Re: [Tails-dev] [RFC] Design (and prototype) for MAC spoofin…

このメッセージを削除

このメッセージに返信
著者: anonym
日付:  
To: The Tails public development discussion list
題目: Re: [Tails-dev] [RFC] Design (and prototype) for MAC spoofing in Tails
24/10/13 16:55, anonym wrote:
> 23/10/13 13:49, sajolida@??? wrote:
>> On 09/10/13 18:32, anonym wrote:
>>> # User interface design

[...]
>> I tried to improve on your proposal and here is what I came up with. All
>> in all it's 48 words instead of 32:
>>
>>     Spoof all MAC addresses
>>     =======================

>>
>>     This option hides the serial number of your network cards to the
>>     local networks. This can help you hide your geographical location.

>>
>>     It is generally safer to spoof MAC addresses, but it might also
>>     raise suspicion or cause network connection problems.
>>     See the documentation.

>>
>>     Spoof all MAC addresses:    (x) Yes                ( ) No

>
> This wording is *much* better, thank you!


I pushed this wording into Tails Greeter branch feature/spoof-mac,
commit e080180.

On a related note, can we some how make the labels expand more? We
currently set "width_chars" to 72, but it'd be ideal if the labels
expanded to the dialog edge and then wrapped (removing the "width_chars"
just makes it worse). The current fixed wrapping makes the the first
paragraph wrap really badly into three lines, but it should definitely
fit in two. The same applies to the administration password help. I
really suck at especially this part of Gtk, so if I were to tackle this
I'd just randomly add packing options and hope for the best. :) If any
one has a better clue about this, do you care to take a look?

> In the docs, we should make really clear what we mean with "hide your
> geographical location", i.e. that it has nothing to do with your
> torified traffic. I imagine the following misunderstanding: disabling
> this option (to *not* hide the location) makes end-points in torified
> communications know your geographical location.


Actually the "to the local networks" part maybe makes this a bit
clearer, but I nonetheless think we should clarify it further in the
documentation.

Cheers!