elliotz

6 ms·

1.
Duplicate Signature Key Selection Attack in Let's Encrypt(agwa.name)
1 points by elliotz 11y ago|0 comments
2.
by elliotz 12y ago
> That's why we ask the question about 3 people in broadly different areas. Frankly, if you don't recognize at least one of those names and understand the foundational contributions they made, then yeah I'd call that a k
3.
by elliotz 12y ago
> If all they can come up with is "Minix" and "that pissing contest with Linus", then I might see if the Linux devops guys have an opening. If they're that incurious, they'll do fine there; those guys think
4.
by elliotz 12y ago
> Since the article doesn't really endorse XTS in any context, I'm not sure your proposed title is accurate. But it's also not saying that you shouldn't use XTS for full disk encryption. In fact it seems to say it&
5.
by elliotz 12y ago
I agree. Although the article content is good and reaches a good, nuanced conclusion, the title is going to confuse people. Many people will only ever encounter XTS when setting up full disk encryption with dm-crypt, where they'll b
6.
by elliotz 12y ago
The public standard shouldn't include the secret values, but rather identify the (verifiable) process for generating the public values, in order to assure people that they were not created from secret values. See: https://en
7.
Debian and CAcert(lwn.net)
1 points by elliotz 12y ago|0 comments
8.
by elliotz 12y ago
It's a great policy. Stripe was doing this 2 years ago: http://blog.alexmaccaw.com/stripes-culture Anyone know if they still do it, even after growing?
9.
by elliotz 12y ago
With emphasis on experienced - Levison was represented for a bit by a business attorney. He may have passed the bar, but he was completely inexperienced in federal criminal cases.
10.
by elliotz 12y ago
Even law enforcement characters were upright: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wL9Li0f1Po
11.
by elliotz 13y ago
Except that the Linux ISO is not called "Firefox." It would be OK for the Linux distribution to use the Firefox trademark descriptively to say that it includes Firefox, but that's not what these adware vendors are doing.
12.
by elliotz 13y ago
> Keurig is free to do what they want, just as a consumer is free to choose whichever coffee maker they want. The issue isn't whether Keurig should be free to add DRM to their product or not. The issue is whether they should be abl
13.
by elliotz 13y ago
I wonder why Mozilla doesn't go after these sites for trademark infringement. Mozilla made Debian change the name of their Firefox package to Iceweasel because they made modifications; surely bundling in adware also violates Mozilla&#
14.
by elliotz 13y ago
Robert Graham (ErrataRob) pointed out some problems with this study: http://blog.erratasec.com/2014/02/that-trollers-are-sadists-...
15.
Constructing a list in a Monad(joachim-breitner.de)
1 points by elliotz 13y ago|0 comments