gjurhgd

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by gjurhgd 8mo ago

   I'm not going back and forth with you if you're not going to discuss the thrust of our disagreement. I am not wading into this minutia with you. I see the game you are playing to evade the subject I am trying to discuss; I'm
2. 2.▲
   by gjurhgd 8mo ago

   It's very difficult for me to imagine a way you could have read my remarks in good faith and come to that conclusion. I hope someday you figure this out, I guess I have no hope of explaining it.
3. 3.▲
   by gjurhgd 8mo ago

   Do we have conflicting premises about what SSH is? I'm pretty sure you're dodging and deflecting from the actual issues here. They were clearly suggesting that there exists a publicly available tool to attack this algorithm. They
4. 4.▲
   by gjurhgd 8mo ago

   You could never, in a million years, have guessed by "broken" they meant "it can be decrypted by the public with little effort?" I doubt that. I see no evidence they are talking about a password hash. Here's what th
5. 5.▲
   by gjurhgd 8mo ago

   Surely someone who has been here as long as you have understands that this type of behavior is not compatible with the guidelines. > Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. You could have just corrected them and not goaded them int