ngneer

7 ms·

31.
by ngneer 2y ago
I was not commenting on VoIP, it works nicely and has for a long time, in the network core too. Mobile carriers do not use VoIP with the MS, to my knowledge. There's "Wi-Fi Calling", but that is the closest you're gonna
32.
by ngneer 2y ago
Judging by this and your other comment, you seem to have made up your mind that the powers that be are not interested in end to end security. You seem to be ignoring (or disregarding without explanation) similar engineering feedback indepen
33.
by ngneer 2y ago
Conversely, you might be vastly overestimating channel capacity. If ALL subscriber calls were on WhatsApp or Signal, the network would grind to a halt.
34.
by ngneer 2y ago
First, can you point to examples where using LLMs to find vulnerabilities works?
35.
by ngneer 2y ago
They will!
36.
by ngneer 2y ago
Great example. Anyone who cavalierly states "let's do PKI!" has not done PKI.
37.
by ngneer 2y ago
Not without redesign. I am telling you that whatever key exchange you run, it will result in key material that is accessible by the telco and therefore by your adversary (e.g., PRC). This is true even if you deployed authenticated Diffie-He
38.
by ngneer 2y ago
You can "easily" convert a block cipher to a stream cipher on paper (e.g., using OFB or output feedback mode), but you will not get the performance. You clearly have no working knowledge here.
39.
by ngneer 2y ago
Right, let's redesign telecom infrastructure...
40.
by ngneer 2y ago
Right, let's redesign telecom infrastructure...
41.
by ngneer 2y ago
Of course I know how TLS works, as well as PFS. I recommend Kaufman on the subject. The general scheme you refer to is known as hybrid cryptography, and the key material that is derived is used to generate symmetric keys for the TLS session
42.
by ngneer 2y ago
You appear to be neglecting the need for symmetric stream ciphers to achieve realtime communications (needed for performance reasons). No matter what you do, you are going to have a symmetric key in there somewhere for adversaries to extrac
43.
by ngneer 2y ago
ARM/IoT community: https://community.arm.com/support-forums/f/architectures-and... https://community.arm.com/arm-community-blogs/b/internet-of-... Security practitioners and academi
44.
by ngneer 2y ago
Hardly. x86 and ARM follow similar security underpinnings and outcomes. ARM has TrustZone, x86 has TEEs. I cannot think of a single attack demonstrated on x86 and not on ARM or vice versa. Could you please cite one?
45.
by ngneer 2y ago
Not applicable today, but older games such as Leisure Suit Larry used to ask age verification questions, anonymous in a way that a government issued ID is not. https://allowe.com/games/larry/tips-manuals/lsl1-
46.
by ngneer 2y ago
Incredible, thanks for sharing. My understanding is that ternary computers would have been based on tri-state logic which was less reliable than say transistors or even vacuum tubes encoding binary state. Is that understanding correct?
47.
by ngneer 2y ago
The moon has a very thin atmosphere, or at least so the mission science reporters said.
48.
by ngneer 2y ago
Hardly. There are simply two ways to expose incompetence. You can be nice or you can be a prick. Your choice. Seeing your handle, you may find it interesting to note that my master's degree in CS was completed at the Technion. I am not
49.
by ngneer 2y ago
Concur. Tone comes off as "toxic manboy". Not sure why the author chose that tone. I would not hire them for their security services just yet, no matter how big a genius they are. Maybe once they understand the world is made of pe
50.
by ngneer 2y ago
CEO felt a threat to his company and responded accordingly. He is clearly green and impolite. Sending a vulnerability disclosure to someone without knowing their experience, and given the amount of spam on the web, one should not be surpris
51.
by ngneer 2y ago
I suppose this comment wasn't adding much to the conversation, or not realistic enough in the context of a legal argument. More to life than law, though.
52.
by ngneer 2y ago
The gall! Next they'll say that "just because we downloaded the content does not mean we USED the content, and you have no proof we used the content, so we are not pirates".
53.
by ngneer 2y ago
Great question to ponder. Surely people would have seen their own reflections in water, but the mirror itself would have made "Reflection Technology" for "Artificial Introspection" more scalable. I suspect the mirror off
54.
by ngneer 2y ago
That's not really a fair question. To answer it, the OP would have to define intelligence. If you have done so already, then by all means, do share your definition. If not, then you are in no better position to claim intelligence than
55.
by ngneer 2y ago
No. Just means we are easy to fool. Like apes who see themselves in the mirror and fail to recognize they are seeing themselves in the mirror, thinking it is a different ape (and trying to mate with or attack it).
56.
by ngneer 2y ago
Best analogy so far. I am adopting this for the next wave of "wait until the next model" and "but humans hallucinate, too" comments. Yes, when we feed back our own output (language on the web) into ourselves, things beco
57.
by ngneer 2y ago
I have a feeling that male and female travel experiences may differ in this regard. "To stay safe, smile." seems pretty naive to me. Clearly, the author is male. I would proffer "always have an exit", "do not walk i
58.
by ngneer 2y ago
BOOX: GOTO BOOX
59.
by ngneer 2y ago
Hardy har har; serves me right for poking fun. Good day, sir.
60.
by ngneer 2y ago
I do not view it as dismissive at all, rather it accurately characterizes the question as a silly question. "swim" is a verb applicable to humans, as is "think". Whether submarines can swim is a silly question. Same for

More ›