Différences

Ci-dessous, les différences entre deux révisions de la page.

--- tech:privacy_and_security_online [2024/10/05] – Mathieu
+++ tech:privacy_and_security_online [2024/10/05] (Version actuelle) – [Backing Up and Managing Personal Data] Mathieu
@@ Ligne 6: / Ligne 6: @@
 <WRAP center round help 60%>
-Vous trouverez une version franćaise de cette page [[tech:vie_privee_et_securite|ici]]
+Une version française de cette page [[tech:vie_privee_et_securite|se trouve ici]]
 </WRAP>
@@ Ligne 91: / Ligne 91: @@
 ==== TOR network ====
 <wrap danger>zone 3</wrap>
@@ Ligne 97: / Ligne 98: @@
 </WRAP>
-[[https://www.torproject.org/|TOR]], also known as the //onion network//, routes your internet traffic through several servers (or "nodes") before it reaches its final destination. This makes it much more difficult, if not practically impossible, for anyone to identify the source of the traffic. You may have heard of it in the context of the //dark web//, for which TOR is one of the main protocols. The term is clearly intended to demonize anonymous and secure internet usage, but the phenomenon it describes—parts of the internet inaccessible to both private and state surveillance—does indeed exist. {{:tech:tor-logo-2011-flat.svg.png?nolink&200|}}
+[[https://www.torproject.org/|TOR]], also known as the //onion network//, routes your internet traffic through several servers (or "nodes") before it reaches its final destination. This makes it much more difficult, if not practically impossible, for anyone to identify the source of the traffic. You may have heard of it in the context of the //dark web//, for which TOR is one of the main protocols. The term is clearly intended to demonize anonymous and secure internet usage, but the phenomenon it describes—parts of the internet inaccessible to both private and state surveillance—does indeed exist.
+{{ :tech:tor-logo-2011-flat.svg.png?nolink&200|}}
 **This solution is by far the most secure and anonymous for connecting to the internet**. However, it comes with significant constraints:
@@ Ligne 125: / Ligne 128: @@
 If you're looking for an easy replacement for Chrome, Edge, or Safari without worrying about configuration, it's probably the best solution.
-However, there are reasons you might not want to choose Brave, starting with its integration of a cryptocurrency system((which can easily be disabled)). Some users prefer to avoid Chromium-based solutions, so as not to contribute to the near-monopoly of WebKit((the underlying web rendering engine)) on the web, much like the days of Internet Explorer.
+However, there are reasons you might not want to choose Brave, starting with its integration of a cryptocurrency system((which can easily be disabled)). Some users prefer to avoid Chromium-based solutions, so as not to contribute to the near-monopoly of Blink((the underlying web rendering engine)) on the web, much like the days of Internet Explorer.
 ===== Firefox =====
@@ Ligne 133: / Ligne 136: @@
 {{ :tech:firefox_logo_2019.png?nolink&100|}}
-Firefox also has the advantage of promoting web diversity and interoperability, as it is based on a different engine than Chromium/WebKit.
+Firefox also has the advantage of promoting web diversity and interoperability, as it is based on a different engine than Chromium/Blink.
 Its default configuration is insufficient (from an ASP perspective). Here are [[tech:ffconf|some configuration tips]] to optimize your situation, along with a few useful extensions for this purpose.
@@ Ligne 274: / Ligne 277: @@
   * Making backups on **physical media**, such as external hard drives or USB keys. This is a viable approach, but it becomes quite complex when considering the need for regular backups, stored off-site to protect against risks like theft or fire. **This approach requires a lot of discipline and regular rotation of media**, making it a fragile and difficult strategy to implement.
-  * Using an online service, such as those mentioned above, but **encrypting your data** before uploading it to the service. This is a perfectly viable approach, though somewhat complex. You won’t be able to rely on the built-in sync features of mainstream services, and you’ll lose access to features that require unencrypted files (such as sharing or online editing). If you choose this route, it's better to use a "bucket" service like AWS, which will cost less and be better suited for this use case. I personally use [[https://www.backblaze.com/b2/cloud-storage.html|Backblaze B2]], {{:tech:nextcloud_logo.svg.png?nolink&200|}}.
+  * Using an online service, such as those mentioned above, but **encrypting your data** before uploading it to the service. This is a perfectly viable approach, though somewhat complex. You won’t be able to rely on the built-in sync features of mainstream services, and you’ll lose access to features that require unencrypted files (such as sharing or online editing). If you choose this route, it's better to use a "bucket" service like AWS, which will cost less and be better suited for this use case. I personally use [[https://www.backblaze.com/b2/cloud-storage.html|Backblaze B2]],
+{{ :tech:nextcloud_logo.svg.png?nolink&200 |}}.
   * <wrap danger>zone 3</wrap> Self-hosting your own data storage, synchronization, sharing, and editing service, using a tool like [[https://nextcloud.com|NextCloud]]. This solution is by far the most complex, but it's also the one that gives you the best of both worlds: complete control over your data security, along with sharing and editing features. However, this route is **far more technically demanding** than the previous two.