a heartbeat, and they can easily exploit that system.
Trusted contacts can become untrusted in a heartbeat, and they can easily exploit that system.
February 13, 2026 at 6:21 PM
That's very flawed.
Trusted contacts can become untrusted in a heartbeat, and they can easily exploit that system.
Trusted contacts can become untrusted in a heartbeat, and they can easily exploit that system.
Reposted by 👻
Bitwarden has a thing called emergency access. You set it up in advance with a trusted contact. If you die, the contact can request access, and has to wait a predetermined number of days (say 14). If you don't respond in that time they can access your vault.
February 13, 2026 at 6:19 PM
Bitwarden has a thing called emergency access. You set it up in advance with a trusted contact. If you die, the contact can request access, and has to wait a predetermined number of days (say 14). If you don't respond in that time they can access your vault.
That's very flawed.
Trusted contacts can become untrusted in a heartbeat, and they can easily exploit that system.
Trusted contacts can become untrusted in a heartbeat, and they can easily exploit that system.
February 13, 2026 at 6:21 PM
That's very flawed.
Trusted contacts can become untrusted in a heartbeat, and they can easily exploit that system.
Trusted contacts can become untrusted in a heartbeat, and they can easily exploit that system.
Reposted by 👻
The issue there is that even people we trust may not be competent enough, and may become compromised themselves.
There has to be "great certainty" around their opsec.
Same for when using Signal, and other secure messaging.
If the person you're messaging has shit opsec the, yeah... not good.
There has to be "great certainty" around their opsec.
Same for when using Signal, and other secure messaging.
If the person you're messaging has shit opsec the, yeah... not good.
February 13, 2026 at 6:17 PM
The issue there is that even people we trust may not be competent enough, and may become compromised themselves.
There has to be "great certainty" around their opsec.
Same for when using Signal, and other secure messaging.
If the person you're messaging has shit opsec the, yeah... not good.
There has to be "great certainty" around their opsec.
Same for when using Signal, and other secure messaging.
If the person you're messaging has shit opsec the, yeah... not good.
Reposted by 👻
I have the perfect friend/former IT colleague for the job but unfortunately he’s got a whole ass family now and I don’t want to put it on his plate. I need to nominate a younger pal for this 👀 orgs go under and shift priorities and competencies
February 13, 2026 at 6:13 PM
I have the perfect friend/former IT colleague for the job but unfortunately he’s got a whole ass family now and I don’t want to put it on his plate. I need to nominate a younger pal for this 👀 orgs go under and shift priorities and competencies
The issue there is that even people we trust may not be competent enough, and may become compromised themselves.
There has to be "great certainty" around their opsec.
Same for when using Signal, and other secure messaging.
If the person you're messaging has shit opsec the, yeah... not good.
There has to be "great certainty" around their opsec.
Same for when using Signal, and other secure messaging.
If the person you're messaging has shit opsec the, yeah... not good.
February 13, 2026 at 6:17 PM
The issue there is that even people we trust may not be competent enough, and may become compromised themselves.
There has to be "great certainty" around their opsec.
Same for when using Signal, and other secure messaging.
If the person you're messaging has shit opsec the, yeah... not good.
There has to be "great certainty" around their opsec.
Same for when using Signal, and other secure messaging.
If the person you're messaging has shit opsec the, yeah... not good.
Reposted by 👻
Yeah, I don't trust lawyers enough, so a "will" doesn't cut it, needs to be handled by a very digitally competent org.
February 13, 2026 at 6:11 PM
Yeah, I don't trust lawyers enough, so a "will" doesn't cut it, needs to be handled by a very digitally competent org.
Yeah, I don't trust lawyers enough, so a "will" doesn't cut it, needs to be handled by a very digitally competent org.
February 13, 2026 at 6:11 PM
Yeah, I don't trust lawyers enough, so a "will" doesn't cut it, needs to be handled by a very digitally competent org.
Reposted by 👻
Lots of ways to do a dead man's switch and that's one of them, I suppose the proper way to do it is to have several switches, linked to urgency / time (no pun intended) sensitivity and value.
