Imbue

4 ms·

1.
by Imbue 14y ago
My question was why is a proper MAC better than appending a checksum to the plain text and then encrypting. With an appended and encrypted checksum, the system could easily reject corrupted messages, that's the whole point of a checksum in
2.
by Imbue 14y ago
But if someone chooses a ciphertext (without knowing the key), how could they get the checksum right (which is also encrypted)? If the checksum was wrong, the system would refuse to decrypt the corrupted message.
3.
by Imbue 14y ago
Why is a proper MAC preferred over simply encrypting the plaintext after appending a checksum or hash.
4.
by Imbue 14y ago
His reasoning is actually quite flawed. Even if you believe there is somehow a black and white $7.7 trillion value difference between candidates, betting on such long odds still isn't rational. If we assume (using numbers from the article)
5.
by Imbue 16y ago
Not sure if I am understanding this correctly. By bootstrapping, do you mean C does only the most basic syntax parsing, and then a fexl script (written in a basic fexl subset) does the more complete parsing? All this stuff is really neat. Y
6.
by Imbue 16y ago
It sounds like you're having a lot of fun with it. I think a C implementation would be better anyway. C is the common denominator between almost every language. Have you already done the foreign function interface to C? When do you think we
7.
by Imbue 16y ago
I'm not trying to rush you or anything. Just want to let you know that at least one person is still looking forward to seeing it.
8.
by Imbue 16y ago
Great! I'll be looking forward to it. I kind of have a thing for small languages.
9.
by Imbue 16y ago
This is probably a stupid question. If you have Fexl written in Perl now, what are the chances of just throwing a sand-boxed interpreter online for people to play with? I'm thinking just a form with an input field and a submit button which
10.
by Imbue 16y ago
Is Fexl open-source, or even available for download? It looks pretty neat.