According to the cryptography textbook I use and the article, this was made public in 1997.
He is also mentioned in the textbook when detailing the development the RSA-algorithm,
so I wouldn't say he's been written out of history.
Introduction to Cryptography with Coding theory 2nd edition by Wade Trappe, Lawrence Washington
Although not my iPhone, I once lost a Sony Ericson P900 down 4 stories on to a concrete floor. The battery, sim-card and rear cover ended up in different ends of the bottom of the stairs, but by simply reassembling it, it worked just as fine as always.
If a security system uses modern cryptographic methods that are considered secure, there should be little difference if the method is known (as it would be in open source) or not. This is because one of the criteria for a secure cryptographic system is that they are secure even when an attacker knows the system used, and has information to mount a known plain-text attack.
Of course this works best in theory, and in a real life application it might not be that simple.
But at least in cryptography the justification that "our method of security is unknown to attackers" is considered weak.
There can not be a history in WoW because nothing ever changes. Sure, there are occasionally 1-time events. The opening of AQ 40, or the Scourge invasion, but honestly, these 1 time events aren't a history, they are just a 1-time thing that you either got to see or didn't. For the vast majority of players, there is no imapact they can have on the world at all. They've killed hundreds of thousands of radiated gnomes, but Gnomerangan will always be inhabited by more of them. They've slaughtered Illidan over and over and over, yet he'll pop right back up again after the next weekly reset.
I would say that the history of wow could be greatly improved if blizzard had implemented a feature in Caverns of Time (existing time travel in the game) to take the character to a future version of the game world based on completed quests. This way the players could see some real in game rewards other than the level and gear of their characters. In my opinion this would give the game a better sense of accomplishment for the casual gamers.
Banks seem to think a system is secure enough as long as
the number of cases where customers are exploited, are few
enough. This way the bank can repay the customers with little
arguing, and prevent these stories from reaching the media.
In Norway there is a story that has been running in the
media where a Professor at the University of Bergen and
a group of students have shown that the system used by
Norwegian banks to offer Banking services on the internet
have flaws that can be exploited. The banks take the same route
and try to claim that the system is secure and have their PR
people find technical terms like calling it a theoretical attack.
(Actually the attack is far from theoretical).
The interesting part is how the banks just keep trying to
convince the media and people in general instead of sitting
down with the researchers at the University and try to
find a solution.
After the first case in the media, the banks worked to fix the security
holes, but the researchers didn't even need a day to find a way
around the new protections.
Since this system is considered for a national authentication standard
the appropriate minister in the Norwegian government is involved,
and is siding with the professor and not the banks.
How about designing a new bot-net to attack storm in kind of the same way as SETI@HOME where you could donate your computers idle time to fight the storm bot-net. If enough people contributed, then maybe even storm could be overpowered.
Slashdot Mirror
According to the cryptography textbook I use and the article, this was made public in 1997. He is also mentioned in the textbook when detailing the development the RSA-algorithm, so I wouldn't say he's been written out of history. Introduction to Cryptography with Coding theory 2nd edition by Wade Trappe, Lawrence Washington
I don't really like iris scanners, as they give criminals who need my identity a reason to remove my eyes. I like my eyes where they are thanks.
Is it April first already? Sounds like someone got their date wrong.
Although not my iPhone, I once lost a Sony Ericson P900 down 4 stories on to a concrete floor. The battery, sim-card and rear cover ended up in different ends of the bottom of the stairs, but by simply reassembling it, it worked just as fine as always.
If a security system uses modern cryptographic methods that are considered secure, there should be little difference if the method is known (as it would be in open source) or not. This is because one of the criteria for a secure cryptographic system is that they are secure even when an attacker knows the system used, and has information to mount a known plain-text attack. Of course this works best in theory, and in a real life application it might not be that simple. But at least in cryptography the justification that "our method of security is unknown to attackers" is considered weak.
There can not be a history in WoW because nothing ever changes. Sure, there are occasionally 1-time events. The opening of AQ 40, or the Scourge invasion, but honestly, these 1 time events aren't a history, they are just a 1-time thing that you either got to see or didn't. For the vast majority of players, there is no imapact they can have on the world at all. They've killed hundreds of thousands of radiated gnomes, but Gnomerangan will always be inhabited by more of them. They've slaughtered Illidan over and over and over, yet he'll pop right back up again after the next weekly reset.
I would say that the history of wow could be greatly improved if blizzard had implemented a feature in Caverns of Time (existing time travel in the game) to take the character to a future version of the game world based on completed quests. This way the players could see some real in game rewards other than the level and gear of their characters. In my opinion this would give the game a better sense of accomplishment for the casual gamers.
Banks seem to think a system is secure enough as long as the number of cases where customers are exploited, are few enough. This way the bank can repay the customers with little arguing, and prevent these stories from reaching the media. In Norway there is a story that has been running in the media where a Professor at the University of Bergen and a group of students have shown that the system used by Norwegian banks to offer Banking services on the internet have flaws that can be exploited. The banks take the same route and try to claim that the system is secure and have their PR people find technical terms like calling it a theoretical attack. (Actually the attack is far from theoretical). The interesting part is how the banks just keep trying to convince the media and people in general instead of sitting down with the researchers at the University and try to find a solution. After the first case in the media, the banks worked to fix the security holes, but the researchers didn't even need a day to find a way around the new protections. Since this system is considered for a national authentication standard the appropriate minister in the Norwegian government is involved, and is siding with the professor and not the banks.
How about designing a new bot-net to attack storm
in kind of the same way as SETI@HOME where you could donate your
computers idle time to fight the storm bot-net.
If enough people contributed, then maybe even storm could be
overpowered.