• 0 Posts
  • 82 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 23rd, 2024

help-circle


  • I worked in software certification under Common Criteria, and while I do know that it creates a lot of work, there were cases where security has been improved measurably - in the hardware department, it even happened that a developer / manufacturer had a breach that affected almost the whole company really badly (design files etc stolen by a probably state sponsored attacker), but not the CC certified part because the attackers used a vector of attack that was caught there and rectified.

    It seemingly was not fixed everywhere for whatever reason… but it’s not that CC certification is just some academic exercise that gives you nothing but a lot of work.

    Is it the right approach for every product? Probably not because of the huge overhead power certified version. But for important pillars of a security model, it makes sense in my opinion.

    Though it needs to be said that the scheme under which I certified is very thorough and strict, so YMMV.



  • Salt the hash with something unique to that specific user so identical passwords have different hashes

    Isn’t that… the very definition of a Salt? A user-specific known string? Though my understanding is that the salt gets appended to the user-provided password, hashed and then checked against the record, so I wouldn’t say that the hash is salted, but rather the password.

    Also using a pepper is good practice in addition to a salt, though the latter is more important.





  • I don’t really know. For text based discussion, I prefer something like Lemmy, also due to better moderation tools etc. It’s a cool early thread-based discussion tool, but mostly outdated.

    Unfortunately, there is absolutely zero other use for it, and nobody should ever bother, it’s wasted time.



  • Laser@feddit.orgtoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldLasagna
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 days ago

    A kind of interesting phenomenon. He comes in with his dog, cries that he doesn’t have a place to stay, Jon allows it for as long as needed and then… he just vanishes one day, leaving Odie with Jon, never to contact them again. Did something happen between the two? Was he ever real or a product of Jon’s mind? A wiki states:

    According to Davis, Lyman’s original purpose was to be someone who Jon could actually talk to and express other ideas — a role gradually taken over by Garfield, himself.

    It doesn’t reveal who gave Lyman that purpose; it could be that it was Jon himself who, over the years, got less attached to reality, so he got done with talking to and interacting with Garfield.

    That or it’s just a lazy uninspired comic that only has a minimum level of continuity and doesn’t care to explain why a former choir character suddenly vanishes.





  • Weed makes you question if you should get more snacks

    I haven’t tried it in a really long time though but I didn’t really like it very much. Not that I think it’s bad, but it’s a downer and they’re just not my favorite.

    Acid and 2C-B on the other hand, man. Haven’t tried other psychs unfortunately but I find them both great for their individual effects. Unfortunately, there’s the huge stigma around psychs in general plus the naturalistic crowd that makes up a proportion of psych users will only accept stuff like shrooms, peyote and ayahuasca.




  • The big issue that the author kind of mentions is that while the kernel has all these neat features, the overlaying OS seems to use them in such a way that they’re often not effective. XP before SP1 was a security nightmare and we got lucky that blaster was not working correctly. A secure token for the processes in your session? It doesn’t really help if every process you spawn gets this token with the user being the administrator (I know this is kind of different nowadays with UAC). A very cool architecture that allows easy porting? Let’s only use it on x86. Even today, it’s big news for Windows running on ARM, which the not-by-design-portable Unices have been doing for years.

    Maybe if Microsoft had allowed the kernel to be used in other operating systems - not expecting a copyleft license - the current view is that Windows Is Bad, and the NT kernel is an inseparable part of Windows. And hell, even Windows CE which did run on other devices and architectures, doesn’t use the NT kernel.

    So while the design and maybe even large parts of its implementation may be good and clean, it’s Microsoft’s fault that the public perception of the NT kernel.