zauguin
> - Remove the data. This is much harder than it sounds. Many PDF tools won't let you change the content of a PDF, not because it isn't possible, but because you'll likely massively screw up the formatting, and the tools don't want to deal with that.
Compared to other formats this is actually relatively easy in a PDF since the way the text drawing operators work they don't influence the state for arbitrary other content. A lot of positioning in a PDF is absolute (or relative to an explicitly defined matrix which has hardcoded values). Usually this makes editing a PDF harder (since when changing text the related text does not adapt automatically), but when removing data it makes it much easier since you can mostly just delete it without affecting anything else. (There are exceptions for text immediately after the removed data, but that's limited and relatively easy to control.)
> - Replace the data. This what what all the "blackout" tools do, find "A" and replace with "🮋". This is effective and doesn't break formatting since it's a 1-to-1 replacement.
That's actually rather tricky in PDFs since they usually contain embedded subset fonts and these usually do not have "🮋" as part of the subset. Also doing this would break the layout since "🮋" has a different width than most letters in a typical font, so it would not lead to less formatting issues than the previous option. Unless the "🮋" is stretched for each letter to have the same dimensions, but then the stretched characters allow to recover the text.
> The problem with "replacing" is that not every PDF tool works the same way, and some, instead, just change the foreground and background color to black; it looks nearly the same, but the power of copy-and-paste still functions.
PDF does not have a concept of a background color. If it looks like a background color in PDF, you have a rectangle drawn in one color and something in the foreground color in front of it. What you usually see in badly redacted PDF files is exactly this, but in opposite color: Someone just draws a black box on top of the characters. You could argue that this is smarter since it would still work even if someone would chnage colors, but of course, PDF is a vector format. If you just add a rectangle, someone else can remove it again. (And also copy & paste doesn't care about your rectangle)
Just have an options file which is checked in with the code and enforce whatever is set in there works much better. You still avoids all the useless discussions about formatting while also allowing to set sensible settings which are consistent with surrounding technology.
> The Service is offered for the creation and storage of NFTs. Use of the Service to store other types of data is not permitted.
Do you have a special agreement with NFTStorage which overrules the general Terms and Conditions?
It's a bit different if you are looking at a tagged PDF, where the tagging structure is in there, but if you want to look at that in detail you are probably better served with e.g. ngPDF (https://ngpdf.com/) which will show the tagging structure including the mapping to rendered elements.
But more generally the font has an empty GSUB table which would be used for such substitutions. I'm wondering if the cockpit display maybe misses support for that and that's why they tried not to use it for anything.
They can now object to it, then there will be a full trial. If they loose there, then they can appeal.
Then again, if you want to control what runs on your system, you probably don't run Windows in the first place.
Also if you want to stop Windows from booting, it's much more reliable to change the Secure Boot keys (and of course not adding the Microsoft keys afterwards). Then your system is guaranteed Windows free.
To set the owner password (mainly for Storage) ``` tpm2_changeauth -c owner file:- ```
To set the endorsement password (e.g. to verify that the TPM is authentic): ``` tpm2_changeauth -c endorsement file:- ```
To set the lockout password (to recover the system without requiring a full reset): ``` tpm2_changeauth -c endorsement file:- ```
[unjustifiable]: https://www.npmjs.com/package/unjustifiable?activeTab=readme [Hypher]: https://github.com/bramstein/hypher
Can't you already do that with an existing TPM? You just set an owner authentication password and an endorsement authentication password and no application can use it anymore unless you provide the password.
Technically it would still be possible to use it as a very slow cryptographic coprocessor I guess, but that benign and useless. It does still provide access to some platform measurements, but they can't be signed by a authenticated (or even safely stored) key, so they are easy to fake.
In addition to that the OS of course can be used to completely block access to it if needed.
The problem is not that people can't stop applications from using it, it is just that in practice people don't care.
> The program must include source code [...] The source code must be the preferred form in which a programmer would modify the program. Deliberately obfuscated source code is not allowed. Intermediate forms such as the output of a preprocessor [...] are not allowed.
I don't think they are making money out of this. The display is 2300€ without VAT and the OP is selling them with 2783€ with 21% VAT, so it's exactly the same price.
What are the requirements to make a system work with these? Do you at the end stream bitmaps to the device? Something else? Is there a documented interface?
The actual issue is that the revoked key is the key used by Windows, so revoking it makes Windows unbootable.
Seems a bit weird to call this a Secure Boot vulnerability though since Secure Boot still works, it's just that a validly signed binary happens to be vulnerable and boots arbitrary stuff in a later stage. While this circumvents Secure Boot on all systems which allow booting Windows (so all systems where noone explicitly changes the Secure Boot setup), it sounds more like a Windows boot loader vulnerability than a Secure Boot issue.
Probably not surprising given that this is the blog of HTTP Toolkit, but instead of debugging the HTTP requests, they could have gotten much of the same information by reading the introduction of the API docs (https://docs.docker.com/registry/spec/api/#overview).
Off-topic, but there isn't really a general ID number for German citizens. There are some numbers for social security or tax purposes, but most people wouldn't give them to other entities and people wouldn't think of them when asked about a ID number in other context. (There is also a number of the ID card, but that only identifies the card and therefore changes whenever you get a new one) So this example would at least not be self-documenting.
I think that's backwards. Producing a file with a specific SHA-1 hash is a preimage attack while producing a file with the same hash as another file is a second preimage attack.
Not that it matters for SHA-1 where both aren't broken yet.
Not really, the traditional commands are rather messy. Of course you can read source2e, but that's not really documentation. For new stuff it often makes sense to write the more programmy stuff in expl3 which is much better documented in interface3. (It contains these commands as `\use_i:nn` and `\use_ii:nn`)
> > Also the Unicode bytes are already active so setting their catcode is useless. > > This is true for LaTeX and not TeX, correct?
Right, this is LaTeX specific.
> Also redefining the first octet breaks LaTeX's UTF-8 handling... > > How so? (If the else case wasn't broken)
LaTeX's definition of the first byte handles arbitrary valid UTF-8 following bytes by using corresponding definitions or printing correct errors, while even a definition which wouldn't trigger the active character again would just print the two bytes which does not print a useful error message and probably prints two random characters from the font, completely ignoring any potential definition using LaTeX's mechanism for other codepoints starting with this byte.
>...and the else case forms an infinite loop. > > If `\Firstλ` was not an active character, would this still be true? Since I store `\Firstλ` in `\lambda@first@oct` before it's declared an active character.
You are correct, if the first byte wouldn't already be an active character (e.g. in plain TeX) then it wouldn't loop. It wouldn't expand to something particularly useful, but that wouldn't be any worse than without the definition so it would be "correct".
> I suppose I should read up on xparse.
Normally `xparse` is preloaded and not a package anymore, therefore also it's documentation has been moved into usrguide3. In this case you still need the package though since the `d` argument type has not been added to the kernel (and therefore also not to usrguide3) since delimited arguments are not recommended for LaTeX commands. It's still documented in the old `xparse` manual though. Just in case you're wondering about the split.