throwaway125

>all the text, sounds, textures models are present on the client side alone

This isn't entirely true. All the quest text, monster says, NPC interactions and more are sent by the server. Sure, the models and sounds are part of the client, but the server tells your client where to place which mobs, how much health they should have, how they react to you, etc.

>The content that is available on Nostralius is literally not available on any live server any more

Yeah, hosting a game server that is no longer available because the company that used to host them stopped offering that option should probably not be against the law. Even single player games are being created as "multiplayer" nowadays, so it's bound to become an even bigger problem in the future.

I have noticed the same problem when adding several search terms and ddg ignoring the one that is the most important. I have found that if you quote that term it returns better results that do include that term.

For your particular example if you search for 'usb type c "resistor"' you get (what I assume to be) reasonable results: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=usb+type+c+"resistor"

Ideally duckduckgo should recognize which of the search terms are defining, but until that happens quoting should help you out.

I think you might have misread the gp. gp asked

>am I required to make my application code public?

You are not required to make your application public as it is not considered a derivative of the linux kernel. If you distribute the device you are required to provide your customers with the source code to the running linux kernel.

The exact details depend on multiple factors (are you linking to libraries? Are they considered system libraries?) and if you are actually thinking of doing this you should invest some time in investigating this, and probably in consulting a lawyer.

Note that this is all based on my layman's understanding of the law and the license, and I'm definitely not a lawyer.

You misread what was said I think. It's about a facebook like, not about facebook itself.

The readme doesn't seem to mention or I have missed it: I assume this works on a locked instance of KeePass (the database opened, but the application interface locked)?

Most of the time you can paste the password in another field (like the username) and select and drag it to the password field.

Browsers should probably not allow that kind of interaction between javascript and the password field.

While your name and phone number are public, the list of people who have your phone number saved is not public. These companies can effectively map who you associate with only by looking at other people's phones. They can profile you by association, and that is very wrong.

At some point privacy is no longer a choice, not a real choice anyway. You get to chose between participating in society or keeping your privacy. It shouldn't have to be this way, but it is.

I really do appreciate the effort you put into these videos, and I definitely understand you want something out of this as well but the user experience of having to go through your site instead of a link to a youtube playlist does put me off quite a bit.

Either way, the first few videos I've watched so far are great, thanks.

It's because the distinction isn't meaningful for day to day use. People use and compare languages and their standard libraries as a whole.

I do think people recognize the fact that these two are different things (e.g. when comparing C to a language with a richer standard library it's one of the points that are often specifically and separately mentioned.), but it's just not very useful to separate them explicitely in a comparison of languages from a user's point of view (as opposed to a language designer's point of view).

techdevman: Your account is shadow banned. Looking at your history I think it was for your first article submission. It seems in error. No contact info in your profile so I wrote this reply.

What is your opinion on Threefish then? Is there something fundamentally wrong with bigger keys/blocks, or is it just that known big key/block schemes are not useful?

I think a renamed fork is (maintained) here https://github.com/mgp25/Chat-API (it was linked in https://github.com/venomous0x/WhatsAPI/issues/1140)

All but Marco Rubio have wildcard certificates without an apparent use for them. It looks like whoever built their websites was keen on using all the budget they were alloted.

I'm not sure why the proposal would not cover MMO games. If a game studio abandons an MMO game it is completely destroyed for the players, an exemption would be very useful in that case. Perhaps the EFF is trying to avoid too much resistance from big companies that make a lot of money on MMO games, which is understandable but unfortunate.

This can be disabled in firefox's about:config page by setting media.peerconnection.enabled to false.

The problem with disabling all these features on a case by case basis is that you contribute to a richer fingerprint this way. Browsers will become increasingly more vulnerable to fingerprinting and there doesn't seem to be a way to stop it without going back to the dark ages of the web.

While many of these warnings can be annoying during development they are also very useful if the code is kept clean of them. In this case the __bounded__ attribute is a security feature their compiler version has. If another platform can not support this feature then revoking this specific instance of this warning is an active decision someone should make when writing the build scripts. Just ignoring all warnings is certainly not the way to go.

The language often (always?) has facilities to remove those warnings on a case by case basis. For example when you don't want to use a parameter you can actively let the compiler know without assigning the variable to itself: you can only include the type and not the name:

    int fn(int, void*);
    
    int fn(int num, void* /*extra*/) {
        // If the name extra is commented out the compiler will
        // not warn that you are not using it. Now it is very
        // clear that not using this variable was an active choice
        // and not a mistake.
        return num;
    }

edit: as pbsd pointed out commenting out extra is not portable C code, though I believe the wider point still stands. These warnings can be very useful and should be be reviewed before ignoring them.

You can't ever guarantee that for any certificate signed by any CA.

It being closed source or not isn't what makes it ironic. Enticing people to include a <script> tag on their website that then makes their visitors download a .js that will leave an entry in cloudfront's log file documenting that your users visited your website (via the referrer url) is what makes it ironic.

Including a third party javascript to protest and spread awareness about mass surveillance... That seems a little ironic.

Have there been recent public disclosures of vulnerabilities in hypervisors?

Breaking out of virtual machines is a really interesting process but it's important to remember that a hypervisor can be attacked with pretty much the same techniques you can attack any other program. Virtual machines aren't a magic contain-all-the-hackers solution. There was an interesting talk on DEFCON 19 about breaking out of KVM: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVSVdudfF8Q

Trying to evaluate and attack systems is a vital part of building secure systems. Many of these researchers do work on their own systems (think tor, redphone, ...) while also engaging with the crypto community at large to find flaws and improve methodology.

It's important to keep in mind that humans are social beings, and communicating with others by writing witty one liners can be very rewarding in and of itself regardless of the karma points you get. That doesn't mean you never do anything useful though, it just means that you decided to do something you enjoy and find personally rewarding at this moment, maybe to take a break from writing that patch you are working on.

In other words: yes, it's vulnerable to SSL stripping.

How did you obtain the right to distribute jab comix for free?

That's not true. Given a dictionary of 2048 words that the attacker has complete knowledge about, picking any 4 random words will always give you 44 bits of entropy.

    2048^4 = 17592186044416
    2^44 = 17592186044416

The following two headers are also useful:

    add_header Strict-Transport-Security max-age=31536000;
    add_header X-Frame-Options DENY;

The first one tells browsers it should never try to visit the http version of this site, even if the user clicks on a http link the browser will visit the https version. This helps prevent ssl stripping attacks.

The second prevents browsers from including this site in an iframe or frame, which helps prevent clickjacking attacks. If your site depends on those you can also set the option to SAMEORIGIN.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/HTTP/X-Frame-Option... https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Security/HTTP_Stric... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSL_stripping#SSL_stripping

Do you have any links to the crypto.cat bug?

now enter the first 72 characters of that password in the bcrypt verification function and it'll still say it's correct. bcrypt is a valid technical reason to limit passwords to 72 characters.