...now if I/try/ or/attempt/ to kill you, that is another matter.
If I tell 3 people that I'm going to kill Bob, then I go get a shotgun, load it up, and march over to Bob's house, it would be pretty easy to say that I intended to kill Bob, and I would deserve to go to jail, even though going to Bob's house with a shotgun is not, in itself, necessarily illegal or wrong.
ID
The unique ID of my PGP key
Type
The crypto algorithm this key is used for
Length
How long the key is
Fingerprint
Kinda like a hash of the key itself
When you get my public key from the key servers (using the ID), you can check it against all these parameters to make sure the key you just got is actually my key.
Well I'm hardly an expert (I can deploy crypto, but I wouldn't be comfortable implementing it), but I do know enough about crypto to know that there's a lot of snake oil out there, and that it's easy to accidentally (or deliberately) leak bits.
Since I'm not an crypto expert (or an expert in reading disassembly) it's even more important to me that as many people as possible who do know what they are doing are able to look at the source without too much trouble.
I had a look at your website and I would strongly recommend that you get your mommy to hit you very, very hard with a Cluestick(tm) before you go to bed tonight!
I'm well aware that my website sucks.
For fuck's sake: A business card with a public key printed on it. If any sorry-assed geek handed me one of those I'd shove it up his nose.
It's to promote awareness of security issues. Besides, business people are amazed by 'cool tech stuff' they don't understand, and security people have a use for this information.
Who cares? I stopped taking PGP seriously when NAI decided to stop releasing source code and expected me to 'just trust them' instead. Any crypto company that does that obviously knows nothing about security.
Are you implying that it's impossible in the real world to keep some features as options, rather than executing large amounts of code for them on every run? If not, when whether or not I produce a competing product is irrelevent.
Except with IP, it's not actually your stuff. By your analogy, you sold someone a house, but left the doors locked and plan to have him/her charged criminally if he/she tries to get into the house.
Actually, it's a nice inventory control / autoconfiguration feature -- if properly marginalized by the OS (i.e. accessible only via a system call, with the result manglable by the OS), which I believe Linux does now.
As discussed in section 2.4.1, a relay SMTP has no need to inspect or
act upon the headers or body of the message data and MUST NOT do so
except to add its own "Received:" header (section 4.4) and,
optionally, to attempt to detect looping in the mail system (see
section 6.2).
IPP is designed to replace the various different printing protocols (NetBIOS, BSD lpr, and whatever Apple uses). It's not a pipe dream for creating a distributed printer.
I disagree. I think it would be better if the companies put all their effort into legislative efforts, rather than impossible technological ones.
Why? Every time some new copy-protection technique is implemented in a device, that device becomes more complex, and therefore more expensive. This expense alone hurts consumers. The other problem is that CP techniquess, by their impossible nature, cannot be made public and still remain secure, raising the barrier to entry into the market of player technology (see DeCSS and Linux DVD players), again hurting consumers. Copy-protection schemes are also unethical, since they discriminate against the law-abiding and less technically-skilled population. However, many people do not consider themselves technically competent enough to criticize highly successful technology companies such as Microsoft over technical issues, they simply accept CP technology with little objection.
However, many more people understand legal matters fairly well. For example, "I can use my stereo to record the songs from my favourite CDs onto a cassette so I can play them in my car, but the greedy record companies want to make that illegal so they can make me pay again for a casette of all the songs want to sell me? Screw that!"
So my point is that I think the legal campaign these companies will make will fail, especially as it becomes more and more obvious that it is nothing but blatent corruption and power-grabbing, but technical measures are narrowly understood and simply harm the industry without anyone noticing.
Re:Should I send this to my congressmen?
on
SSSCA Hearing
·
· Score: 2
Furthermore, "sendmail" is such a widespread product that E-Mail on the Internet would effectively end if all copies of "sendmail" were
simultaneously disabled
Actually, the internet would become much moresecure.:-)
Yep. Even the whole instant-messaging thing is just a big hack on the fact that most people can't run their own SMTP/talk servers (otherwise, ICQ could have been implemented using these standard protocols, rather than using their own proprietary, client/server model.
Slashdot Mirror
That is not intent. That is desire.
