mehrdada

53 ms·

511.
by mehrdada 11y ago
> When you stop passive attacks, then attackers will just step up their game to active attacks. Not always. It often changes the economics of the game. Especially when facing mass surveillance, considering the potential risk of detectabi
512.
by mehrdada 11y ago
> You just admitted that it's useless! No, I do not believe stopping passive attacks is useless.
513.
by mehrdada 11y ago
> browser Javascript, which can only be as secure as the server's verified TLS key anyways (and thus doesn't add any security TLS doesn't) This is not precise. While it does not stop even the most basic active attackers
514.
by mehrdada 11y ago
> I have a choice in my mobile provider Among an oligopoly of four, one of which is complete trash, two are way overpriced and have no real competition. > T-Mobile has a limited amount of spectrum on each tower The spectrum is fun
515.
by mehrdada 11y ago
It might be hypocritical, but it is a logically consistent point of view. If you desire to exert control on X and it is feasible, you advocate central control when you are the center. On the other hand, if you do not have the power to be th
516.
by mehrdada 11y ago
I seriously doubt anyone cares much about raw battery capacity per se. Battery longevity is what matters. I wouldn't mind the smallest battery in the world if it powers my device the longest. The good news is despite the smaller batter
517.
by mehrdada 11y ago
Efficient, perhaps; Centrally controlled, I'm not so sure it is a Silicon Valley ideal (i.e. one likes it when they own it, but it's not generally an ideal preached by the SV community.)
518.
by mehrdada 11y ago
The article misses the mark, but XML--the language itself, not the tooling--does have an advantage: it is designed to be quite good at one thing that's often neglected despite being in its name: extensibility. XML provides enormous fle
519.
by mehrdada 11y ago
The speaker makes fun of Intel for calling a relatively trivial mapping of CPU physical address to DRAM addresses in the memory controller a "hash function". I'd like to point out that it is actually a hash function mathemat
520.
by mehrdada 11y ago
IANAL, (nor am I the OP,) but my understanding is: You can do X for no reason != You can do X for any reason i.e. they can fire you when they wish to, but if you can demonstrate that the reason for firing was illegal, then it the firing is
521.
by mehrdada 11y ago
> the facts on the ground are 80% of Indians do not have internet access The facts on the ground for everywhere in the world not too long ago was worse than 20% access to the Internet. And I bet the current 20% Indian Internet users have
522.
by mehrdada 11y ago
Some Chromebooks have a "flash write-protect screw"[1] that basically makes the firmware read-only. Acts as a physical protection for flashrom by software (though I am not sure if there are ways to work around it). [1]: https:&#x
523.
by mehrdada 11y ago
Please address where in your story calling the employer by your good distant friend would be justified. Sounds like a jerk to me.
524.
by mehrdada 11y ago
I'm personally on your side of the argument and against Facebook's stance, but this statement is strictly speaking not true. At worst, it will be equivalent to protection provided by an encryption scheme without authenticating th
525.
by mehrdada 11y ago
My understanding is they draw the line at updatability: if someone else is able to change the code, then they can exercise unjust power over you (i.e. there's a power asymmetry between you and the vendor over who controls the device)
526.
by mehrdada 11y ago
> why not to just use a cheap but capable modern $200 laptop? The problem is that those newer machines generally require some proprietary binary blobs in the firmware to be loaded on boot that are loaded and that is considered unaccept
527.
by mehrdada 11y ago
HFS+ is a crap filesystem for many reasons. Resource fork is not one of them.
528.
The 2016 HTPC Build(blog.codinghorror.com)
5 points by mehrdada 11y ago|0 comments
529.
by mehrdada 11y ago
"You had one job"
530.
by mehrdada 11y ago
Please note that Mozilla did not resist DRM in Web standards but they spent money on things like FirefoxOS that clearly wouldn't get anywhere. I am quite unsure if they are aligned enough with the free web ideals. I do not think more d
531.
by mehrdada 11y ago
There is a big gap between "this obviously looks bad" and "I have an exploit for it". There are many things that one should obviously not do and you can legitimately strongly advise against, but are not easy to demo an
532.
by mehrdada 11y ago
> If you look at the history of TLS, you'll see how tricky is to get crypto right. There has been lots of attacks on the protocol, that no one person could've think of. You'd hope so, but contrary to popular belief, actual
533.
by mehrdada 11y ago
It is now possible to compile your own binaries and deploy it yourself without paying $99. As for trusting the OS, it is true, but I would argue it is no better than running on an Android phone that you don't compile and deploy the OS
534.
by mehrdada 11y ago
Don't know about the Android version, but the iOS version repeatedly crashed on me and was nowhere as nice as iMessage to be honest.
535.
by mehrdada 11y ago
This [ ...is less profitable, thus removing incentive ] is probably true, unfortunately. I personally seriously considered this space and actually wrote a quite complete prototype with this exact goal more than a year ago, but eventually de
536.
by mehrdada 11y ago
My point is, I think the area is too immature at the moment and needs a lot more innovation before we call for standardization. Security in particular is an area that often requires breaking away from compatibility (not just in the technica
537.
by mehrdada 11y ago
The only tool that's free software and doesn't use shady crypto at the moment seems to be Signal (TextSecure) which is not a great messaging app UI-wise. Perhaps a couple more do exist as well, but I don't see a plethora of a
538.
by mehrdada 11y ago
In practice, you basically get one-bit error correction 'for free' when you have enough redundancy to detect two-bit soft errors. Simple parity can only detect one bit flip, so if you want to catch two-bit errors, you might as wel
539.
by mehrdada 11y ago
Please note that the main purpose of ECC is not to reduce RAM error rate and make it look more reliable, but to help the system stop the process when an unrecoverable memory error occurs as opposed to propagating it and resulting in unpredi
540.
by mehrdada 11y ago
> It's just that (a) you often won't notice those transient errors (one pixel in your multi-megapixel photo is one bit off) and (b) a lot of your RAM is probably unused. Also, most modern processors use ECC for their caches (

More ›