It doesn't seem like it's such a big deal to run SRTP on a phone and mix in some other crypto goodness. They (the NSA) presented the design in public in 2012.
A post victory Trump president would almost certainly be very different to the version we get to see pre-election. The same is true of Obama. I don't want a Trump president, but I fear him less than the religious nutters he's competing with. A Trump/Hillary race would present less risk to the country than a Sanders/Cruz race.
When I connect to wifi hotspots in things like Coffee shops, they intercept the web access and route the connection to their "accept our stupid legal thing you didn't read".
If I connect to a https web site, this doesn't work, because the redirected endpoint doesn't present the correct cert.
So I always start by connecting to Slashdot, because it's not https. Now I'm going to have to find a different non-https web site.
The murders aren't causing the guns. The arrow of causation can only go one way or be confounded by a third variable. We certainly might infer that the presence of guns causes more murders. Many people do. The data doesn't contradict it. Control experiments won't pass human subjects review though, so you'll have to make do with the data we have.
At this point, the intel agencies might have gotten everything useful out of the records they could, and thought it wise to publish the fact and see who scurries for cover.
Indeed. It's especially wonderful when you see them comparing countries by gun murder rate. No shit Britain has a gun murder rate that's like...5% of ours, but their plain old murder rate is a lot closer, what does THAT tell you?
UK murder rate per million: 11.68. USA 42.01. That's a 4X per capita difference. In numerical terms, the cost of the 4X higher murder rate in the USA costs many more lives. UK: 722, USA, 12,996. So we might infer that if the 4X difference in murder rate is due to the greater gun control in the UK, that same gun control in the US would yield 9747 fewer murder victims.
You might want to consider what your motivations are for making those lies.
What makes you think the intel svcs didn't get these first,
The wording of the article implied they received them recently, but going back a re-reading more carefully it looks like they chose their words carefully to give that impression but not say it. So I don't know.
and what makes you say Murdoch published all the details?
Sky News told the world. I didn't say they had published all the details.
Wishful thinking so you could see if your name was spelled correctly?
The link I found about this claims the information is years out of date.
The date of the documents suggested they may not provide information on the group's current membership, but could offer insight into fighters recruited in 2013 as well as its bureaucratic systems.
As I understand it ISIS is basically a different system now than it was in 2013. Still it should provide a huge number of places to investigate. Godspeed, FBI.
And Rupert Murdoch set about telling the world before letting anyone investigate in private before the hypothetical bad guys all run and hide.
That's the whole point! Untraceable, unaccountable, easily-hidden money. The cops can't find it on you by checking your pockets; the FBI can't find it by checking your bank account; and the individual block chains tend to flow in and out of exchanges with no association to who is putting them in or taking them out. Bitcoin exchanges are money laundering operations as a feature: bitcoins go into a consolidated fund, and the same number of bitcoins come back out of that consolidated fund; they're different block chains, so their block history is not traceable to any particular original owner.
It's like they just wrote the mission statement of Bitcoin and said "ILLEGAL!"
Avoiding the egregious charges of card processing companies is a legitimate and very appealing use. That's is why we accept risk in society. So we can have nice things, even though bad people don't stop being bad.
PCI as in the PCI in PCI-DSS and the associated companies responsible for plaintext magstripe credentials still being in use today.
Saying "We're EMVco and we're so awesome for developing chip & pin" while mag stripes are still accepted everywhere and the mostly pointless chip & signature is what is foisted on the public is pretty bloody disingenuous.
We have a business with a store and at no point have we been given the option of buying or using payment equipment that can only be placed in a secure configuration.
It is the classic security faux pas of securing the front door (and not very well) while leaving the back window open. No criminal needs to bother cracking chip&pin when they plaintext mag stripes are in broad use.
The PCI can is indeed awful, because (1) the actions it has people take have no effect on the underlaying insecurity of the payment card systems and (2) it comes with a 'pay us or we have the banks charge you more transaction fees' threat for this useless service . The payment card industry needs to fix its crappy, insecure payment cards first before accusing businesses, who have no control over the payment card industry that the cause of insecurity it their fault for not paying for a PCI scan.
Wild McEliece was broken as were several other variants. That's a reason to suspect McEliece won't survive very long
The most important problem to solve it key agreement protocols based on public key crypto to replace DH and RSA if quantum computers become practical. Hashes just need to increase their output size. So signing isn't a big problem and Merkel trees are thus fine.
However Lamport keys are around 128Kibits each, so a key pair is 256Kibits. So the key size is not reasonable.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm in the 98th percentile for neanderthal DNA. I feel qualified to comment, but I won't, I have to pluck my unibrow.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
It doesn't seem like it's such a big deal to run SRTP on a phone and mix in some other crypto goodness. They (the NSA) presented the design in public in 2012.
I'm shocked! Shocked!.
Oh wait. No I'm not. If playing with the seating plan is the worst corruption you can find, be glad of the honest and uncorrupt government you have.
not three years + one year of Congress ignoring their constitutional duties
You mean like in 2008? When Pelosi didn't bother doing anything until Obama was sworn in? What goes around comes around.
It seems perfectly logical to wait for the better president.
And it seems more logical to just do it now.
In 2016, yes, when the better president is still in power and has made an appointment that doesn't appear to be crazy.
Do you REALLY want Trump's children in supreme court?
Those things aren't children.
not three years + one year of Congress ignoring their constitutional duties
You mean like in 2008? When Pelosi didn't bother doing anything until Obama was sworn in? What goes around comes around.
