Comment Payment by cryptocurrency (Score 1) 17
"a few issues" is just that they're still waiting for the blockchain transaction to complete.
A perfect implementation of those algorithms is possibly unbreakable. The tools would target flawed implementations, which might even be the vast majority. Just using a standard random number generator, or a key generator that produces one bit less than you thought it did - as per the recent issue with a huge range of public keys - can lead to being able to break the encryption, especially if you've got gigabytes or terabytes of data to analyse. Most would be less subtle and more easily detected flaws.
It also depends on what you consider perfect for the usage, and what lengths you want to go to. Many algorithms or implementation have side-channel attacks if you can get to the hardware. I might have no chance of decrypting something encrypted in "the cloud" (i.e. someone else's computer), but if I can observe the CPU and memory usage, heat, throughput, etc. of a malware program (like when I've introduced it onto a test machine), especially if I can control the data (say, what files it's encrypting), I can very possibly work out or reduce to a practical number the alternatives for the keys. Let alone if I'm running the thing in a debugging emulator. And if they use one (or a small set) of keys for everything, (rookie mistake for ongoing security, but: logistics of the use case (panic them into paying) and (hopefully) knowing the key to sell to victims comes into play) only one organisation has to find it (or pay for it) to allow many others to decrypt it.
In this use case, especially, you don't need perfect encryption. Even with tools available, there's enough victims who don't know the alternatives to paying for the bad guys to make a packet. See Also: Year of the Linux Desktop
Go into your admin console and check for the existence of an account with a dot as the user id. Cut and paste the dot from the csv if you need to for a search, just in case it's a unicode glyph rather than the standard period symbol.
If you find something, take whatever action is required in your circumstance to determine if it's a malicious or accidental account creation.
If you can't find anything, contact google support with the reference issue number provided in the email (last paragraph before the G Suite Team "signature") and ask them what's up.
assoc
.mht
and press Enter/Return. It'll likely return
.mht=mhmtlfile
and if you wish to check if IE is the handler for that file type enter
ftype mhtmlfile
and press Enter. If the result mentions iexplore.exe, that's IE.
Enter the following two lines (pressing Enter after each) to break the association for IE archives (there are two extensions associated):
assoc
.mht=
assoc
.mhmtl=
Close the prompt (type exit and press Enter, or click the "X" close window control).
A somewhat safer way (in terms of other possible exploits, not in mucking up your PC) is to use ftype to list any file types opened by IE ( ftype | find "iexplore" ) and then delete those filetypes ( ftype filetype= ), but if you're not confident with what you're doing, skip that.
I found this article to be rather long winded in order to create a story with suspense. The moon has a side facing away from Saturn which is darker then the side facing saturn. It seems to be due to collecting dust from a larger ring that is on the border of its orbit.
Done, saved you a long and pointless naritive.
Actually, that's not quite correct. You've got two errors there, and missing the real mystery, although the article itself actually fails to explicitly specify what the solution is.
The darker side is actually the leading hemisphere, not the far or outer side (from Saturn). Dust doesn't onto the far side, the moon plows through it in places, getting dust on the leading side. No mystery here for quite a while though - telescopes have been able to make out "the dark patterns look a lot like dust" for quite a while. The Phoebe ring itself was only detected about 10 years ago, but it was expected that dust was coming from the outer moons for a while.
The thing is, if the only process happening was that dust was being swept up by Iapetus, then every time the dark side faced the Sun, the dark coating would heat up, cause the ice underneath it to sublime (think evaporate, if that doesn't mean anything - it's close enough) and freeze again over the dust, leaving behind a light surface again. But we see a dark surface. Why? Mystery!
The solution (which the article doesn't really explain fully) is that initially dust from the ring caused ice to turn to gas, leaving behind a dark residue that we now see (and the Cassini probe has been able to measure), but instead of just floating around above the (relatively) warm, dark surface until it faces away from the Sun and cools down, much of the vapour refreezes on the light side as it passes over it due to the lower temperature there.
The dark residue (not the original dust) now causes further heating each orbit, repeating the cycle. Over time, a large amount of ice from the leading side is being evaporated away, leaving that side to get darker and darker from the residue, with a certain amount of the ice migrating to the light side and refreezing (as light coloured ice) keeping it nice and bright.
TLDR: Mystery! Dust doesn't explain the dark leading side of Iapetus! Ice would cover it in a shiny coat each orbit. Planetary detectives trace the culprit to dark residues left behind as heated ice moves to a new neighbourhood on the cooler side of the moon. More dark areas means more solar heating, and more ice migrating away in a self-perpetuating cycle. Mystery solved! Good job, planetary scientists!
Yet one of Saturn's moon's, Iapetus, is unique
Aren't they all unique?
Yes, and they're all special too.
And they can grow up to be any kind of planet they want.
AS LONG AS IT'S A DWARF PLANET, RIGHT PLUTO? HA HA HA, LOSER!
Viewed from which side? Counterclockwise does not apply here.
Viewed when looking down from the north pole. This is mentioned in TFA, per
Rather that [sic] (looking down from the north pole) orbiting counterclockwise around its parent planet, which all the other moons do, Phoebe revolves clockwise around Saturn.
Two things to note:
First, they're not "teleporting" the photon. It's a quantum property (such as spin - which, also, by the way, doesn't have to do with the photon rotating in the way you'd think of, say, a ball spinning, but I digress) that is being "teleported" and applied to the target photon.
Second, when you send a fax, the "picture" (or the information to recreate it) is sent along the wires (or optic fibres, radio waves, etc.) through space from one location to the other. With entangled particles, the effect that alters the target particle's property doesn't travel through space. It just affects it directly. That's why it's instantaneous (as opposed to travelling at the speed of light or less, like your fax signal) and called teleportation. The downside is that this teleportation effect cannot convey information.
He who steps on others to reach the top has good balance.
