I'd question that. No systemd based distro has been certified with EAL, FIPS, or Common Criteria yet.
What does that have to do with security? All of the certifications you've mentioned are an evaluation of how desperate a vendor is to bid on government contracts, not of the security of a system.
Every phone seems to have this same issue, but it is not the phones fault. It's the fault of what the owner installs on it. My wifes galaxy mega was great at first, but now that she has all these stupid games installed it is buggy and needs to be restarted regularly.
Blaming applications for screwing up the system is not an acceptable answer in my book. The OS should be capable of gracefully withstanding abuse from user land without freaking out. If it can't it deserves to be called out for its failure.
You're at two events events (leaving one place and appearing at another) separated by what in relativity is called a space-like interval - and by definition there are observers that 'see' them happen at the same time, others that 'see' one happen first, and others that 'see' the other happen first.
Events can appear at same time or not regardless of whether they occurred at the same time or not however there is never an observable ordering disagreement.
My best guess as to what you're trying to say is that because you don't end up in your own past light-cone (i.e. the events don't have an inverted time-like separation) there are no paradoxes, no violations of causality, etc. Which is true if this kind of trav
If I appear back on "earth" from "earth2" and announce discovery of a supernova 100 years before that information reaches earth such information at no point traveled superluminally. It went with me thru my shortcut slower than light. Any observer astute enough to know this would not see a problem. Those who see problems are naively drawing out a diagram and concluding a problem because they know only points in space and time without knowing or considering the history of what actually took place.
A much different example of this are twins in rocket ships starting off together yet each going away on separate space adventures. Later they turn around and meet back up in the same place they started. Clocks in each spaceship will read differently based on which spacecraft actually does acceleration and has experienced associated inertia acting upon it. You need the full inertial histories of both crafts to calculate what those time difference would be. In the same way an outside observer needs the full path history that information actually propagated to know whether FTL propagation has actually occurred.
If one of the spacecraft were to go through a wormhole their inertial history would not be changed as a result and neither would their clock or energy not in their frame or relative to their twins frame or anyone else's as a consequence of traveling through the wormhole.. not when their inside of it nor when they emerge on the other end of it.
I'm not even sure what you're trying to say. "Magic" or not, you'd be travelling outside of your future light cone
There is no traveling. One moment here the next 100 light years away without propagation through 100 light years worth of space to get there.
and that's exactly the problem - to you and people on Earth it would appear instantaneous, but for some observers you would be traveling backward in time.
You use the word "traveling" which is not occurring. Superluminal "traveling" = backwards time travel. If you don't propagate information superluminally there is no backwards travel.
On other words, "instant" travel is nonsense because spatially separated things can't happen "at the same time" for all observers. Relativity of simultaneity and all that.
Yes instant travel is nonsense. Instantly appearing out of thin air without traveling through intervening space is what I'm talking about.
The distinction is important because when traveling through a shortcut consisting of region of negative density (wormhole) you are not traveling 100 light years you might be traveling only a mile as agreeable to all relatively stationary observers to the shortcut. It might be hard or impossible to actually see you moving only a mile... many may be tricked into thinking you went 100 light years... but that didn't actually happen.
Lets say there are two points in space and two ways to get there.
Normal distance between Point A and Point B is 100 light years.
Shortcut distance between the very same Point A and Point B is 1 mile.
If you were to travel through 100 light years of space in 4 minutes to get to Point B.. that would be crazy and all the superluminal time reversals in all applicable reference frames are legitimate.
If however you were to travel to Point B from Point A traveling through just a mile worth of space at a comfortable 15mph.. nobody sees a time reversal in any frame of reference.
How you got from point A to point B made all the difference in the world.
There are many variations of this. One I *think* works (but I don't have the skill to check) is that the universe is "sort of" like a simulation, where only macroscopic items have a defined state
Favorite simulation analogy paints entanglement as the consistency contract of some sort of transactional memory controller.
People are forbidden from seeing sausage being compiled because conveyance of this knowledge violates the consistency contract leading to undefinable behavior and is frankly gross. "Dirty read" = NMI = BSOD = Matrix Reloaded.
A one-time pad is also unbreakable. What makes quantum cryptography any better?
In some ways QC is worse than OTP because quantum crypto still requires classical basis of trust to authenticate communication partners.
What makes QC useful is it allows production of new OTP material from a provably private well completely "disconnected" from the classical communication channel.
There are a number of methods for re-keying without QC but they are based on deterministic algorithms where if you were to get your hands on the "previous" state you would stand some chance of being able to derive subsequent states... with QC that chain is broken.