February 13, 2026 at 6:05 PM
Lots of ways to do a dead man's switch and that's one of them, I suppose the proper way to do it is to have several switches, linked to urgency / time (no pun intended) sensitivity and value.
Reposted by 👻
I saw someone on here with a task that deleted their browser history when their apple watch registered a 0 bpm heart rate for 20 mins
February 13, 2026 at 6:01 PM
I saw someone on here with a task that deleted their browser history when their apple watch registered a 0 bpm heart rate for 20 mins
Lots of ways to do a dead man's switch and that's one of them, I suppose the proper way to do it is to have several switches, linked to urgency / time (no pun intended) sensitivity and value.
February 13, 2026 at 6:05 PM
Lots of ways to do a dead man's switch and that's one of them, I suppose the proper way to do it is to have several switches, linked to urgency / time (no pun intended) sensitivity and value.
Reposted by 👻
"All is fair in love and war"
...and then, love became war.
...and then, love became war.
February 13, 2026 at 6:00 PM
"All is fair in love and war"
...and then, love became war.
...and then, love became war.
Reposted by 👻
"Baby, we've been dating for six months. Do you trust me?"
"Of course I do."
"Well, you can do this thing with your passwords."
"Ok. Who needs end-to-end AES-256 bit encryption,
salted hashing, and
PBKDF2 SHA-256 authentication process when I have youuuuu 🥰😍"
[sound of my head exploding]
"Of course I do."
"Well, you can do this thing with your passwords."
"Ok. Who needs end-to-end AES-256 bit encryption,
salted hashing, and
PBKDF2 SHA-256 authentication process when I have youuuuu 🥰😍"
[sound of my head exploding]
February 13, 2026 at 5:45 PM
"Baby, we've been dating for six months. Do you trust me?"
"Of course I do."
"Well, you can do this thing with your passwords."
"Ok. Who needs end-to-end AES-256 bit encryption,
salted hashing, and
PBKDF2 SHA-256 authentication process when I have youuuuu 🥰😍"
[sound of my head exploding]
"Of course I do."
"Well, you can do this thing with your passwords."
"Ok. Who needs end-to-end AES-256 bit encryption,
salted hashing, and
PBKDF2 SHA-256 authentication process when I have youuuuu 🥰😍"
[sound of my head exploding]
"All is fair in love and war"
...and then, love became war.
...and then, love became war.
February 13, 2026 at 6:00 PM
"All is fair in love and war"
...and then, love became war.
...and then, love became war.
No, it isn't
That doesn't solve the technical issues, nor the trust issues of having third parties hold keys and instructions.
I've seen a lot of incompetence in lawyers, and I'm not gonna be trusting them to handle digital keys.
That doesn't solve the technical issues, nor the trust issues of having third parties hold keys and instructions.
I've seen a lot of incompetence in lawyers, and I'm not gonna be trusting them to handle digital keys.
February 13, 2026 at 5:57 PM
No, it isn't
That doesn't solve the technical issues, nor the trust issues of having third parties hold keys and instructions.
I've seen a lot of incompetence in lawyers, and I'm not gonna be trusting them to handle digital keys.
That doesn't solve the technical issues, nor the trust issues of having third parties hold keys and instructions.
I've seen a lot of incompetence in lawyers, and I'm not gonna be trusting them to handle digital keys.
Yeah, I agree, probably completely unrelated, but a few other people mentioned about a drop in engagement as well.
Could be anything really, idk
Could be anything really, idk
February 13, 2026 at 5:49 PM
Yeah, I agree, probably completely unrelated, but a few other people mentioned about a drop in engagement as well.
Could be anything really, idk
Could be anything really, idk
Tie it to a dead man's switch, send keys and instructions when triggered, done.
February 13, 2026 at 5:46 PM
Tie it to a dead man's switch, send keys and instructions when triggered, done.
They should make a "When I die" vault.
February 13, 2026 at 5:40 PM
They should make a "When I die" vault.