keyme

24 ms·

211.
by keyme 12y ago
Drop the 0day. I'd say Anonymously, but not necessarily. If its an obvious bug, this isn't a moral issue at all. Had it been a multi stage, complicated exploit (hard to find and implement), I would suggest otherwise. In this case
212.
by keyme 12y ago
I hope people get this already. Hacking is a skill set, and a general approach to doing things. As with everything, you can use it to do all sort of things, some of them less nice.
213.
by keyme 12y ago
Strings should be byte strings. Not ASCII, not Unicode. Bytes. Strings don't represent Text lest I decide they do. For this a UnicodeString object should exist, and it should _not_ be the default. In my latest project I've made my
214.
by keyme 13y ago
Setting up a rogue node that messes with all transactions is the best way of hurrying a proper fix to the protocol that will also be deployed ASAP and accepted by everyone!
215.
by keyme 13y ago
You mean like this? https://www.asus.com/Notebooks_Ultrabooks/ASUS_ROG_G750JH
216.
by keyme 13y ago
Yes! Thank you. All the other commenters here that are explaining things like using a list() in order to print out an iterator are missing the point entirely. The issue is "discomfort". Of course you can write code that makes ever
217.
by keyme 13y ago
If I recall, writing no boilerplate code was a big deal in python once... And while 2 lines are not worth my rant, writing those 2 lines again and again all the time, is.
218.
by keyme 13y ago
> you would use byte strings and you would never have to call encode or touch UTF-8 before passing the byte string to a TCP socket. I'll start by adding that it's also incredibly annoying to declare each string to be a byte str
219.
by keyme 13y ago
I don't like Python 3. Iterators everywhere are incredibly annoying, especially with my development workflow, where I don't put a line of code into a file before I run it manually in the interpreter. When I run a map over a list,
220.
by keyme 13y ago
I read the whole paper, and it doesn't at all look like the "real deal". No actual evidence in the form of malware samples (after exploitation of the netwrok), detected "duplicate" certificates or whatever is provid
221.
by keyme 13y ago
"and it could easily become valueless if users lose faith." About as easily as religion losing its grip if believers lost faith... This can happen, but not "easily". "An object at rest stays at rest and an object i
222.
by keyme 13y ago
If the key was randomly generated (not derived form a passphrase), it is impossible to crack the key. Usually when people talk about cracking a "key", they refer to brute forcing a passphrase that either protects the real key (enc
223.
by keyme 13y ago
Is there a browser plugin or something that can keep google in check? Like separating youtube, gmail and the search into different "sandboxes"? Maybe blocking some of the annoying popups that constantly demand your info? I'm
224.
by keyme 13y ago
Difference is, there is no one behind bitcoin. No one to arrest. The only "real people" "behind" it are the Exchanges. However, they(usually) hold proper documentation for transactions and comply with the law fully.
225.
by keyme 13y ago
Ah, oh well. I hoped that maybe they've messed up the encryption by doing only file headers or random locations. Thanks for checking it out.
226.
by keyme 13y ago
"JPEGs were altered but still viewable". Could be a problem with their encryption. Care to share a before and after JPEG of something? For science?
227.
by keyme 13y ago
"Don't worry too much about patching your system; in general, the risk of the executable code is worse than the risk of not having your patches up to date." Not good advice. If you plan to open anything other than text files
228.
by keyme 13y ago
Not really... I've seen a demonstration where a Truecrypt (or something similar) encrypted laptop is stolen. The machine is locked, but still powered on (very reasonable. You locked your machine and left your desk). This basically mean
229.
by keyme 13y ago
The only reason not to roll your own VPN on some private server, is the lack of deniability. The dedicated IP of the server is tied directly to your name/credit card. A public VPN, while also tied to your banking info, usually acts as
230.
by keyme 13y ago
There is special "blame" here put on the US government, but I think this is irrelevant. In pretty much any country today, the foreign intelligence services are allowed to spy on everyone else except their own citizens. In the mind
231.
by keyme 13y ago
Probably just Kids. Nothing very sophisticated. Shame that pretty much all of the basic internet infrastructure is so utterly broken.
232.
by keyme 13y ago
Attacking a linux box that runs little more than the TOR daemon is much harder than attacking a browser on an avarage client machine. The difference in attack surface is huge. Further, one needs to attack many (hundreds) of TOR nodes to eff
233.
by keyme 13y ago
I actually use a setup that involves a bunch of VMs for pretty good separation. It's a bit of a complicated setup, so I won't elaborate here. The main thing about it, is that even if an attacker runs with root privs on the "a
234.
by keyme 13y ago
Doesn't have to do much. Once you execute pretty much any (non-sandboxed) code on a machine, you can bypass something like TOR easily. From this point, any network packet sent by the payload to the feds effectively de-anonymizes the us
235.
by keyme 13y ago
Taking over? You should probably realize by now that what you see in the media about classified government ops is just the tip of the iceberg. Considering the inherently insecure nature of computer systems, and the heavy reliance of securit