Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:Who authorized go on launch? (Score 1) 174

by Eclectic Engineer (#32031520) Attached to: NASA's Space Balloon Smashes Car In Australia
The video zoomed in on the crane, so it's hard to tell, but I wonder if the recovery chute inflated and yanked it off the crane. That, or it deployed after the initial failure, but it becomes visible and semi-inflated later. At the least, I'd guess it was the chute that did the dragging rather than the balloon itself.

Comment: Re:Explanation of the attack -- enforcement issues (Score 2, Interesting) 312

by Eclectic Engineer (#12783457) Attached to: Meaningful MD5 Collisions

It is an interesting attack, and IANAL, but I'd be curious about the legal ramifications. If I slip a carbon (ah... the way-back machine) in a stack of papers and ask someone to sign the top one without thus informing them, I think my stealth probably invalidates the additional document(s).

You could argue that there's a noticeable difference between pen and carbon -- making the copy hard to enforce -- but I'd argue the digital version is even easier: at least in the PS example, both "copies" of the document need to be present to preserve the hash.

In normal (pen/paper) signature situations, I get a copy of what I signed. The same ought to apply to digital sigs, resulting in a simple legal challenge to the validity of the document.

If at first you don't succeed, you must be a programmer.

Working...