Quite frankly I doubt it really provides much in the way of any real world benefit because a system is only as good as its weakest link and you still have to bind the quantum system using classical cryptographic methods subject to the same attacks we're all quite familiar with already. Keep a massive OTP codebook secret or keep a smaller secret and use QC... same problem either way.
Only if it took 100 years for you to make the trip. Otherwise you will be moving backward in time for some possible observers.
Superluminal propagation of the light cone is needed to invert cause and effect and that did not occur in my scenario.
The information I took with me simply took a more efficient path. The consequences of that never propagated superluminally.
To see the problem, imagine 2 wormholes, A and B, each with widely separated endpoints. In my reference frame, the endpoints A1 and A2 are stationary - I'm standing by A1 and can send a message instantly to A2. The endpoints B1 and B2 are stationary relative to one another, but are moving close to c relative to A. In B's reference frame, my message goes back in time.
Sounds like adding vectors while neglecting Lorentz. When you travel thru such a wormhole you gain only incidental mass and potential energy as observed by an external frame stationary to wormhole, you don't see the universe contracting to a point, your observers don't see your mass increasing or your clock slowing. No observer ever gets to see your mass/energy dwarfing the rest of the universes and there isn't any backwards time travel. You can't add or subtract the apparent external velocity of messages thru wormhole with the differential velocity of another wormhole whizzing by.
A simpler example: you can get a straightforward time machine simply by accelerating one end of a wormhole up to relativistic speed for a few years, and then bringing it back, parking it at rest near the other end. Like the twin who visits a distant star and returns, one end will be "younger" than the other. Now the wormhole moves you back (or forward) in time by a few years when you traverse it.
I agree that one end will be younger but later after they are parked traveling through it won't send you backward in time and you'll only go as forward in time as it actually takes the travel through.
To violate ordering of cause and effect you need to actually exceed C not just *appear* to exceed it.
If I were to magically snap my fingers and magically materialize between "earth" and "earth2" 100 light years away without having propagated thru space I am free to make whatever measurements I want between either planets and leak all the information I can find and at no point will any observer in any frame be able to detect an inversion of cause and effect.
OK, I tried to read your first sentence 3 times, and I still can't parse it, so I'm not sure what you're saying. Naturally, slower-than-light state transfer doesn't introduce paradox. FTL state transfer does allow inversion of cause and effect - the clear examples of this involve two pairs of wormholes, moving quickly relative to one another, which allows you go send a signal out through one pair and back through the other, and get the signal before you sent it.
The only thing that matters is propagation. Lets say I can only go 10 spaces in 10 ticks.
- - - - - - - - - -
1.................10
Now lets try covering the same external distance through a wormhole:
- - -
1.................3
Well I went 3 spaces in 3 ticks... but the rest of the universe thinks I went 10 spaces...silly fools.
You just think FTL propagation because your losing track of the configuration of space through which the propagation is being done. Your assuming the result matters when what really matters is HOW you got there.
Wormholes can connect two arbitrary points in spacetime - this allows FTL travel,
but that means time travel, with raises all sorts of paradoxes.
Instantaneous state transfers which don't operate by means of propagation or the taking of shortcuts traveling less than FTL locally thru said mystical shortcut raise no paradox of any kind in any frame of reference. There is no grandfather paradox or inversion of cause and effect.
Allowing unsigned code into the app bundle changes the app bundle and makes the signature invalid. That's how signatures work. The idea here is that a legitimately signed and installed app can then execute code outside the app bundle which will run without additional controls in place.
It depends. If you can add metadata to the bundle without it being detected (a problem that has cropped up with Linux repositories several times) then this is a genuine vuln. If OTOH it's something like "If you install a Python interpreter then you can use that to run arbitrary code that isn't validated by Gatekeeper" then it's a "Code execution results in code execution" issue. In the great tradition of journalists everywhere, the ThreatPost article never provided any links to any original material, so all we have is the writer's interpretation of what's actually going on,
Assuming the previous reply was by the guy who gave the talk, is it online anywhere?
It does sound and awful lot like the notorious MS07-052: Code execution results in code execution
.
Wait! Eating whole foods *doesn't* cure cancer?!
Of course it doesn't, everyone knows that! You cure cancer, and in particular pancreatic cancer, with a strict vegan diet, acupuncture sessions, drinking special fruit juices, hydrotherapy, and visiting spiritualists.
An application that blows dick stops working on an unsupported operating system that sucks dick?! STOP THE PRESSES!
Well that's not quite correct, while Windows XP may merely suck dick, iTunes actually swallows.
No, he took full responsability for a black op
That's "African-American op", you insensitive clod! If Bush had done it you'd probably be calling it a white op.
We are not a clone.
