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


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:One time pad (Score 1) 138

You update the code as you exhaust it.

For the highest level security you can physically deliver new codes. Thus meaning the code will only be compromised if intercepted. And if it is intercepted... physically... you just invalidate the new code and deploy another one.

Again this is used for the highest level security already. Nuclear launch codes work this way. You can't crack them. If I told you what all the past launch codes were, you'd have no idea what the new launch codes are. The codes don't repeat. Once and never again.

Comment Re:One time pad (Score 1) 138

... It is assumed that the opposition doesn't have physical access to your system or the target system. Rather the assumption is that the encryption is required any other system besides the origin and destination of the message. If you need to secure things so that your own system isn't compromised then you're basically fucked via the first rule of computer security...

Physical security. You either have that or kill yourself.

Comment Re:One time pad (Score 1) 138

Doesn't address the quantum aspect of the query. Define the danger of quantum cracking?

Do you know how that is supposed to work? If you think your 256 bit key is going to hold against what that promises to be then maybe you should look that up.

That said, I haven't seen any practical evidence of it actually working. So maybe it doesn't matter.

Your sad dive into rudeness however is unfortunate. Why is your ego so small that when your obvious autism is revealed you have to lash out.

Calm down, dude. You're autistic. It's okay.

Comment One time pad (Score 1) 138

If you want unbreakable crypto... One time pad.

and here someone says "but MOOOOOM its hard!"... no it isn't.

How many gigs of communication do you need to secure per device? Lets presume that there are LEVELS of security that can be secured with varying levels of security.

Naturally it is impractical to secure everything with the one time pad type encryption. Which to be clear would be a very large file stored on the sender and receiver and the data being encrypted would use only a portion of that seed data to randomize the information you wanted secured. And any portion of the "pad" that was used would be blacklisted from future use. So what would I use with something like this? Well, how about using the one time pad to encrypt new encryption keys. Thus encrypt/decrypt keys, seeds, etc would be secured by one time pad. Transferring the new pad could be done physically if this is really high security thus bypassing networks that are demonstrably compromised enough that you want to encrypt your data over them.

One time pads are already used by the government for the highest level security. Nuclear launch codes for example are one time pad. A lot of the shoe leather and handshake intelligence networks run on one time pads.

There is no reason we can't translate this even more easily to the digital sphere than it is in the wink and pistol sphere. Let us say you have a file that contains something like 32 gigs of randomized "one time pad" data. Using 1:1 encryption that could encrypt 32 gigs of data you want to secure. And breaking it would be basically impossible. No repeating patterns. You need the one time pad data to decrypt. Period. Look at text messages from cell phones. If we WANT to be efficient with our data transmissions, we can be.

Let us say what we want to do is sync two databases over the internet and the data in these databases is very very sensitive. Now we could use the one time pad data sparingly... passing only some data through that system. Maybe just encrypt/decrypt data for some other encryption scheme. Possibly certain aspects of the data would be encrypted using one time pad. Maybe not all the data being synced has the same security clearance. The point is that if you need to be efficient about it, you can be.

And if you want encryption that can't be broken. One time pad.

Now I assume that isn't what they want. They want some fire and forget, cheap as dirt, flawless, idiot proof system they can slot into the system and stop thinking about this ever again.

That is a fantasy. I don't see that happening.

Comment Re:CnC makes more sense right now (Score 1) 274

1st, don't be pedantic. We're talking about the general price range of a 3d printer.


There you go. And if you're going to be a twit about the last 99 dollars, consider that that's for the new model. The last model is cheaper because its the elder model and is quite able to do the job.

3rd, dust collection is something the user is supposed to manage with a dust buster. This is a hobbyist machine. That said, they have plans and attachments that provide that feature for very little if you want that.

4th, as to it being louder, it is not a 3d printer... it is a CNC machine. You want a quiet CNC machine? This complaint is autistic. The point is functionality. You want to make tiny plastic yoda heads? Do it. I was pointing out that CNC machines are able to make more useful things at the same price point and therefore are the correct path. Unless you want tiny plastic yoda heads. in which case, congrats... that is what you get.

Comment Re:Provide this at the state level (Score 1) 280

All political boundaries are just lines on maps. What gives them meaning is that when you cross them there are consequences.

A line with no consequences is merely just a line as you say. But just as your neighbor would have a response if you decided to build on his property without permission... there are consequences for arbitrarily negating laws, precedent, and generally running roughshod over people.

Do it. You seem like a guy without a healthy respect for consequences.

Comment Re:Provide this at the state level (Score 1) 280

Many of the wealth distinctions are the result of purchasing power parity adjustments that many people don't appear to understand.

People in various places get paid more but they often must pay more for everything almost in perfect proportion to how much more they are paid. Gasoline for example can cost 4 to 5 dollars in Los Angeles whilst costing 2 dollars or less in many other parts of the country. You'll find similar issues with home prices and various other things.

The net result is that the adjusted standard of living once you've factored for purchasing power is that there is frequently less of a distinction then you'd think.

What is more, discrepancies in funding is only relevant to the extent that funding is insufficient to meet local needs. In most cases... having factored for most variables... I'd love to see an argument for negating state powers, centralizing all state functions at the federal level, and justifying all of that on the basis of what can only be described as a collectivist redistributionist moral paradigm.

Look, I appreciate you mean well. But you're also presuming to rule people and tell them what they want. I'd respect your position a great deal more if you ASKED people what they want and accepted no for an answer. If you don't ask but rather TELL and don't listen to refusals... Then your position is ultimately tyranny disguised in patronizing paternalism.

Comment Re:Provide this at the state level (Score 1) 280

Because justice should be different in New York than in Alaska? And yet both manage their police locally. Why have governors, state legislators, mayors, etc if you have no respect or regard for anything besides hyper centralized authority?

Education like many things has different challenges and objectives in different parts of the country because we have different economic realities etc. To presume you can manage all this from Washington DC is simply ignorance on your part.

Many things are managed locally. Education is one of them. Keep in mind that Washington DC, the city containing the geniuses you presume to put in charge of everyone's education has some of the worst schools in the country. Explain please where this organization gets the credibility to be taken seriously to manage the nation's education given that they demonstrably have failed to manage the education of the city under their nose?

Do not rise above your competence. If you can't even manage ONE city's education system, I have little patience listening to your opinions on how an entire country's education should be run.

Comment Re:Provide this at the state level (Score 1) 280

Why have states at all if you want to argue to centralization of everything? Why have state governors, state legislators, mayors, locally elected police chiefs?

You ask for logic but you've not demonstrated that you understand the pros and cons of a federated system with limited autonomy. Given your obvious ignorance of a basic concept of US civics and your obvious arrogance... I am hesitant to waste my time with someone that is likely to not listen. Typically people that have retained that kind of arrogance and ignorance in the same skull are not especially reasonable. Just my experience.

Do you want to try again or did I figure you out off the bat?

Slashdot Top Deals

A list is only as strong as its weakest link. -- Don Knuth