If I tell 3 people that I'm going to kill Bob, then I go get a shotgun, load it up, and march over to Bob's house, it would be pretty easy to say that I intended to kill Bob, and I would deserve to go to jail, even though going to Bob's house with a shotgun is not, in itself, necessarily illegal or wrong.
Would you like to explain what is wrong with this approach?
Sigh. The subscript of an array is the offset from its starting address.
When you get my public key from the key servers (using the ID), you can check it against all these parameters to make sure the key you just got is actually my key.
Well I'm hardly an expert (I can deploy crypto, but I wouldn't be comfortable implementing it), but I do know enough about crypto to know that there's a lot of snake oil out there, and that it's easy to accidentally (or deliberately) leak bits.
Since I'm not an crypto expert (or an expert in reading disassembly) it's even more important to me that as many people as possible who do know what they are doing are able to look at the source without too much trouble.
I had a look at your website and I would strongly recommend that you get your mommy to hit you very, very hard with a Cluestick(tm) before you go to bed tonight!
I'm well aware that my website sucks.
For fuck's sake: A business card with a public key printed on it. If any sorry-assed geek handed me one of those I'd shove it up his nose.
It's to promote awareness of security issues. Besides, business people are amazed by 'cool tech stuff' they don't understand, and security people have a use for this information.
Who cares? I stopped taking PGP seriously when NAI decided to stop releasing source code and expected me to 'just trust them' instead. Any crypto company that does that obviously knows nothing about security.
cast cannot open cast-dictionary file: /home/dwon/.glimpse_quick
(use -H to give a dictionary-dir or run 'buildcast' to make a dictionary)
It *does* seem to work better now, though. :)
I'm a Canadian. The fate of this case directly affects me. Why is my only option to just sit and watch?
Agreed. It's really too bad that the software industry hasn't been restricted this way.
I think a Palm uses much mroe energy than a clock, so you'd be shaking it every 15 minutes.
Are you implying that it's impossible in the real world to keep some features as options, rather than executing large amounts of code for them on every run? If not, when whether or not I produce a competing product is irrelevent.
If that's not all VS.NET is, would you please enlighten me?
That's no excuse. Good software has these features as options.
Capitalism is intended to model itself around people's behaviour, not vice versa.
90 USD for a crippled compiler and what is basically XEmacs is hardly cheap.
I recommend you learn a different interface. The Windows XP GUI is good for the eyes, but it's not really that efficient (usability-wise).
Except with IP, it's not actually your stuff. By your analogy, you sold someone a house, but left the doors locked and plan to have him/her charged criminally if he/she tries to get into the house.
This type of crap should bug you. It's your computer, so it should do what you, and only you, tell it to do.
Actually, it's a nice inventory control / autoconfiguration feature -- if properly marginalized by the OS (i.e. accessible only via a system call, with the result manglable by the OS), which I believe Linux does now.
Sigh. Only in the U.S. could information have rights. Besides, I thought it wanted to be free, anyway. :-)
... which is in direct violation of SMTP:
IPP is designed to replace the various different printing protocols (NetBIOS, BSD lpr, and whatever Apple uses). It's not a pipe dream for creating a distributed printer.
Why? Every time some new copy-protection technique is implemented in a device, that device becomes more complex, and therefore more expensive. This expense alone hurts consumers. The other problem is that CP techniquess, by their impossible nature, cannot be made public and still remain secure, raising the barrier to entry into the market of player technology (see DeCSS and Linux DVD players), again hurting consumers. Copy-protection schemes are also unethical, since they discriminate against the law-abiding and less technically-skilled population. However, many people do not consider themselves technically competent enough to criticize highly successful technology companies such as Microsoft over technical issues, they simply accept CP technology with little objection.
However, many more people understand legal matters fairly well. For example, "I can use my stereo to record the songs from my favourite CDs onto a cassette so I can play them in my car, but the greedy record companies want to make that illegal so they can make me pay again for a casette of all the songs want to sell me? Screw that!"
So my point is that I think the legal campaign these companies will make will fail, especially as it becomes more and more obvious that it is nothing but blatent corruption and power-grabbing, but technical measures are narrowly understood and simply harm the industry without anyone noticing.
Actually, the internet would become much more secure. :-)
Yep. Even the whole instant-messaging thing is just a big hack on the fact that most people can't run their own SMTP/talk servers (otherwise, ICQ could have been implemented using these standard protocols, rather than using their own proprietary, client/server model.