400300+ entries in 1.958s
mircea_popescu: specifically : it is not useful
to have fixed "boilerplate".
mircea_popescu: you know it occurs
to me,
this is not necessarily
the correct approach
to
the malleability problem.
ascii_field: the reason for
this is
that (as anyone who stayed awake in kindergarten ??) knows, rsa operation is malleable
ascii_field: the basic idea of 'padding' is
that before you can really use rsa, you have
to proclaim 'i will NEVER EVEN consider a blob
that doesn't decrypt
to
this-standard-boilerplate-and-the-payload' - or, in
the case of signatures, 'it is ~not~ a signature unless
the signed payload is such-and-such-boilerplate-and-THEN-the-actual-payload'
punkman: mats, are you using
that Hammer library linked from langsec www?
ascii_field: iirc bleichenbacher's attack works with all currently standardized padding (wtf plz can has another word for
this !!!) schemes
mircea_popescu: the only correct way would be
to PROVE
the padding works for
the coding scheme.
this afaik was never EVEN DISCUSSED let alone attempted, and forget succeeded.
ascii_field: btw i'm half-convinced
that
the existing 'padding' (what a
terrible misnomer!) schemes are voodoo.
mats: and i'm not so sure i'm
the person for
the job
mats: i'm on my
third attempt at
this and i still haven't quite wrapped my head around rfc4880 as well as
the behavior of various gpg versions
kakobrekla: if
the bar is so low
that most existing and running code contains scamcode, no wonder why noone asks for an honest computer
☟︎ ascii_field: kakobrekla: sounds like an ordinary exhaust
turbocharger, no ?
kakobrekla: dunno really, seems kinda sketchy
to me
kakobrekla: >When I last bought a VW (2008) I was concerned due
to a clunking noise after first starting it up and driving a few miles; I called
the VW service dept and
they explained
that
there was a compressor which captured exhaust fumes and released
them at a lower rate for
the first few miles of each journey --
to help
them meet EPA emissions standards.
☟︎ pete_dushenski: like
the whole
toyota 'unintended acceleration' dealio from ~2008
pete_dushenski: either a) when anything plugs into
the obd-ii port, or b)
the whole
thing is a parallel construction
to keep ze germans at bay against
tbtf 'domestics'
☟︎ punkman: I mean
the emissions
testing
punkman: how
the hell do
they detect
that
pete_dushenski: "The device is programmed
to detect when
the car is undergoing official emissions
testing, and
to only
turn on full emissions control systems during
that
testing.
Those controls are
turned off during normal driving situations, when
the vehicles pollute far more heavily
than reported by
the manufacturer,
the E.P.A. said." << kek
punkman: "An architecture and environment
that could lead you into
this situation, where you are helpless and wronged and did nothing but what you were
told was right, and
then punished quite severely, is very wrong. It is
the opposite of what a computer and
technology should do."
ascii_field: my views re: 'let's do pm' are roughly similar
to
those of mircea_popescu.
punkman: mats, so what kind of parsing are you doing for
the keyserver?
assbot: Logged on 28-07-2015 02:41:28;
trinque: lost on most is
the value of being yelled at by a learned person.
trinque: mats: sometimes people sit back and enjoy
the conversation
mats: 10/10
times it is just alf and i.
☟︎ mats: dunno
that anyone even cares, now
ascii_field: i like
to 1) educate people 2) refer
to logs in
the future
mats: so in
the future i
think i'll be
taking
these discussions
to PM, if
this is something you'd be interested in, ascii_field
ascii_field: likewise, 'mitigations' which ultimately prolong
the agony of c/c++/c-machine - are works of evil.
ascii_field: expecting me
to just swallow 100MB of whateverthefuck source, WON'T FLY
ascii_field: but now i have
to UNDERSTAND HOW
THEY WORK
ascii_field: e.g., it is good and well
to have, g.g., a hindley milner
type inference system, or
theorem prover,
punkman: mats, probably above my paygrade, but I'll have a look at
them
ascii_field: and
the ultimate litmus
test for whether a proposed security mechanism is usgistic: 'does
this item INCREASE - or DECREASE -
the amount of complexity present in
the system, for which i must defer
to someone's authority
to determine whether it does what was promised ?'
ascii_field: i ~like~
the idea of 'this quicksort will provably not overstep its bounds.' but much better is ~this quicksort can as easily overstep its bounds as my car can start itself and drive
to alaska'
mats: punkman: have you read any of
the papers?
ascii_field: anyone who proposes one, directly or by implication, is (whether he knows it or not) committing pseudointellectual flimflammery in
the service of hitler.
ascii_field: understand, i have no objection
to
tools such as computerized
theorem-proving, data flow analysis, etc. except in
that
these are put forward as ~substitutes for fits-in-head simplicity~.
mats: i read
the logs sometimes.
mats: maybe
this is just not
the place for me
to bring up such discussions, when folks clearly are not interested in
this kind of research
☟︎ punkman: mats: I'm all for langsec and chipsec and whatever other brand
they come up with, but I don't see anyone getting anywhere
ascii_field: the only
thing
the offerings of usg ~provably~ are able
to do is
to lighten your wallet.
