log☇︎
36500+ entries in 0.291s
spyked: zx2c4, I've been looking over the tamarin protocol verification paper and I'm curious, what does "symbolic verification" mean? also, what's the thing's output? is it just a "yes, properties hold" or does it also output the proof? ☟︎
spyked: anyway, back to http://btcbase.org/log/2018-04-12#1797753 : also, I ran a http://p.bvulpes.com/pastes/hYZVy/?raw=true out of curiosity. results: cca 150k LoC of proof (of which ~10k just the basic definitions) that generate another cca 100k LoC of C code. but to be fair, this is for more than just 25519 ☝︎☟︎
trinque: a muntzed drakma would be a fine thing, I'd sign ☟︎
spyked: whole thing's a mess, but I'm organizing the code so that I can eventually replace it with something else.
trinque: nope, current thing is a sad pythonball hanging off the side.
spyked: trinque, yeah, I'm actually playing with cl-feed-parser to get an idea of what's required for the feed bot, going to spec it and all. I grabbed it off the githubs ( https://github.com/tkych/cl-feed-parser ) and the number of dependencies is irksome, so if you happen to know a better alternative other than building my own, I'm open to suggestions
ben_vulpes: gonna spam for a sec, pls hold
lobbes: trinque, while yer digging I noticed that wot.deedbot.org appears to have not updated in a bit (e.g. I unrated "blazedout419" a few weeks ago, yet still shows >> http://wot.deedbot.org/3320BCA7825525AD077203C331F36D29A4D93652.html)
avgjoe: no, it's a easy/fake study to have more spare time keeping government grants ☟︎
avgjoe: after seeing that raiblocks was just some random coin, i tried to understand better bitcoin and found trilema as a very valid starting point, no-frills like, to use bitcoin in a responsable manner
avgjoe: and a couple of months ago i was lucky to cash out in bitcoin the crazy (at least for me) amount generated by solving captchas
ben_vulpes: well it's more of a nineties yahooforum pink sheet stock but that's neither here nor there
avgjoe: basically a coin that was given to lazy people that solved captchas
avgjoe: i'm a student, I've discovered bitcoin thanks to raiblocks
trinque: note that a horde of titties just came through and used the thing on the basis of knowing douchebag
ben_vulpes: trinque: dude has a point, self-referential though it might be faq.html would benefit from an "i am trinque, and have been running this service for members in good standing of the #trilema wot and others before it since XXX"
mircea_popescu: and bbl folks, have a great time.
ben_vulpes: trinque: web site is run on a daily job?
avgjoe: so if I understand correct: all the deedbot functions are ready to go for a newcomer, except for the wallet function that works well after having a good wot connection
trinque: avgjoe: the point being, while I can give you a lot of nice words about not stealing your bitcents, this doesn't amount to much.
avgjoe: is a feature for doing off chain transactions by trusting the human meat or i'm missing something?
avgjoe: "Requests that `amount` be withdrawn from your available balance and sent to `to-btc-address`. This step shall be performed by a human operator after reviewing account history. Expect at least one day of processing. Bitcoin transaction fees shall be deducted from your account."
mircea_popescu: nobody cared about him back when he was a good actor 20 years ago as much as they care now, that he delivers wooden monologues of sheer nonsense.
mircea_popescu: morgan freeman is also worshipped now. why ? same reason. wolf-raised kids can't believe oldman is a thing.
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: blake2 is bernstein's hash ( consists of a slightly modified chacha, his symmetric algo ) ☟︎
avgjoe: or at least, a server located where?
avgjoe: a curiosity about the deedbot wallet feature: if i use that feature, who is controlling the keys?
a111: 0 results for "\"Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity\"", http://btcbase.org/log-search?q=%22Transgressing%20the%20Boundaries%3A%20Towards%20a%20Transformative%20Hermeneutics%20of%20Quantum%20Gravity%22
mircea_popescu: !#s "Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity"
a111: Logged on 2018-04-12 16:25 zx2c4: i havent compiled a list of Name+WrittenReview. maybe i should do that
mircea_popescu: http://btcbase.org/log/2018-04-12#1797184 << you definitely should do that, seeing how the superficial "was reviewed" claim collapses upon the most cursory scrutiny. this is not a good state to put yourself into, it makes it too easy to be painted with unflattering brushes. ☝︎
mircea_popescu: a.
mircea_popescu: http://trilema.com/2018/bogota-a-mixed-bag/ << there. you ever go to bogota ?
mircea_popescu: but if you look through that category ("la pas prin lume") there's a ton of various.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform yes well. one thing at a time huh :D
a111: Logged on 2014-11-13 23:07 mircea_popescu: In the days when Sussman was a novice, Minsky once came to him as he sat hacking at the PDP-6.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform it can't be a debit like that, because the main unknown is the approach.
