topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

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

Login with username, password and session length
  • Tuesday November 11, 2025, 9:06 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 ... 159 160 161 162 163 [164] 165 166 167 168 169 ... 175next
4076
Hi Skwire,

That new version is giving me squished text again on my Win7 hi-res screens. We saw that before on one of your other programs. Is that easy to fix again?
4077
I was so looking forward to the ads!  :D ::) :lol:

Oh, I haven't forgotten my little idea! I have to settle down a little, then I'll make my own mini ad page ForTehLulz and we can have at it!

4078
"I'm in the process of setting up a static blog, where all blogging takes place on a local development (machine), with the resulting static site being pushed to my shared hosting."

Although my backbone is much different, I am doing something like this too. Last I knew there were fewer points of attack against simple web pages. I also like having local control of my data.
4079
New Progress and features!

Any chance the CrossHairs of Death can be (optionally?) removed on the next update?

With all these surveillance stories it's making me want to draw a graphic:
(Rectangular Box - In the middle is one word in huge font: "YOU". Elsewhere in the caption it says "Who is targetting you now?"
4080
I'm going to go buy some tinfoil now, to make a nice hat, thereby reversing the TinFoilHat Meme.

This stuff is becoming like a collectible card game.  "Let's see what's in this expansion pack!"

Question: How do we sort the Rarities? By the Wow factor?

Question: How do we prevent the FBI attaching cookies like that? One of the No-Script type plugins, "accept all cookies manually" or something?  P.S. With that Collusion plugin, where it makes noises for each cookie, some sites just set one, some go off like machine guns!
4081
I had a bad experience with Ubuntu a couple of times. A ways back I ran into a (later determined) known bug in Dapper Drake that did ugly things, then somewhere about 10-10 Ubuntu quit loading on my test machine.

I did sorta okay with one of the Suses. I've been dying to try out Mint with xfce, but I need a good 3 day weekend to really try out a distro.

But lately I just lost interest because it's the App side. Forgetting the big hitter programs, I have almost/over 100 mini apps! So the trouble for me is trying to find replacements for everything.
Yeah, me too.  i rely on dozens of little software every day on Windows.  Actually, that would be an interesting list for me to make regarding this little project of mine.  I should list all my regularly used Windows softwares and find equivalents for mint.

I forgot about Wine! But I don't understand that well how to get data "out of the wine side" and "into the linux side." (Does Cut and Paste work?)

But if you just think, at the absurdly fast Hour per App, that's 100 hours!  :o

To that other set of posts, I DO want Linux to be able to do everything with a GUI, because for me it is about the Philosophy of Linux being Not a Big Corp. I am not interested in the command line right now. So we were saying about multi distros, gimme a GUI one! I like Buttons!
4082
Living Room / Re: On Change Run Task - My first Windows desktop application
« Last post by TaoPhoenix on March 19, 2012, 02:31 PM »
Oh there we go! That is kinda cute! Not sure what to do with it yet, but I'm good at Rube Goldberging stuff!
4083
I had a bad experience with Ubuntu a couple of times. A ways back I ran into a (later determined) known bug in Dapper Drake that did ugly things, then somewhere about 10-10 Ubuntu quit loading on my test machine.

I did sorta okay with one of the Suses. I've been dying to try out Mint with xfce, but I need a good 3 day weekend to really try out a distro.

But lately I just lost interest because it's the App side. Forgetting the big hitter programs, I have almost/over 100 mini apps! So the trouble for me is trying to find replacements for everything.
4084
Living Room / Re: On Change Run Task - My first Windows desktop application
« Last post by TaoPhoenix on March 19, 2012, 01:32 PM »
I'm not sure I'm doing it right. "Add Task" seems to add a file to watch, but then I can't load in anything for it to do. How does that work?

I re-installed the Framework but no effect. I'm on Win7.
4085
Come to think of it, is it not so that the software that implements the scheme as proposed by TaoPhoenix has to know which kind of scheme is has to work with code-wise?

Thus clearing up the whole obfuscation part for one who knows where to look/reverse-engineer? It sounds silly to me to have the software 'bruteforce' its way through the possible encryption techniques, as it would make using this software unbearable slow and very CPU/GPU resource hungry.   

Thanks everyone for chiming in.

One part of this is Audience - it was always about my own data outbound to correspondents, with vague surveying the intrusion culture such as Gmail's new SuperAggregation, etc. Designing systems for other clients wasn't part of it all.

