It also means that you're allowing an outside source, which is extremely easy to manipulate (a van parked outside your house with a transmitter) to create your random.
Sweeping statement - not necessarily. Pre-shared keys and all that. It is possible to make good crypto systems without using random. Sorry to be autistic about it.
'Cross platform' and 'manage memory usage and disk access at a very granular level' do not readily go together. And not in Java either. Abstract your 'granular access' away in a C (I said 'C', not 'C++') library of your own. Use a lot of #ifdefs. On top of that, build in whatever you want.
"just make your troops leave their personal devices at home."
The impression I get is that it is exactly this that all armed forces all over the world are struggling with. A lot. Apparently, you can order a youngster these days to do a lot. But not that they leave their phone at home. Also, bear in mind that when soldiers get to take their own phones, then armies don't have to buy expensive welfare network capabilities.
According to Russia, the West helped stage an undemocratic coup there. And although there have been democratic elections since, this still has a ring of truth to it.
Most of the recently proposed crypto algorithms aren't American. The cat is out of the bag - crypto is an academic subject now, and everyone's participating.
Every single source address that a listener outside your network can find. That's how many machines you have. At least. You couldn't find that information from a NATted network.
Fine. Once a week, you get to hold your breath, go through the airlock, and stand on the surface of the planet - naked - for five minutes. That should solve your vitamin D problem.
Per-connection MTU's are a pain. You shouldn't be making that point if you think that routers having a PNAT table is a hack - having state is awful. And IPv6 has other flaws too: some headers fields are unprotected from bit-errors in transit. There is no specification as to how many extension headers I'm allowed to use. Higher layer fragments are completely unrecognisable to stateless concentrators (more so than in IPv4). UDP- and TCP-checksums are not allowed to be all zeroes (which was neat when you provided a better checksum yourself over, you know, fragments, which got ripped out).
No there's plenty rotten in the state of IPv6. And it's not just because 'interests' ripped things out.
No, we certainly are not all targets of nation states. But there are more potential targets of nation states than that currently actually have proper IT security measures in place. I'm talking about you, waterworks / electricalworks / etc. To say you can 'predict' an attack is to say that you can 'predict' Putin's next move. You can only anticipate statistically. And how do you do that? By using security products to fill in a security plan.
? It's quite common to perform a hash in a loop, if only to make checking algorithms slower. But also to prevent rainbow-tabeling. I don't think that the bankruptcy of your former company had anything to do with their password treatment policies...
The cat is out of the bag. Crypto and its application is an academic subject now, with plenty of companies and open-source projects using the fruit of the work. That is to say, for another ten-fifteen years or so. Then, quantum will start taking it all apart. The amateurs will not have the resources to follow there.
Slashdot Mirror
Lucky for us, Diffie-Helmann requires a random sources on each side. If your RNG is broken and your counter-party's isn't, you're still good.
It also means that you're allowing an outside source, which is extremely easy to manipulate (a van parked outside your house with a transmitter) to create your random.
Sweeping statement - not necessarily. Pre-shared keys and all that. It is possible to make good crypto systems without using random. Sorry to be autistic about it.
To find out where the NSA put the twist.
'Cross platform' and 'manage memory usage and disk access at a very granular level' do not readily go together. And not in Java either. Abstract your 'granular access' away in a C (I said 'C', not 'C++') library of your own. Use a lot of #ifdefs. On top of that, build in whatever you want.
Oh god. Don't *do* that. The nightmares - they keep on coming back!
"just make your troops leave their personal devices at home."
The impression I get is that it is exactly this that all armed forces all over the world are struggling with. A lot. Apparently, you can order a youngster these days to do a lot. But not that they leave their phone at home. Also, bear in mind that when soldiers get to take their own phones, then armies don't have to buy expensive welfare network capabilities.
According to Russia, the West helped stage an undemocratic coup there. And although there have been democratic elections since, this still has a ring of truth to it.
The F117 was taken down with a SAM. Someone had discovered its radar signature when it opened its bomb bay door.
A new language without support for regex literals is worthless to even consider.
Most of the recently proposed crypto algorithms aren't American. The cat is out of the bag - crypto is an academic subject now, and everyone's participating.
Every single source address that a listener outside your network can find. That's how many machines you have. At least. You couldn't find that information from a NATted network.
None. But it would be weird if you didn't.
Of the latest buzzword bingo - what are 'cord cutters'?
Fine. Once a week, you get to hold your breath, go through the airlock, and stand on the surface of the planet - naked - for five minutes. That should solve your vitamin D problem.
You're at sea. Doesn't sticking the whole thing under water help?
Bollocks. In China maybe. Not in the Western world. And even here, most addicts were, as usual, alcohol addicts.
"Nobody uses C or C++ because they love the language."
I take issue with that. I absolutely love C. I also abhor any movement to 'prettify' algol-like languages (python, java), which I consider useless.
People who say 'C/C++' are likely to know neither language.
Per-connection MTU's are a pain. You shouldn't be making that point if you think that routers having a PNAT table is a hack - having state is awful. And IPv6 has other flaws too: some headers fields are unprotected from bit-errors in transit. There is no specification as to how many extension headers I'm allowed to use. Higher layer fragments are completely unrecognisable to stateless concentrators (more so than in IPv4). UDP- and TCP-checksums are not allowed to be all zeroes (which was neat when you provided a better checksum yourself over, you know, fragments, which got ripped out).
No there's plenty rotten in the state of IPv6. And it's not just because 'interests' ripped things out.
No, we certainly are not all targets of nation states. But there are more potential targets of nation states than that currently actually have proper IT security measures in place. I'm talking about you, waterworks / electricalworks / etc. To say you can 'predict' an attack is to say that you can 'predict' Putin's next move. You can only anticipate statistically. And how do you do that? By using security products to fill in a security plan.
What is that Assange guy doing?
? It's quite common to perform a hash in a loop, if only to make checking algorithms slower. But also to prevent rainbow-tabeling. I don't think that the bankruptcy of your former company had anything to do with their password treatment policies...
WFTAmIReading.jpg.
The cat is out of the bag. Crypto and its application is an academic subject now, with plenty of companies and open-source projects using the fruit of the work. That is to say, for another ten-fifteen years or so. Then, quantum will start taking it all apart. The amateurs will not have the resources to follow there.