a111: Logged on 2018-04-12 18:10 mircea_popescu: http://btcbase.org/log/2018-04-12#1797142 << understand, the discussion here is re cryptographic hardness, not mathematical hardness ; as discussed otherplaces in the logs, the mathematical notion of difficulty is "what's the absolute hardest case this problem can yield", because they want to offer maximal flop guarantees ; cryptographically it is kinda opposite : what's the LOWEST difficulty a problem in this class may yield
asciilifeform: http://btcbase.org/log/2018-04-12#1797536 << we may have had the thread iirc, but : cryptographic 'lowest difficulty' is inescapably statistical, considering that there is a nonzero and calculable probability of guessing a key ( under any system which is not otp, i.e. correct key is somehow distinguishable from the space of possible rubbish key ) ☝︎
BingoBoingo: Now, there's also "alfajores integrals" where a birdseed paste is smashed between two birdseed wafers, but those cost ~70 pesos whereas alfajores verdaderos costs 20-30 pesos
asciilifeform: right now 2 types of cipher are known -- otp, and errythingelse. only re otp is there a mathematical statement of any substance ( i.e. it is degenerate case, leaks 0 bits )
asciilifeform: ( what would 'getting somewhere' look like ? how about a general theory, or even ~study of particular case, like aes~ re how many bits of key are leaked per, say, TB of ciphertext )
BingoBoingo: <ben_vulpes> i have been seduced into liking sugary delights! << It's scarcely been more than a month since a fractional alfajore gave you sugar shock
asciilifeform: ftr i got ~nowhere re: a proper approach to cryptohardness.
mircea_popescu: . because they want to put a MINIMUM floor in. so to a large degree mathematical discussions of hardness are not cryptographically useful.
mircea_popescu: http://btcbase.org/log/2018-04-12#1797142 << understand, the discussion here is re cryptographic hardness, not mathematical hardness ; as discussed otherplaces in the logs, the mathematical notion of difficulty is "what's the absolute hardest case this problem can yield", because they want to offer maximal flop guarantees ; cryptographically it is kinda opposite : what's the LOWEST difficulty a problem in this class may yield ☝︎☟︎
a111: Logged on 2018-04-12 16:12 zx2c4: things like RSA boil down to number theory problems. but that's in a sense scarier than the set of problems that good block ciphers tend to boil down to. because it means that those primitives have lots of _structure_, and generally structure is something that can be exploited. just look at all the amazing and fantastic attacks on things with structure. so just boiling down to a [currently considered] "hard problem" doesn't provide as much solace
asciilifeform: to be fair, the thing isn't even obscenely lengthy, esp for a robo-generated proggy. ( it remains the case that i dislike c, and also ecc; but these are orthogonal concerns )
mircea_popescu: the line 332 explosion is a fine example of this as any could be had.
mircea_popescu: http://btcbase.org/log/2018-04-12#1797078 << this looks almost like a Very Desperate Man (tm) writing say pcb wiring constraints. ☝︎
mircea_popescu: not afaik. i linked you to a snippet lessee
ben_vulpes: mircea_popescu: the .htaccess files included with/generated by mpwp include the `Allow` incantation, which is not a thing in apache 2.4; trilema purports to run on 2.4.16; can the Order/Allow incantations be replaced with the 2.4-style Require?
mircea_popescu: generally the alfajor as a commercial item is two wafers, ddl in betrween, whole dipped in hard chocolate.
mircea_popescu: hey, i didn't think i even liked girls, as a 14yo. people get strange ideas in their heads.
ckang: from a security perspective
ben_vulpes: well they are a far cry from the mango gelato of mircea_popescu's haremfactory but goshdarn these alfajores are magical with coffee in the morning
mircea_popescu: anyway, guy got a bitcoin, meaning he can put however many more hours into the thing you're using, so wins all around.
zx2c4: but ill idle in here for a while and will be back in several hours mostlikely
zx2c4: i need to head out for a bit now
zx2c4: ill give ada a look. ive long heard about it but never dived in
asciilifeform: zx2c4: there is some quite 'fascist' compile-time checking. most noobs to the lang, spend a week or so getting their proggy to even build.
asciilifeform: if you switch the runtime checks on, you get a ~50% speed penalty in practice, vs 'naked c'
mircea_popescu: zx2c4 the good news is that i am now finally in a position to explain what EXACTLY is meant by "terrorist" : that feeling in http://btcbase.org/log/2018-04-12#1797417 when shit keeps coming and coming and coming up. what is it, if not spiritual terror ? ☝︎☟︎
asciilifeform: and doesn't require a multi-MB runtime.
