and excretions.
817 karma · joined December 30, 2020
It is trivial to fit several compressed curve points (i.e. signatures) in a single packet, whereas you can't even fit two RSA signatures in a minimum-safe-to-assume DNS UDP reply packet after accounting for padding and ASN.1 overhead.
I get the feeling that there is some faction that really hates UDP and they sort of hijacked the DNSSEC situation to use as a lever to force people to allow DNS-over-TCP.
That seems to be backfiring, however, and DNSSEC has wound up taking a bullet for the UDP-haters.
Many very-large networks simply can't afford for their DNS traffic to be exposed to TCP's intrusion-detection malleability and slowloris (resource exhaustion) attacks. These networks appear to be simply ignoring the "thou must TCP thine DNS" edict. DNSSEC is not a good enough carrot for them. I think ditching RSA would have been a more pragmatic choice than ditching UDP or skipping DNSSEC.
> they would have to do their own client-side TLS handshake
By intercepting the STARTTLS port the attacker can merely decrypt -- rather than, as you wrote, decrypting and re-encrypting.
Use them.
Stop using domains. Stop.
The MiTM attacker can pass through a command stream without STARTTLS. If they intercepted 5223 they would have to do their own client-side TLS handshake with the attacked server, which would look really obvious to anybody doing TLS fingerprinting on the server: all of a sudden, 100% of their clients have the exact same TLS fingerprint.
Stop outsourcing your PKI to ICANN, folks. Domains are not public keys.
At least that's what Michael Lewis' book Going Infinite says happened.
FTX's mistake was that their liquidation engine valued collateral using something that could be manipulated. It's actually a very hard problem for an illiquid asset -- the correct valuation is the order book depth during the margin account's liquidation -- but that's always in the future so you can't know it exactly. And an attacker with two accounts can manipulate most of the things you might want to use as an approximation (like the last trade price or the order book depth right now).
The book claims that the bankrupcy trustee found the exploiter and the trustee CEO claimed they "had video of him entering and leaving his house" in (IIRC) Mauritius. However since the funds haven't been recovered the bankruptcy trustee could be bluffing or simply wrong about this. Or they can't extradite the guy. So not quite total silence, but also definitely not resolved.
BTW the book is really good, although it feels a bit rushed (obviously Lewis had a hard deadline for optimal publication date so this is totally forgiveable). There is a crapton of juicy stuff in there, like "Operation Warm Blanket". The number of powerful people who have egg on their face because of that book is absolutely unbelievable. No redactions. So many of them would have been able to quietly sneak out the back door with no public record if not for Lewis. Oh yeah and the mother of all easter eggs on the inside of the dust jacket.
You're applying evolutionary reasoning to an algorithm (gradient descent) which does not involve fitness selection in any way, shape, or form. This is bogus.
The Minds have no reason to treat humans well. Humans have a powerful evolutionary motivation to treat their kin well.
I dunno; it doesn't bother me at all.
What bothers me is pretending that the Culture is humanity's. Or that humans are in any way relevant to the whole plotline. It's like if somebody rewrote all the great works of literature from the perspectives of the protagonists' dogs, and then threw away the originals, and pretended that this was somehow a useful perspective. That would bother me.
Well okay; the humans aren't pets, they're emotional support animals. Not a huge improvement though.
When higher vertebrates developed cerebrums, those didn't replace the evoluntionarily-older cerebellum or midbrain. We humans still have those. From the perspective of a lizard, a human looks like a lizard with an awesome AI-like cerebrum strapped to it.
Importantly, the cerebrum does not have an independent self-preservation drive.
Frankly, I think "AIs with their own self-preservation drive and plans for the future" is implausible, although it is likely to be put forward as a deceptive explanation of what's going on by the first few humans who figure out how to strap on another layer of cerebrum. It's the easiest way to keep the rest of us from becoming resentful.
Come home, all you commodores, come home...
... but then it's really the machines' Culture, isn't it? And we're just their pets.
I'm going to read Consider Phlebas based on the essay linked above, but I think it's a bit dishonest to describe this Culture as belonging to any of its inhabitants other than The Minds. It's The Minds' Culture, and everybody else are just their housecats. Kind of a disappointing future if there's any other option besides self-annihilation. Cozy, but disappointing.
They tend to be in the same ballpark.
There's a feedback effect: if the maskset gets cheaper you can afford to do shorter product cycles (think "iphone 15.5"), now you've got two masksets each with half the engineer-years devoted to it. This lets you be a bit bolder with the design since the cost of screwing up is lower. If masks get super-expensive then you only do one maskset and you throw more design-hours into making damn sure it's correct, and spend more time adding in "chicken bits" -- ways to turn off features that you screwed up, without ruining the whole chip -- and fallback options or insurance-policy type stuff. So the design cycle will lengthen or shorten if the engineering cost is several times larger or several times smaller than the mask cost. They sort of balance out.
Also the design cost is often impossible to define exactly. Blocks from previous designs get reused, so you can't really "charge" the effort it took to design them to just one chip. All the major design houses write a lot their own CAD tools too, and these tools have decade-or-longer lifetimes.
The issuer can also sell that debt (daily rental up to car value) to a debt collector.
https://nebulas.sfwa.org/nominated-work/the-voluntary-state/
https://www.lexal.net/scifi/scifiction/originals/originals_a...
Five years ago I would not have called it "realistic", but a lot has changed.
Come home, all you commodores, come home...
Deposition is usually the same -- CVD.
Note that the stamp is applied to the resist:
> the new product does it by pressing a mask imprinted with the circuit pattern on the resist on the wafer like a stamp
Last time I heard about this tech (~8 years ago, when it was nowhere near commercial availability) that was the obstacle. Since the mask comes into physical contact with each wafer there is unavoidable wear on the mask with each wafer (actually with each chip). So the mask life is a certain number of chips; then you have to make a new one.
This uses e-beams to make the mask, right? Edit: here's their research paper (7 years old but note the identical model name FPA-1200NZ2C):
http://cnt.canon.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Nanoimprint-...
Turns out they e-beam a "master mask" and then use that as an imprint to create "replica masks". Then the "replica masks" imprint the wafers. Sadly you still have to start with a crazy-expensive e-beam mask.
In the US, the rental agreements let them keep charging you the daily rental fee until the amount collected exceeds the value of the car.
This phenomenon is so massively underappreciated.
Now that interest rates are back to normal I am extremely interested in seeing how much of this phenomenon is permanent (i.e. path-dependent). I just hope that Big Tech hasn't become so important that it is bailout-eligible.
"It isn't until the tide goes out that you see who's been swimming naked" -- various successful investors.
Coherence: Wikipedia pages are small and loosely-coupled.
Stability: Wikipedia has no external API. Any page can be renamed and restructured at any time.
Spin?
So you can only be attacked if you're using a socks5 proxy, and even then you can only be attacked by your own proxy? Which rules out things like torsocks where you're running the proxy too.
Does this really merit all of last week's antics?
Come on man, this is delusional. I want to believe it too but be realistic.