Above all it was about education - I knew I was on to something, and I wasn't all that far off. I'm happy to use implementation details by the Pros. I just knew my basic starting point was less "small-key alg" based, and more straddling the lines of One Time Pads and One Time Book Ciphers. Having seen the Statistical Frequency attacks and noticing the much higher (though not perfect!) entropy in program files forced open into Notepad, the notion occurred to me that such files would *approximate* One Time Pads, and mostly avoid the statistical attacks of ordinary Book Ciphers.

That Chinese paper closed the loop, essentially saying that my concept was close, but to perform those operations at the binary level on binary text data, rather than symbol-to-letter. So then theoretically all I'd need was a program that simply performed the binary book cipher encoding. So yes, even if the method is known, according to the paper, it should still be very difficult to extract the data with one-time-books.

So then to clarify, since by definition any cipher requires the recipient to have something secret, I was just leaning toward it being "secretly chosen books" rather than "secretly chosen short keys".

However, that is all the interest I have in it right now.
4086
Okay, I apparently have a habit of being a Semi-Troll to leave alone!

Meanwhile, the results of another weekend project are concluding.

I was stumbling toward:
"A Novel Method to Implement Book Ciphers"
http://ojs.academypu...ad/051116211628/2309
(Warning, I just got database connection errors - not sure what that means, if I downloaded it too many times!)

and Key Agreement Protocols.

And yes, this was much more than a $50 commission given the risks of bugs vs my other one which was just for nice sites.
4087
Living Room / Re: RIAA chief: ISPs to start policing copyright by July 12
« Last post by TaoPhoenix on March 17, 2012, 04:32 PM »
Oh, you're right in concept, they shouldn't get all that, but they do ... there's the whole thing that come July 2012 the ISP's will get a new level of tracking etc...
4088
Living Room / Re: A change I've seen in the forum
« Last post by TaoPhoenix on March 17, 2012, 01:05 PM »
Discussion are Yummy! And we are doing well, I don't see many "stupid troll" posts.
4089
Kyrathaba, I can afford a $50 Commission to you (or anyone else) developing this kind of program at Phase 1.
4090
And here is the answer to my puzzle!


Supercode 1: Weakened!

1.     Go to http://upsideout.com/
1a.     Download graphic for Proxy.org
1b.    Change File Extension from .gif to Null by deleting the file extension altogether.
1c.    Open the Null file in MS Wordpad.
1d.    Review open file - lots of junk characters - but here is the magic!

2.    Examine the coded message. The 10's are meant to be a Trojan Horse for Binary guesses, but they are actually cumulative batches of 10.
2a.    Add up the Batches of 10. The code letters are counted as # of characters from the top of the document. And this is the simple case!
2b.    ^ is a deliberate re-use of a symbol, not to be the exponent of anything, but to mean "Approximately this many characters in". I have yet to formalize whether a character count is before or after the character, etc. Also, this covers for human errors. If I say "Approx 6 char in" and the first 8 are total junk and char 9 works, that's part of the theme, though that gets better with software.
2c.    Once a character is located, the count starts back at zero. This should work for about any two uses of a letter here and there, because it sorta approximates 3-4 digit numbers per letter, so even if they get a stray L, that can't be that great of a help.

3.     Take the next section of code from the beginning again. (In this variant! This was meant to be easy! Relative Counting via software is even better!)
3a.    Count out the next batch of 10. Include the possibility that the author miscounted the batches! These are junk boxes, so if you come up way short, call me a moron, add an extra batch, then try again. Formalized again, this kind of thing will beat the Cracker programs because it's outside the algorithm (currently!).
3b.    Find the second letter of the code.

4.    Assemble the message.
4a.    I only did two letters with a purposely easy method. I have almost 30 methods on tap. For example, relative counting, "destructive boxes" which change the letter countings of the data, I don't even have to use a single file, Unknown file locations, unknown data formats produce their own file-junk in Notepad, Trojan Horse Messages that are incorrect seemingly duplicate solutions, and more.

5.    Publish the results. The Alpha test went to Justin Schlecter of UpsideOut.com and UpsideOut, Inc., DonationCoder.com, and an extra contact of my own. Method: If a both weakened and partially explained test example cannot be cracked in a trivial amount of time, then hardened versions combined with all the other methods should be a new set of security concepts.

