noclip

3 ms·

1.
LizardSquad launches DDOS against Twitch(twitter.com)
2 points by noclip 12y ago|0 comments
2.
by noclip 12y ago
It's definitely a bit surreal that even a crypto library vulnerability not only has its own web site but that the site is almost indistinguishable, like every other site launched today, from an Apple product announcement page.
3.
by noclip 13y ago
It seems from the reaction that for Facebook this wasn't just a $2 billion deal but a $3 billion deal — $2 billion in cash, plus $1 billion of Oculus' value wiped out by the announcement.
4.
by noclip 13y ago
There's also a possibly-not-completly-wrong table on that other TLS library's website ( http://www.gnutls.org/manual/gnutls.html#Selecting-cryptogra... ) that takes a stab at estimating the relative security
5.
by noclip 13y ago
I'm curious as to what it is about Australia that makes these obscenely invasive schemes tenable to the public. It's clear that surveillance agencies in representative governments all over the world want and pursue these kinds of
6.
by noclip 13y ago
That, or slap the affiliate ID for Twitter on the URL.
7.
by noclip 13y ago
If you pay for (say) a DS3 line, there's an implicit assumption that you are not going to be pumping 44.736 Mbit/s through it 24/7. Whoa, whoa, whoa. This is exactly the assumption commercial customers paying for unmetere
8.
by noclip 13y ago
The s_client connection continues but should still report a verify error. On Linux: http://pastebin.com/QWpSrR5p
9.
by noclip 13y ago
Except it isn't failing.
10.
by noclip 13y ago
It's not just cURL. It's much bigger, and much worse. http://pastebin.com/Yb6pUvr6
11.
by noclip 13y ago
What's more puzzling than the flagrant absurdity of this is why the people involved are content to waste their lives creating these things.
12.
by noclip 13y ago
ICANN charges 22 cents per domain. What would you propose the price be lowered to?
13.
by noclip 13y ago
You mean to say a company that encrypts users' messages in ECB mode with a fixed key hard-coded into the binary and which was publicly disclosed almost a year ago and hasn't been changed isn't responsible with user data?
14.
by noclip 13y ago
"were"
15.
Telemarketing call from the future(theatlantic.com)
7 points by noclip 13y ago|1 comments
16.
by noclip 13y ago
Then there's this: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/looting-the-pensio...
17.
by noclip 13y ago
In case anyone is still curious, part of the encrypted data in those blobs is almost certainly the entire HTTP request sent by the client. A tiny GET with just a Host: header generates a much smaller blob than a normal request with a browse
18.
by noclip 15y ago
Why even bother breaking the crypto? They say right on the site that they use HTTP for public key retrieval so a MITM would simply serve up bogus public keys to the clients.