topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • Friday December 19, 2025, 6:36 pm
  • Proudly celebrating 15+ years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Recent Posts

Pages: prev1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... 56next
326
Living Room / Re: Can we stop with the diagonal screen length thing?
« Last post by Eóin on January 08, 2011, 03:32 PM »
They deliberately withhold that information, because if they did list it, even in the smaller print, customers would get used to seeing it there.  Soon, customers would get used to it and start talking about their tv's using those numbers instead of the diagonal number, because it just makes more sense.  So, in the office, when someone asks how big your tv is, right now we say 50" or whatever....but eventually, if that information was readily available, people would start saying 40x30" even if not all the time...but that would destroy the power of that big >>54"<< sticker that is so prominent on the tv's in the store now.  Anyway...

That's a pretty hypothetical conspiracy theory, and one I don't buy. Most people aren't good with figures, trying to compare tv sizes when presented with two dimensions gives you four figures to juggle, that's too much for most people who, frankly, aren't really that bothered at the end of the day anyway. So manufactures/advertisers give one figure because that's what most people want. Those of us who need the two figures can look them up/work the out for ourselves.

It would be selfish of me to want advertisers to confuse the majority just to make the my, and the minorities, lives ever so slightly simpler.
327
Living Room / Re: Can we stop with the diagonal screen length thing?
« Last post by Eóin on January 08, 2011, 03:06 PM »
Resolution and pixel pitch is what I look, i find the physical dimension much less useful.
328
I would imagine D is a wonderful language, it's probably the language C++ should be. But then it's not C++, so it doesn't have the anywhere near the same level of compiler support or library breath.
329
Living Room / Re: Password Brute Forcing and Geometric Series
« Last post by Eóin on January 05, 2011, 10:14 AM »
A though experiment is all it was ment to be :D
330
Living Room / Password Brute Forcing and Geometric Series
« Last post by Eóin on January 05, 2011, 08:01 AM »
There's been lots of talk about secure passwords recently. I was a bit bored and so decided to do a little math. The math relates to working out how long it would take the brute force a password while also taking into account Moore's Law. I first saw mention of this in a very early version of the 7-zip help file. It's no longer present in the new versions. Note this is just me musing, I'm not a cryptographer.

Let's simplify the math initially, so while Moore's Laws talks about transistor counts doubling every 18 months or so, we'll completely misrepresent it and claim that the number of passwords that the "technology of now" can brute force doubles every year. Next we'll also think of password lenghts in terms if bits so that we can can directly relate the increasing the length of the password by 1 bit to doubling the search space. For example in a lower-case alphanumeric password where each character comes from one of 36 possibilities, every additional character adds over five bits.

Ok, now onto the fun bit. So let's say that computers today can brute force about 1,000 passwords a year and that we have a password of 10 bits which gives a search space of also about 1,000. Now lets say this is a rather important password and I want to ensure what it protects stays safe for 15 years. One thought would be to add 4 more bits which would increase the search space by 16. But, the problem is over these 15 years the computers are improving. Indeed next year a computer would be able to brute force 2,000ish passwords, the following year that could be 4,000. Indeed by our simplified Moore's Law we see that in 4 years: 1,000 + 2,000 + 4,000 + 8,000 = 15,000. So though we increased the search space by 16, we really only added just over 4 years to the brute forcing effort, we've actually only seen a linear improvement.

This pattern is known as a geometric series, and to rob a Wikipedia graphic, there is a formula for calculating the sum

47470196f9edbc3b7bb81e853a3487ff.png

Here a is the number of passwords that can be brute forced now and r is the rate at which that increases.

So let's do a little test and ask how long would I need a password to be (in bits) today such that it'd stand up to 30 years brute forcing. We'll do the math in steps of months rather than years. To use somewhat real figures, I looked at CodingCrypto's page on Engineyard's Programming Contest. One of the results they quote is that a Quad Core 2 @ 2.4Ghz could compute 47,603,960 SHA1 hashes/second, which becomes a rather mind boggling ~ 1.2339 x 10^14 per month.

Ok, so let's do the math :Thmbsup:
  • If r over 18 months is 2, then r for one month is r = 2^(1/18) = 1.0393
  • We want to survive 30 years brute forcing so n = 30*12. Therefore the geometric sum x = 2.6709e+007
  • The value a we are taking to be 1.2339 x 10^14 passwords per month, giving the total, t = a*x = 3.2956e+021 over the next 30 years.
  • So what size in bits would a password need to be to stand up to that? Well the length l = log(t)/log(2) = 71.4810, so at least 72 bits.
  • Now what size lowercase alpha numeric password would we need? Well now we have l = log(t)/log(36) = 13.8263, or 14 characters.