6.    Ideas: The power comes from blending multi-disciplinary ideas.

6a.    Steganography is the art of including data that is at best meaningless, and even worse, misleads the cracker into a blind alley as a false hint.
6b.    Multiplicity (as I term it) is the idea that it's not just a simple-but-tough algorothm; instead the cracker initially doesn't even know all of the techniques to use. So enemy time will be wasted trying to figure out even what methods to use, in what order.
6c.    Obfuscation. Any of my internal results can be "wrapped" in a standard Crypto layer, so that even if a chunk of time and comps are used to break the outer layer, the message is still a mess. When modern cracking programs look for a pattern and the "correct answer at that level" is still
wergefrhrthjrewfgtrjreTGartheWHearygerHYareh, they might have trouble recognizing it as a valid key break. More research is needed here. Even if they do, the next step still takes a secondary algorithm, which could be "anything" as far as they know.
6d.    Innovation - I believe there are tons of materials made possible by the Computer Revolution which will contribute to Cryptographic theory, but are not currently being harnessed. I have used a few of them in my sample.
6e.    Left Field Thinking - My term for a new style of Cryptography. A quick glance over current literature on Cryptography seems to revolve on high end math. There is a lot of fertility left in low end PreProcessing and Post-Processing not covered by all this literature. Almost anything can be converted to cryptographic use, from spacial placement of desktop icons, to spaces in a document, to fonts used for punctuation per document per a chart. (Can you tell an Arial period from a Geneva period?)
6f.    Test Cases. I have sent off a couple of purposely weakened test cases. If even the weak test cases prove troublesome, then the advanced algorithms and methods must be even worse!

7.     There IS a mistake!!!!! (Not intentional, but recovering from it is part of this memo). I think a lot of my "10's" became straight "0's" in the last half. So I think restoring them to 10's works. I might have lost count, the receiver might need to add a 10. But it's still distractions, which serves my point. ((Partially fixed for DC, but there are still a couple of extra characters!))

    There are more ideas not yet covered here in this memo.
4091
On a personal level you have picked my interest (in wanting to know how your scheme works, not breaking it).

On a professional level it is likely not that interesting as any method other than the default ones are very hard to sell to (mediocre) management that just want to buy some extra protection for their site/LAN/whatever.

All of my ideas can be automated to be "purchased as additional security". I am just staying Low Level Old School to demonstrate that there is room for innovation that I have not seen covered in the articles.
4092
Like Shades, I'd be interested in learning about the methodology. But I lack the time and interest to actually want to try cracking anything. Not that I'd be "leet" enough at cracking to pull it off even if I wanted to.

That's why I only pay attention to so-called "open" encryption algorithms. They constantly have a few hundred very smart and qualified eyes on them. So any exploitable holes or weaknesses (either from intrinsic factors or introduced by advances in cracking technology) usually get identified and fixed quite quickly. With the result that open encryption tools are 'known' and often more secure than methods that depend on obscurity for part of their security.

Good luck with your new methodology however.  :Thmbsup: Anything that can make our data more secure is ok by me. 8)

You have a point about "open" schemes, but somewhere in the mix I believe the Obscurity Factor is under-rated. If you cannot tell even what algorithm to use, then you as the Interested Enemy are slowed down that much more.

It also relates to my theory of "Good Enough". I carefully ruled out absolute results. Then if "you yourself" are not interested enough to crack the code and have to "delegate it off", then the method stands. So maybe "Alexander Fegorov in Russia" knows how to break it, if 1000 US generals don't have access to him, the method stands for the first 100 messages. Then we just switch methods anyway.

And I have over 30 individual element techniques on tap anyway, so that's the power of obfuscation. Half your problem is even figuring out what the blazes I am doing.

EDIT: However, for the discussion, I posted my first example below.
4093
Update:

In fact, I got a reply from a privacy-security web site firm in New York. Heh I also sent it off to a personal contact.

This is my "easy example". I put the extra provocative language that "if the best people in the biz can't bust this in 2-3 days, and this is the purposely weakened example with lots of extra hints, then my larger point that there are lots of concepts left for cryptography stands".

EDIT: I did explain below. But if my initial post stumped you, that was the entire point - innovative cryptography means that the method is unclear. I purposely said it's not "inifinitely secure", there are edge cases. But I believe there is a big "Good Enough" realm for many uses.

