Recent Posts
And, of course, continue to have unsuccessful relationships. One of these has to hit!Oh, that one might just work! Although I think I just might skip relationships and girls altogether.-superboyac (December 30, 2008, 04:33 PM)
Preemptive multitasking. Basically means linux can not crash unless the kernel crashes.That's not what pre-emptive multitasking means.
How many times you had to reboot your computer because of a hung app?Since win9x, never. Because of a BSOD? Since NT, only because of badly written drivers.
Even though it's gotten better, windows still yet does not use preemptive multitasking.Please do your research.
Everything is a program. Meaning, Linux can be less than 2MB in size for a fully functional Linux operating system. Windows can't do this, not even its compact edition.While "Windows" as a whole isn't super-modular, you can get the windows kernel below... what was is... a couple hundred kilobytes? (check the original stripped-down NT kernel used in the XBOX).
Portability. Linux can be ran, easily and natively, on basically every CPU architecture made. It can run on a powerpc mac, it can run on x86 windows processor, a RISC chip in mobile devices, the list goes on. This is something that windows and mac both can definitely not say. Yea, it can be ported, but this takes a long tedious time. The linux kernel just needs recompiling with the drivers for the device loaded. This calls for rapid deployment on a very wide range of new devices.For linux to be recompiled, first GCC + binutil + libc + <other stuff> needs to be ported. Then there's a few (or more) kernel modifications that need to be done. You're trivializing the porting process, which is nowhere near as simple as you're claiming. Sure, NT doesn't run on as many platforms as linux does, but because of it's HAL design it can be ported pretty well. Because of it's commercial nature, it isn't ported where there isn't a demand, though. This does, however, include the Alpha, x86, x86-64, Itanium, Itanium2, ARM (iirc) and some other handheld devices. So it's not like NT isn't portable, it's just that it's not ported where there isn't a (strong) demand).
Linux can be as big or as little as necessary (see portability), meaning it can pretty much run on any computer ever made, or any embedded device, for that matter.Try getting it to run on an 8-bit embedded controller - good luck. Even if it's possible, it'd be in such a stripped-down state that it doesn't make much sense, and you'd be better off running a custom OS.
One look at Windows Vista requirements, and it becomes obvious to you very quickly that Vista was not designed with older PC's in mind. Windows XP, for that matter, has quite steep system requirements when compared to its predecessor Win98.Now you're comparing a kernel (linux) to a full OS (Windows). There's quite a difference between those concepts... even the Vista kernel could be ported to a lot of different architectures. It's default settings are tweaked with modern machines in mind (following the BSD mentality of "unused RAM is wasted RAM").
No matter what browser she uses, it won't protect her from doing something stupid like entering her username/pass where she shouldn't even be.FF3 will warn against (already identified) phishing sites, though...-app103 (December 29, 2008, 11:28 PM)
, but FF3+ABP is a really fine combination.She assured me she was not dumb enough to fill in her MSN email address and password, other than to click the link.I would probably have been too embarrassed to admit having done so myself... but that's the way it works. That is, unless they've started feeding you malware that simply has the purpose of grabbing your msn login information - which would only work if you have auto-login enabled. And I somehow doubt that, since there would be much more interesting malware you could drop on the user's box then-patteo (December 29, 2008, 10:40 PM)
(AFAIK the sites don't install malware, or at least it's not the malware that's responsible for the spamming - my guess is the point of the crap is to drive traffic and gain advertisement money).
). There's currently no GUI for it, though, so all it does is transform a text like...This gets *bold*, and that gets __italic__. And here's a fast way to do google MSDN search: CreateProcess()-original
This gets bold, and that gets italic. And here's a fast way to do google MSDN search: CreateProcess()-transformed
. I do plan on fixing it eventually though, since I believe it could be a somewhat useful tool - it could be used, for instance, for all kinds of bbcode (or other forum) transforms that are faster to type than the regular codes, and you could do forum-specific replaces (like, I might use one set for DonationCoder and another for the ASM Community).
