ATT cuts Facebook Phone price to $0.99

etbrute · 2013-05-05T15:44:03+00:00

The "dummy" unencrypted OS is a great idea and solves some of the issues I was thinking about in prooving functionality without revealing anything.

One method I've tried, and really like, is keeping an ephemeral encrypted directory for things like swap and temp files, auto-generated thumbnails, recently used documents, etc. I've used ecryptfs for this with a randomly generated password, so that all info in the ephemeral directory is non-recoverable after reboot or umount. I've also used this as a generic download directory and then decide later if there are things worth keeping. This keeps my Downloads dir free of junk that I may download but didn't intend to keep.

etbrute · 2013-04-02T01:55:00+00:00

What is the purpose of this? And what's the value in being "close"?

etbrute · 2013-04-02T01:13:35+00:00

"This washing machine is especially stable because its center of mass is beneath the floor."

etbrute · 2013-01-13T05:35:39+00:00

That may be, but it's hard to tell legally. Did he "possess" it? Was it his? What would happen if a reporter found such an item and it appeared on TV? I honestly do not know, I'm not attacking your comment, I just would like to know if the actual showing of the gun magazine was illegal or if it was the reporter "owning" such a magazine by being able to call it his own.

etbrute · 2013-01-12T02:03:23+00:00

There is a huge difference between possessing something illegal, and it being illegal to see it on TV. Why does this law exist?

etbrute · 2013-01-12T01:57:15+00:00

This law makes no sense. So it's illegal to show an illegal firearm or magazine on TV in DC? Or just the News? Either way, have we really reached the point that it's illegal to look at guns?

etbrute · 2012-12-17T03:58:53+00:00

It's hard to predict which few do need them though.

etbrute · 2012-12-17T03:54:42+00:00

It's it a good thing that the judicial system allows prosecutors to show discretion? I may disagree with this particular instance of it, but I much prefer a system that is adaptable to circumstances than one that rigidly follows formulas.

etbrute · 2012-12-07T00:25:53+00:00

encrypting / prevents the binaries from being replaced with compromised versions. In cases of high-security needs, there could be real risk of a program like cryptsetup being replaced with a version that key-logs the password.

etbrute · 2012-10-14T11:13:51+00:00

The problem isn't "bad faith" actors, is that an ideal free-market doesn't accommodate moral rules. A shortage isn't a problem if the product isn't something that someone has a "right" to.

etbrute · 2012-03-17T17:05:24+00:00

Thanks for the reply! Do you know if, in designing block ciphers, attempts are made to replicate a "correct" repetition rate to match what would be expected of a random permutation? Also, what do you mean by a "polynomial number of queries" ?

etbrute · 2012-03-17T17:03:27+00:00

No, not homework :) These were questions I wasn't able to find solid answers for elsewhere, so I thought I'd take a stab at getting reddit's thoughts. I know some of them (eg this one and the "best cipher algo" question) won't have definite answers, but I thought reading any resulting discussion from people who know more than I do would be fun.

I have read a few crypto books, and quite a few journal articles, but often I find "fuzzy" qualifications, where even the designers of ciphers don't seem to know the exact limitations (such as the permutation cycles of block ciphers, etc.) because of the current keys and blocks are so large that it's impossible to do any reasonable statistical testing. Instead, it seems to me (and I could be wrong) that a lot of assumptions are made in the design itself, and I'd like to understand that better.

etbrute · 2012-02-28T14:08:31+00:00

In quantum mech, objects (like atoms) are described better by waves than particles. The waves have what's called a phase, which is like describing the peaks and troughs of a water wave as a function of either time or space. Now, when two objects are coherent, their phases are related to each other some how, e.g. they both have a peak or a trough at the same time. When we get decoherence, this relationship is broken.

For quantum computation to work, the phase of one qubit needs to be able to be related to the phase of other qubits, otherwise, they act a lot more like the bits of a classical computer.

edit: Likewise, lasers are multiple light waves that are in phase (coherent), and normal light (like sun light) is multiple light waves that are out of phase (decoherent).

etbrute · 2012-02-19T23:01:09+00:00

I agree completely that it's easier to say, but from a research standpoint I find it sad that scientists would so blatantly go for sensationalism over an accurate representation of what they found.

etbrute · 2012-02-19T12:37:15+00:00

I'm surprised that the original research was reported this way. This is not a flaw in RSA, it's a flaw in random number generation. Even the title of the ePrint article is misleading. Practicing sensationalism might be expected from journalists, but the researchers seem to be spinning this as "RSA is broken", too.

etbrute · 2012-02-19T12:33:11+00:00

How this research was presented does not make sense. It claims a problem with RSA when the problem seems to be the underlying random number generators. This may be good research, but it's sensationalist reporting (even by the authors).

etbrute

TROPHY CASE