-----

(repaste of other text)

Rather than explain, I shall give an example! (Isn't that the point of encryption - half the sauce is in the method!)

Do you like Chinese Food? The correct message is 2 letters long. And I shouldn't even tell you that but I'm being nice. : ) And I didn't even use any of my nasty tricks. So this should be nice and relaxing, you know, over breakfast or lunch, with some nice buttered toast.

10101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010
1010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010
1010101010101010101010101010^7
10101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010
1010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010
10101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010
10101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010
1010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010
1010101010101010101010110101010101010101010^4
(Lots of Extra Line Breaks in there, to get it to fit in the forum)
So that should be a nice pleasant warmup to our discussion! To make it even easier, here are some hints!

- I hand coded that one, so there may be a mistake, but formalized, the concept means that we currently rely on "perfect messages" as output, which is a flaw. Once my method above is known, it should be a trivial fix for any competent staffer. In the theory of cryptography, we rely too much on "perfect translations", so that when designing new theory, we should make the recipient "work a little" to prove the message. To make this obvious, an "x" in a random spot can't possibly (NORMALLY!) be part of the message, but it's enough to slow down the crackers.

- For the same reason that AI's struggle, put a "human factor" into codes. Let's suppose I made a mistake in my hand coding. A "human analyst would look for nearby cases". (This can be later automated.)

- At the brutally obvious level, all that junk can't be 1-1, to produce a 2 letter answer, so clearly something else is going on. But what?

Heh -

I appreciate your interest, and I hope my "easy version with hints" is enough to spark your interest. To joke, I gave so many hints that if your best cracker can't do it in two days after purposely weakening it as much as amuses me, my point is made about my bigger concept, which is that tons of ideas have not yet made it to Professional Cryptography.

To distract the living hell out of you, (essential part of any good crypto message) I'll mention Kurt Godel, and ask you how many characters there are in this email!

Yours with codes,

--Tao
4094
Living Room / Re: RIAA chief: ISPs to start policing copyright by July 12
« Last post by TaoPhoenix on March 17, 2012, 05:49 AM »
I remember the Cache cases, there's been rumblings about those being required to view a page. However somewhere between you two, and indeed with some illogic, they are indeed trying to make it illegal to create permanent copies of transitory stuff.

We have specialized lawyers winning these kinds of cases in places like East Texas, and the new generation of copyright laws like the now famous SOPA/PIPA/PCFIPA/"Canadian DMCA", ACTA, and your choice of a few more, ARE making/trying to make what are indeed supposed to be common sense actions, illegal.
4095
Living Room / Re: A change I've seen in the forum
« Last post by TaoPhoenix on March 17, 2012, 05:37 AM »
Yep, I'm in agreement with the topic importance theme. Windows vs Mac vs Linux is fairly well settled these days. Windows 7 is a credible successor to XP, having fixed up the Vista Core, Mac OS is its usual solid self with aggressive obsolescence of hardware, Linux is the Third Rail of the other two. So folks will bounce along those three, etc.

It's hard to pin down a date,  so I see it as a bit of a year span, but I'll suggest 1999's Napster following upon 1998's DMCA leading into April 2001's despair of the Dot Com crash and 2001's 9-11 2002's  as about the start of it all, I followed the articles on the fall of Napster, but it still needed a couple of years to brew all the evil.

For me that brewing occurred because of the *military* oppression structure that Bush kicked into gear, basically creating a new (and bad) model of government. However there wasn't exactly anything "flashfire" that would get you in trouble from the Airport screenings, not universally. They'd take your baby's juice away but you wouldn't go bankrupt from it.

The Copyright thing is a sort of Lord of the Rings Sauron Eye. "Oh, are you using a computer for what it was supposed to do? Gasp, did you copy a picture? $125,000 lawsuit for you!"

So as smart tech folks, we are trying to rise to the challenge, call us the kids of the Science Fiction Age who grew up with the warning stories, so we're trying to put a few resources in place before they complete the total locks at the end/setting of those stories.
4096
Older DC Contests and Challenges / "Unconventional Encryption Challenge"
« Last post by TaoPhoenix on March 16, 2012, 01:43 PM »

I'm giddy today. So I created a new challenge. I posted it over to Slashdot too. (Slightly reworded for DC vs there.)

I've wondered for a long time now about encryption. I think it's time to use "out of the box" approaches to encryption.