All in all 14 lowercase alpha numeric characters isn't too long a password. But 30 years is a far cry from the thousands, if not millions, of years normally quoted for such password lenghts (and no, I don't have a citation to back up said quoted figures ;) )

Anyway, as I say, I'm just musing and maybe totally wrong. Also assuming Moore's Law to hold up over such timescales, or longer, is a bit fanciful  :-[
331
+1 on that. I've seldom seen a rebuild go 100% smoothly. Usually all of the drives were purchased at the same time

But the solution, surely, is just don't do that. RAID reliability assumes the probability of one drive failing is independant of the others. While that ideal can't be met in practice, you can get close to it by buying different drives from different sources and ideally different manufacturers.
332
Developer's Corner / Re: Mono for Android
« Last post by Eóin on January 04, 2011, 08:46 PM »
Did you get a mail already? I applied for the preview the moment I made this post but no email yet?
333
Developer's Corner / Re: Mono for Android
« Last post by Eóin on January 04, 2011, 07:41 PM »
Joined the preview myself. Looking forward to giving it a spin!!!
334
Well I only started playing with Win Server OSes with Server 2008, so i guess I started from a clean slate.
335
BTW, one big plus for Windows Server over a desktop Win OS is that it supports RAID setups. Pretty much all ours does at home is act as a file server tbh.
336
Windows Server 2008 R2 because it's free for students and is just sooooo easy to manage.

If I were setting up a web facing server I'd prob go Linux or *BSD. Actually I'd almost certainly go OpenBSD for geek browny points  :D
337
Developer's Corner / Mono for Android
« Last post by Eóin on January 04, 2011, 11:26 AM »
Oooooh sexy. From Miguel de Icaza's blog, Mono for Android has begun a preview program.

mono-android.png

Now that we feel that we have fixed all the embarrassing bugs in Mono for Android, so we have opened up our Mono for Android preview program to anyone that wants to take it out for a spin.

Mono for Android brings the full Mono VM to Android.
338
Developer's Corner / Re: Any EASY Windows Forms Skin Kits for C#?
« Last post by Eóin on January 03, 2011, 04:45 PM »
I must agree that in general I find custom skins irritating. I've often switched from an app, often to a less functional one, just because the first used a custom skin.
339
General Software Discussion / Re: In need of security advice ...
« Last post by Eóin on January 01, 2011, 06:19 PM »
I'm not so sure that the issue of effort vs. return comes into play with hacky "content protectors" as bypassing them is usually effortless. Also I find such tricks to be pretty obnoxious. If I can view the content then that's simply it, I have a copy of it on my machine, a copy I was willfully given. Anything someone does to try and make it difficult for me to get at what is already on my machine is simply wrong, evil, and highly malicious behavior.

If you don't want someone to have a copy of an image, then don't give that someone a copy of the image.
340
Living Room / Re: Apple, Champion of Censorship
« Last post by Eóin on December 26, 2010, 09:26 AM »
Well I'm embarrassed now that I jumped to assume the worst of him...
341
Living Room / Re: Not backing up will cost you!
« Last post by Eóin on December 25, 2010, 03:38 PM »
Often, if you order them at the same time, it is the same batch. So once one drive breaks, the other one isn't far away. That is what happened to me.

I've done that myself so I'm no saint, but doing do is very much wrong. Proper RAID arrays should contain drives from as many different sources as possible.
342
Living Room / Re: OpenBSD: Only two remote holes [...] - the rest come from inside?
« Last post by Eóin on December 24, 2010, 11:13 AM »
Fantastic news to hear! I've always admired OpenBSD :-*
343
Living Room / Re: Apple, Champion of Censorship
« Last post by Eóin on December 22, 2010, 05:34 PM »
This is true, but if I were to write such an app, my conscience wouldn't let me charge for it.

Nonetheless, the Apple censorship- appaling as always :(
344
Living Room / Re: Apple, Champion of Censorship
« Last post by Eóin on December 22, 2010, 05:25 PM »
It's not I suppose. Raw duplication of content, especially when you profit from it, is pretty dishonest, even if not illegal.

At least newspapers usually edit and utterly misrepresent or misquote the original source ;)
345
Living Room / Re: Apple, Champion of Censorship
« Last post by Eóin on December 22, 2010, 05:15 PM »
I don't doubt Apple would pull a genuine Wikileaks app if one were present. But this app was just someone cheaply, and I would say dishonestly, cashing in on the hype.

"Wikileaks App" was a paid app ($1.99) which did nothing more than present the Wikileaks Twitter feed and website – both of which can of course still be seen by iDevice users with sufficient energy to activate their browser and/or Twitter platform of choice, RSS app etc.

[snip]

There is no indication that any of the money will go to Wikileaks, or to Bradley Manning – the junior US soldier who allegedly supplied the site with almost everything of interest it has ever published.
346
Living Room / Re: DC Cool Sites List
« Last post by Eóin on December 22, 2010, 08:22 AM »
I forgot to mention another favorite.


For a great summary of the year see: http://www.badscienc...-year-in-nonsense-2/
347
Developer's Corner / Re: Your software — screencasting — why do it?
« Last post by Eóin on December 21, 2010, 09:48 PM »
Am I the only person who hates screencasts and finds them to be almost the worst possible way to make tutorials or even put together a demo? Like tutorials in a game, I find them terribly ineffective for teaching.
348
Living Room / Re: DC Cool Sites List
« Last post by Eóin on December 21, 2010, 11:38 AM »
349
No of course he's not. What I'm saying is artificial restrictions like regions make no sense in the modern digital world. So while the distributors continue to treat customers like this, it's no surprise that many (other) people turn to piracy.
350
Crap like this is why people pirate >:(
Pages: prev1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... 56next