Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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: Hate to rain on your parade (Score 1) 216

by trifish (#45996937) Attached to: Porn Will Be Bitcoin's Killer App

I fail to see how Bitcoin is private and confidential. All the transactions are public (inherently by design). And if you buy bitcoins somewhere with your CC or paypal or bank, it is possible to link the bitcoins to your name.

If you buy them with cash, you could as well buy one of those cash coupons that porn sites might accept too. Then, you gain TRUE anonymity and, as a bonus, you and the seller avoid the massive volatility of the currency (100x decrease/increase in value over a day).

Comment: All right (Score 2, Insightful) 257

by trifish (#45268377) Attached to: Chrome Will End XP Support in 2015; Firefox Has No Plans To Stop

Only an idiot would run a browser on an OS with unpatched vulnerabilities. Windows XP will not get any security issues fixed after April 2014. If you ignore those simple facts, you deserve becoming a part of a botnet, sending your passwords and credit card numbers to the botmaster.

Comment: Very informative piece of info at the bottom (Score 5, Informative) 246

by trifish (#45100007) Attached to: EU Court Holds News Website Liable For Readers' Comments

A very interesting piece of info is at the bottom of TFA:

since readers were allowed to make comments without registering their names, the identity of the authors would have been extremely difficult to establish. Making Delfi legally responsible for the comments was therefore practical, said the court. It was also reasonable, because the news portal received commercial benefit from comments being made.

Comment: Uninformed nonsense (Score 1, Flamebait) 169

by trifish (#44978421) Attached to: Did NIST Cripple SHA-3?

The guy calls himself cryptographer, but he doesn't know what he's talking about.

Hashes, and also any ideal random oracles, have only (n/2) security due to so called birthday paradox limit.

That's why SHA-512 has only 256-bit security. This is not weakening of the hash in any form. It is a property of any hash or RNG.

What the slides show is that they want to reduce clutter in reducing dozen options into two options. One high-security (256-bit security) and another fast, medium-security.

Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it.