I'm certainly not in that Elite-IQ crowd but given the very nature of how the sender has a colossal advantage over the breaker, I think I could create a message that no one but the elite genius at those agencies could break. I think no one at DC is good enough to get it, nor Anonymous. Mensa might have a chance, barely.

This is different from "certifying it unbreakable". I'm avoiding that trap. Just "Sufficiently hard".

Any takers? It might even be fun if someone has Academic connections. My overall concept is so good I think I could stump almost all of the Non-Gov Professors too.

Anyone interested, reply here. I'll reply with a watered down "easy version" just to be sure someone's not trolling me. (Also it forms a weak version of a test.) On the (slim?) chance that someone gets it, I'll produce a couple of the real corkers. I'd stake up to $100 of my own money through a certified neutral holder. Not that it's "worth that little", just saying I'm not trolling, this concept is so good nobody but the absolute best will figure it out. It's a new METHOD of encryption, so it's probably even NP-Hard (I'm probably using that term wrong) as a class so that "almost unlimited" examples can be created.
4097
Living Room / Re: RIAA chief: ISPs to start policing copyright by July 12
« Last post by TaoPhoenix on March 16, 2012, 12:21 PM »
Cueing the Not-A-Lawyer acronym, I respectfully believe your post is wrong.

Starting from the common sense side, let's take that picture as an example. RightClick ... wait for it ... *Copy* Image. Right Click your desktop. Paste Image. Boom - a new ... uh... something has appeared.

So I believe downloading is absolutely distribution - you become your own distributor to yourself.

They currently let a lot of downloading slide because it's bigger dollars of gain on the upload side, but given a big enough product under discussion, they'd go after that too.

As for the Stream part, that's where they are playing fast and loose - yes "technically" it's a copy created, but they're treating it like a "one-time performance" and not a copy. They're wink&nodding people's lack of computer skills to extract the streamed copy from its obfuscated temporary folder.
4098
Living Room / Re: RIAA chief: ISPs to start policing copyright by July 12
« Last post by TaoPhoenix on March 16, 2012, 07:22 AM »

What I really want to say:
:mad:
...
"You have failed to indicate the license of that graphical work that you copied in its entirety. This is your first warning. A second offense will involve Habanero Pepper Beef Jerky."
4099
Living Room / RIAA chief: ISPs to start policing copyright by July 12
« Last post by TaoPhoenix on March 15, 2012, 08:05 PM »

See, the Tin Foil Hats were RIGHT. Don't we owe them an apology for 20 years of ridicule?

Try this one:

http://news.cnet.com...opyright-by-july-12/

Comcast, Time Warner and Verizon are among the ISPs preparing to implement a graduated response to piracy by July, says the music industry's chief lobbyist.

"Last July, Comcast, Cablevision, Verizon, Time Warner Cable and other bandwidth providers announced that they had agreed to adopt policies designed to discourage customers from illegally downloading music, movies and software. Since then, the ISPs have been very quiet about their antipiracy measures. "

LAST JULY. It's now March. See how short the Net's attention span is?

"Supporters say this could become the most effective antipiracy program ever. Since ISPs are the Internet's gatekeepers, the theory is that network providers are in the best position to fight illegal file sharing. CNET broke the news last June that the RIAA and counterparts at the trade group for the big film studios, had managed to get the deal through--with the help of the White House. "

"Participating ISPs can choose from a list of penalties, or what the RIAA calls "mitigation measures," which include throttling down the customer's connection speed and suspending Web access until the subscriber agrees to stop pirating. "

"The partnership with the major bandwidth providers was years in the making."


4100
Living Room / Re: Censoring Internet Porn?
« Last post by TaoPhoenix on March 15, 2012, 07:53 PM »
And it's Rick Santorum. He's really trying to play the far right line "Oh gasp people should be pious churchgoers and never need to look at a picture because their almost-lovely loving wife will never leave them".

Sorry Rick. Someone convict him on a misdemeanor and order him to watch the movie Pleasantville 9 times. It's not 1954 anymore. Philip K. Dick agreed. (Eye in the Sky, etc.)

These guys take your average list of Uni Freshman in Philosophy's list of Logical Fallacies and race to employ every last one as often as possible because finally the poor workingman/woman's mind explodes and they vote for the guy.

Pages: prev1 ... 159 160 161 162 163 [164] 165 166 167 168 169 ... 175next