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


Forgot your password?

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:Open source? (Score 2) 215

by Kynde (#45826907) Attached to: The Startling Array of Hacking Tools In NSA's Armory

No. I think you've misunderstood one-time padding (or brute-forcing).

Brute forcing is when you try (almost) every possible key, which is significantly shorter than the message, to see what the message will turn out with said key hoping to find the right one. If the message turns out to make sense (contain english words or ascii alphabet for example) it is likely to be correct.

With OTP the key and the message are of equal length. Going through every key is the same as going through every possible message. So you will not only hit alphabet, but you'll get shakespeare and snowden leaks alike.

That makes all forms of bruteforcing futile. No extra codes necessary.

One bit example:
my message is M (0 or 1) and my pad is P (0 or 1).
M xor P = C cipher text, and equally C xor P is M.

Now, given C, say 1. You can trivially bruteforce it into 0 as if P had been 1 or into 1 as if P had been 0, but that solves nothing. Because both possibilites are equally likely. Repeat that on every bit and all you will ever know about the message is its length.

The length leakage is also easy to counter to some extent by appropriate amount of random padding (adding some extra gunk to the end).

Comment: Re:OMG enough (Score 1) 360

by Kynde (#45085587) Attached to: The Linux Backdoor Attempt of 2003

Actually, the code snippet, without context is not an obvious attempt. It is a cleverly hidden attempt that COULD be a genuine error.

Sir, you have not looked into this one bit and are spewing hot air without any substance.

The ANDed limitation of uid being root makes zero sense. Why limit root in particular?

Not to mention that __WALL already has __WCLONE flag in it, what would possibly be the point of that? Aside from the obvious assignment as comparison, which of course seemingly could be a typo, the rest of it is something no sane kernel developer would have any reason what so ever to put in there.

That is why it is a backdoor insertion without any reasonable doubt. Not because of the mere = in place of ==, which I still typo regularly after 25 years of C. Thankfully these days compiler warnings and various static analyzers catch that nonsense.

Comment: Re:It's very possible (Score 1) 526

by Kynde (#42162019) Attached to: Steve Jobs Was Wrong About Touchscreen Laptops

It's also very possible that the Asus Transformer range showed that a good touchscreen tablet/laptop combo is a useful bit of gear well before "Microsoft might have validated the idea".

It's because I own a Transformer that I know touchscreen laptops suck.

And I, as an owner, too, will have to disagree because absolutely love it. There's future right there, no doubt on my mind.

Comment: Re:It's very possible (Score 1) 526

by Kynde (#42161873) Attached to: Steve Jobs Was Wrong About Touchscreen Laptops

If you're too lazy to check facts, don't challenge people who post them.

I disagree. Any troll can post false "fact" after false "fact" fast enough to overwhelm anyone else's ability to check and disprove them. Therefore the responsibility should be on the person presenting the fact to provide a valid citation (if not up front, then at least when asked for it).

So true, I'm so sick and tired of such gish gallops often used by the AGW denialists.

"That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence""

Comment: Re:NSA likely already built one (Score 1) 262

by Kynde (#41130169) Attached to: Solid State Quantum Computer Finds 15=3x5 — 48% of the Time

Absolutely. It is naive and foolish to believe that there is any publicly available encryption that actually works. Some things are born secret and will stay that way until it's no longer useful

Don't be silly. There are symmetric ciphers that have been proven to be "unbreakable" in a sense that to open them would take time comparable to brute forcing.

Factoring large prime composites and RSA is another matter, but to entangle 4000 qubits right now? I seriously doubt it.

And I think you're also wrong on the availability aspect. It's naive to think that anything but public encryption methods actually work.

Comment: Re:Bruce still has a shot (Score 1) 352

You're wrong. Just sayin'.

"The biggest bomb ever detonated on earth" is the biggest one ever built - the full yield version was never built.

Yep, that would be Tsar Bomba detonated over Novaja Zemlja in the sixties. Windows were broken as far as in Finnish and Norwegian north. Amazing and fascinating stuff.

Comment: Re:Bill Gates has kids? (Score 1) 137

by Kynde (#38998083) Attached to: Google's First Employee Departs

I remember when Alta Vista came out with natural language searches. You could ask it What's the name of President Clinton's cat? And it would give you links for where to buy socks.

The thing I remember about alta vista is that when I searched for "UDP proxy", for example, all I got was a hundred pr0n links without a single link to anything actually relating to UDP or proxying. I think it was just about then when I switched to google.

Comment: Re:Android phone under $100 (Score 1) 199

by Kynde (#37579228) Attached to: Nokia Preps Linux OS For Low-End Smartphones

For Androids the cheapest Huaweis sell here for about 110e and you get a ton of options around 150e.

There are a lot of Nokians that sell between 50e and 100e, but I doubt that Nokia could sell anything they can jam linux into below 100e. Those cheap ass phones are all series40 with virtually zero sw costs and a line of phones they've been making for ten years now so no wonder they can make them cheap. Nokia always had good hardware manufacturing and logistics, it's what they did and didn't do with software that sunk them into the maelstrom they're in now.

An adequate bootstrap is a contradiction in terms.