☟︎ mats: and obviously systems
that can provably prevent
things from happening are preferable...
mats: i research what folks are doing
to incrementally raise
the cost of attack, because
there is interesting work being done
there,
this is where
the money is, and we are all living with various design decisions
that can't be undone at low cost.
ascii_field: and yes, i guess, being concerned with
the number of intellectual 'cpu cycles' needed
to fully grasp
the ~implementation~ of
the language and
the machine under it - makes me a
t3rr0r1st11111
ascii_field: my other problem is
that i have not yet found an implementation of ml language
that fits-in-head.
ascii_field: mats: for instance, i like 'ml' (language.) but i will not close my eyes
to
the fact
that garbage collector is a cross-process info leaker.
ascii_field: and
the data structures popular among 'functionality' aficionados are not physically possible, but instead are clunkily emulated ('immutability') with actual ones
ascii_field: but
there is no such
thing, in our universe, as a 'functional' cpu.
☟︎ mats: well, just a
thought here, functional programming looks like a better path forward
than ada, if only because its easier
to automate
ascii_field: no one who actually ~solves~ problems at
the eliminate-a-whole-field level is remotely welcome.
☟︎ ascii_field: instead, it is baked into
the 'firmware' of academia as a
thing.
ascii_field: this is not 'ordered from above' in
the naive way imagined by hecklers of 'conspiratorial' matters
ascii_field: deceive people into failing
to so much suspect
that
the root of
their probems can be dealt with, without
telling any lies in
the usual sense of
the word.
ascii_field: this is fundamentally an example of what i was
talking about.
punkman: so what is
the formal language when I grab random bytes off someone's HTTP?
☟︎ punkman: "LANGSEC posits
that
the only path
to
trustworthy software
that
takes untrusted inputs is
treating all valid or expected inputs as a formal language, and
the respective input-handling routines as a recognizer for
that language."
ascii_field: it is not an uninteresting subject. just as, say, historical climate patterns are not uninteresting. but both would become considerably more intellectually respectable if all of
the current academic practitioners of each were
to be shot.
mats: i am generally interested in
these
things because i like knowing about whether a given abstraction kills particular
techniques
ascii_field: if pursued as pure mathematics, it can be a mildly respectable
thing.
ascii_field: mats: note
that i did not say 'waste of
time'
mats: waste of
time, like whether and how advancement of formal languages for security is useful, or keeping input grammars regular whenever possible, verifiale parser, ...
mats: well, if you ever decide
to describe why 'langsec' et al. is a waste of
time, i'd love
to read it. you
too, pete_dushenski.
ascii_field: from usg's point of view, ANYTHING is better
than having folks wake up
to cpu-with-bounds-checking-on-all-ops and fits-in-head
BingoBoingo: ascii_field: Well
that and
taking a portion of hungry people and redirecting
their worry so
they burn
themselves down instead of burning
the whole show
ascii_field: BingoBoingo: nah
that's mainly panem et circenses
BingoBoingo: <ascii_field> usg has a very effective program for soaking
them up << I'm pretty sure
the push
to get people into grad school rather
than employment 2007-2011 was exactly
this
☟︎ ascii_field: on items GUARANTEED not
to result in serious dings
to 'nothing is beyond our reach' (e.g., full
techno-lustration silicon and upwards)
ascii_field: usg has a very effective program for soaking
them up
mats: then i suppose I'll conclude with disagreeing
this is an unworthy area of research.
ascii_field: mats: i pointedly do not care whether or by whom you were (or like
to be) bought
mats: or have we moved on
to hand waving and accusations of being bought because honest discussion is
too
troublesome and insinuations about pwnage cannot be substantiated
☟︎ mats: yes,
this is all well and good, but we were
talking about IR parsers
ascii_field: pete_dushenski: iirc mats admitted
to merely ~wishing~
to be bought
pete_dushenski: anyways mats, whatever
they're paying you, you're definitely dancing hard enough for it.
ascii_field: the
thing is brazen and one-sided enough
to make u.s. 'climatology' look good.
☟︎ ascii_field: find me ~someone, anyone~ funded by american dollars who puts forth
the opposing view from
this.
☟︎ ascii_field: e.g.,
the push for movement from rsa
to ecc
ascii_field: but
that overall DIRECTIONS of research
that are given support by usg in past decade are specifically counterproductive