asciilifeform: i'ma cheat and cite my own article, http://www.loper-os.org/?p=1913 : '... in a heavily-restricted subset of the Ada programming language — the only currently-existing nonproprietary statically-compiled language which permits fully bounds-checked, pointerolade-free code and practically-auditable binaries. We will be using GNAT, which relies on the GCC backend.'
zx2c4: linus has never been so happy about other languages in the kernel. for example, he rejected a C++ layer many years ago
asciilifeform: ( iirc i posted a cookbook re same, while back )
asciilifeform: zx2c4, mircea_popescu : it is quite trivial to build a kernel mod with gnat
mircea_popescu: that's a perl impl of a v tool by mod6 ; everyone is invited to make their own v tools.
mircea_popescu: the idea with it is that patches must be a) clearly assigned to a responsible key and b) well read. actually, not putatively a la ers's trillion dead fish eyes.
asciilifeform: cascadianhacker.com/07_v-tronics-101-a-gentle-introduction-to-the-most-serene-republic-of-bitcoins-cryptographically-backed-version-control-system << likbez
asciilifeform: zx2c4: this isn't v per se tho, it is a graphical viewer for same
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: iirc you need a svg-capable wwwtron
mircea_popescu: anyway, as to the other one : v is the republican... well many things, but also works as a versioning system. here's a pretty picture to help the notion along : http://btcbase.org/patches << you can select from the drop menu to the left, see vaqrious trees extant. you can click on any item to see the patch it represents.
zx2c4: i suppose your point is that you _could_ choose to obscure the lengths of the messages youre sending back? whereas with zero that isnt a possibility?
mircea_popescu: if however he observes a stream of n messages of length = 0, he can infer nothing was said.
mircea_popescu: one thing at a time : if an attacker observes a stream of n messages of lengths != 0, there is nothing he can infer : maybe they're part of one message, or maybe they're not, or maybe they don't even say anything.
zx2c4: why do you think zero is a special case?
mircea_popescu: anyway, the point here isn't that padded protocols infoleak in multiples of the paddiong., the point is that 0 is a special case invariant, and yhou can never leak a multiple of 0 safely. because, again, a message of arbitrary length n can be presented as m messages of length k ; but 0 messages can never carry anything.
zx2c4: this may indeed be too large of an infoleak and you'd prefer a different padding scheme like always filling the entire MTU
zx2c4: mircea_popescu: padded protocols infoleak in multiples of the padding. you get to see if a given packet elicited a 0 reply, a 16 reply, a 32 reply, a 48 reply, and so forth
asciilifeform: because i can tell when a particular message has been received and ack'd
mircea_popescu: in any case, cryptography comes in two sorts : sort a), known here as "this must be secure, it's so confusing to me", and sort b). the moment you say "i can't see what this gives attacker" you force-shove yourself in group a. it's not your business to know the attacker, that's the whole fundamental philosophy of ciphering, that you do not need to know the attacker.
mircea_popescu: this is the problem : you introduce a categorical breach with this system.
mircea_popescu: because i can turn a 31 message into two 15 messages or back ; but i can't turn 0 messages into anything else.
zx2c4: mircea_popescu: an attacker can also distinguish between a length 15 message and a length 31 message. i still maintain this doesnt give an attacker anything useful
asciilifeform: zx2c4: speaking in general of symmetric ciphers -- a known-plaintext instance anywhere in the stream, or even a means of narrowing down possible plaintext, makes for considerably cheaper break
mircea_popescu: why am i held to explain how a protocol breach can be elevated to arbitrary height ? the attracker FIND SOMETHING
zx2c4: what do you get by knowing from inference that it's a keepalive?
zx2c4: no, i dont think sending a random string would make it more secure
zx2c4: when you encrypt a message of 0 bytes, you get 0 bytes of ciphertext + 16 bytes of authentication tag
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu do you have a link to the famous penguin handy ?
mircea_popescu: zx2c4 here's a simple alternative to consider : would you agree the assemblage would be more secure if instead of sending a null payload you sent a random string ?
zx2c4: normally when you encrypt a message of 32 bytes, you get 32 bytes of cipher text + 16 bytes of authentication tag
asciilifeform: in such a message
asciilifeform: zx2c4: it would appear that you have a known-plaintext though
mircea_popescu: can you off the top of your head give me a dummy example of such ?
zx2c4: in otherwords, the empty plaintext is still a valid value to be authenticated-encrypted
mircea_popescu: so it is not "empty" in the sense of "" ; it is empty in the sense of the payload being null, but the actual message is in fact a nonce and some tags anyway.
zx2c4: in this case, its important that you send me a keepalive, so that i know you at least got it. however, these keepalives arent persistent. if subsequently, i have nothing more to say to you, then we both go silent and dont say anything.