I really spent a lot of time and great efforts in the development of these algorithms.I'm not saying you didn't, and I'm not saying your algorithm is bad, or that Rijndael is the best algorithm. What I am saying is that a new algorithm shouldn't be trusted until it has been through rigorous testing by a lot of people.-Crush (December 29, 2008, 03:59 PM)
It seems that you trust too much in open source. Open source is a good thing to show others how to do special solutions or to create free programs for others. In such things like encryption I personally don´t trust very much in the security of open encryption algorithms that everybody can access and analyse.Forum regulars will know that I'm not an open-source zealot. But for something as critical as encryption, there's no way I'd ever use a closed-source algorithm - security through obscurity never worked. Without peer review, the only guarantee I have that your algorithm is good is your words. Try seeing things outside your own perspective - would you trust business- or life-critical data to a random guy?-Crush (December 29, 2008, 03:59 PM)
The "open" that is in most cases a good thing is in this case a weak point.Why? If it's open, multiple people can look for flaws in the algorithm. Of course this doesn't to most people, as it takes a lot of math background to do crypt-analysis, but keeping it closed gets you zero peer review.-Crush (December 29, 2008, 03:59 PM)
Additionally, I perhaps want to make a commercial product out of Cryptonizer with some other new features I don´t want to reveal now and these are the reasons why I don´t want to spread the source everywhere.You can make a commercial product even if the algorithm is open - there's a lot more to systems using encryption than just the algorithm used. I'd personally never use a product using a proprietary algorithm though, and I'd advice everybody against doing so, too.-Crush (December 29, 2008, 03:59 PM)
Some time ago people thaught DES or AES128 would be secure like you do now for AES that seems not to be very secure to me as your guru Bruce Schneier wrote.That sounded slightly patronizing... if I was a Schneier I'd probably have been running around in circles promoting Twofish, don't you think? I do believe he often has som very sensible things to say, though.-Crush (December 29, 2008, 03:59 PM)
I become a little bit sceptic when I see that NIST and the NSA wants everybody to use AES for public encryption. Would they really want you all to use an encryption they cannot decrypt without big efforts? Organisations that insist and live from controlling, information gathering and knowing everything about everybody doesn´t seem to be a trustful source for hints and tips.Ah, don't we love a good conspiracy theory?-Crush (December 29, 2008, 03:59 PM)
@dcm_rushI'm not shutting my eyes for new development - agan, I'm only saying that
Thank you for your words not to totally shut the eyes for new developmentsor other cool things you can find here or anywhere else.
-Crush (December 29, 2008, 03:59 PM)
I posted the code to other programmers that also said to me this could be a too simple way of encryption. After taking a look on it they admitted it´s impossible for them to say something about it´s safety but the principle should work.Not everybody who's a programmer is a cryptanalyst...-Crush (December 29, 2008, 03:59 PM)
Fodder, it seems more like your argument is more against anyone attemting to create a new cryptographic application than ANYTHING about this one or the authors work in this case, which seems to at the very least, solid and worthy of some further testing and research.Then you have misunderstood me.-dcm_rush (December 29, 2008, 08:46 AM)
If you can find a better way to test it than to let it go for free and let people find flaws in the application or alg, let me know, but it seems like even way back in 1999 when that was written, they knew the only real way to test it was to give it to the public to chew up and spit out.Yes, letting it into the wild... including design document and source code. And even then, new algorithms haven't been widely adopted until they've undergone massive testing, beating, analysis etc.-dcm_rush (December 29, 2008, 08:46 AM)
MS and Logitech drivers don't always play nice together!I haven't installed mouse or keyboard specific drivers for years-Carol Haynes (December 29, 2008, 10:41 AM)
- but I only do use the standard multimedia keys that is natively supported in XP, and I don't need tons of mouse buttons either. I've never been a fan of the keyboard and mouse "drivers" (which afaik don't even include driver components these days, but is more like always-running apps that intercept keys/buttons and launch applications/whatever), especially logitech have been really good at creating monster bloatware.i advise matching keyboard+mouse companyHow come?-mouser (December 29, 2008, 12:58 AM)
- I am a bit annoyed that people keep pushing the idea that IE is "preloaded" and thus has big advantages over other browsers, which is pretty bullcrap... and pretty easy to debunk on a slow machine, simply check how long a "cold" startup of IE (after a machine reboot) takes, and then how long a "hot" start takes.Is that a scratch-off lotto card?Nah, it's blotter paper-cmpm (December 25, 2008, 06:59 AM)
Ah, I do remember seeing that. A full regex combinatorial thing like that would probably be nontrivial to write, but tools to help with stuff like bbcode lists (and whatnot) could be doable - that's actually one of the purposes of the RegRexPlace pluginNope. I mean something like this:Please consider Text Generating pluginYou mean FabtasticMindReader plugin? That's planed for version 666-fenixproductions (December 25, 2008, 12:59 PM)-f0dder (December 25, 2008, 01:03 PM)
https://www.donation....msg141354#msg141354-fenixproductions (December 25, 2008, 02:06 PM)
Please consider Text Generating pluginYou mean FabtasticMindReader plugin? That's planed for version 666-fenixproductions (December 25, 2008, 12:59 PM)
| Application Name | f0dder's Notepad++ plugins |
| Version | 1.1 |
| Short Description | A small set of NP++ plugins that I find useful, and hope others will too |
| Supported OSes | Win32/x86-64, tested on XP64 and Vista64 - might work on Win9x as well |
| Web Page | http://f0dder.dcmembers.com/npp_plugins |
| Download Link | http://f0dder.dcmembers.com/npp_plugins |
| System Requirements |
|
| Version History |
|
| Author | f0dder |
(process files with preset regex templates)