It seems perfectly logical to wait for the better president.
The next president will probably get a shot at one or two nominations. So it's probably no great issue if Garland gets the job.
A post victory Trump president would almost certainly be very different to the version we get to see pre-election. The same is true of Obama.
I don't want a Trump president, but I fear him less than the religious nutters he's competing with.
A Trump/Hillary race would present less risk to the country than a Sanders/Cruz race.
asdgaf
It works great on my Apple IIe
I couldn't get it to correctly run the second half of the 800 submodules of systemd on my IPhone 6S plussity plus.
When I connect to wifi hotspots in things like Coffee shops, they intercept the web access and route the connection to their "accept our stupid legal thing you didn't read".
If I connect to a https web site, this doesn't work, because the redirected endpoint doesn't present the correct cert.
So I always start by connecting to Slashdot, because it's not https. Now I'm going to have to find a different non-https web site.
The murders aren't causing the guns. The arrow of causation can only go one way or be confounded by a third variable. We certainly might infer that the presence of guns causes more murders. Many people do. The data doesn't contradict it. Control experiments won't pass human subjects review though, so you'll have to make do with the data we have.
At this point, the intel agencies might have gotten everything useful out of the records they could, and thought it wise to publish the fact and see who scurries for cover.
I file this under "things I know I don't know".
I don't think so. Elliptic curves?
Best done in prime fields.
No one uses the Koblitz curves. That would be stupid. Oh wait ... Bitcoin.
I've lived in both places. I'll take being assaulted over being shot.
Indeed. It's especially wonderful when you see them comparing countries by gun murder rate. No shit Britain has a gun murder rate that's like...5% of ours, but their plain old murder rate is a lot closer, what does THAT tell you?
WTF are you smoking and can I have some?
http://www.nationmaster.com/co...
UK murder rate per million: 11.68. USA 42.01.
That's a 4X per capita difference. In numerical terms, the cost of the 4X higher murder rate in the USA costs many more lives. UK: 722, USA, 12,996.
So we might infer that if the 4X difference in murder rate is due to the greater gun control in the UK, that same gun control in the US would yield 9747 fewer murder victims.
You might want to consider what your motivations are for making those lies.
What makes you think the intel svcs didn't get these first,
The wording of the article implied they received them recently, but going back a re-reading more carefully it looks like they chose their words carefully to give that impression but not say it. So I don't know.
and what makes you say Murdoch published all the details?
Sky News told the world. I didn't say they had published all the details.
Wishful thinking so you could see if your name was spelled correctly?
Troll much A.C.?
The link I found about this claims the information is years out of date.
As I understand it ISIS is basically a different system now than it was in 2013. Still it should provide a huge number of places to investigate. Godspeed, FBI.
And Rupert Murdoch set about telling the world before letting anyone investigate in private before the hypothetical bad guys all run and hide.
That's the whole point! Untraceable, unaccountable, easily-hidden money. The cops can't find it on you by checking your pockets; the FBI can't find it by checking your bank account; and the individual block chains tend to flow in and out of exchanges with no association to who is putting them in or taking them out. Bitcoin exchanges are money laundering operations as a feature: bitcoins go into a consolidated fund, and the same number of bitcoins come back out of that consolidated fund; they're different block chains, so their block history is not traceable to any particular original owner.
It's like they just wrote the mission statement of Bitcoin and said "ILLEGAL!"
Avoiding the egregious charges of card processing companies is a legitimate and very appealing use. That's is why we accept risk in society. So we can have nice things, even though bad people don't stop being bad.
PCI as in the PCI in PCI-DSS and the associated companies responsible for plaintext magstripe credentials still being in use today.
Saying "We're EMVco and we're so awesome for developing chip & pin" while mag stripes are still accepted everywhere and the mostly pointless chip & signature is what is foisted on the public is pretty bloody disingenuous.
We have a business with a store and at no point have we been given the option of buying or using payment equipment that can only be placed in a secure configuration.
It is the classic security faux pas of securing the front door (and not very well) while leaving the back window open. No criminal needs to bother cracking chip&pin when they plaintext mag stripes are in broad use.
Try implementing these things in power efficient hardware. Huge keys suck both from an efficiency point of view and a side channel point of view.
...do you not know what an exam is?
Of course I do. UK school exams, O level exams, A Level exams, university exams.
You do realise that the question asked what an exam is, not what an exam was? The UK 'O' level hasn't been a thing for a quarter of a century
Yup. I haven't done O levels in the last quarter century. Do you think the basic idea has changed since then? I don't.
The PCI can is indeed awful, because (1) the actions it has people take have no effect on the underlaying insecurity of the payment card systems and (2) it comes with a 'pay us or we have the banks charge you more transaction fees' threat for this useless service . The payment card industry needs to fix its crappy, insecure payment cards first before accusing businesses, who have no control over the payment card industry that the cause of insecurity it their fault for not paying for a PCI scan.
...do you not know what an exam is?
Of course I do. UK school exams, O level exams, A Level exams, university exams.
But testing for memorization is stupid, since in any normal job, you are free to consult references and use computers to do your job more efficiently.
Wild McEliece was broken as were several other variants. That's a reason to suspect McEliece won't survive very long
The most important problem to solve it key agreement protocols based on public key crypto to replace DH and RSA if quantum computers become practical. Hashes just need to increase their output size. So signing isn't a big problem and Merkel trees are thus fine.
However Lamport keys are around 128Kibits each, so a key pair is 256Kibits. So the key size is not reasonable.