 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel <a_l### [at] hotmail com> wrote:
> It was a very powerful concept, e,g, if it was still alive
> today we could easily implement a POV: device such that copying a file
> into that device would render that file.
AFAIK in the current MacOS X you can create folder-specific scripts
which are automatically run on files which are copied to that folder
(and maybe on some other events as well). For example some people use
the feature to automatically create thumbnail versions of images when
those images are copied to a certain folder. I assume you could easily
achieve that povray-rendering feature as well, if you wanted.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> own custom-designed [and horribly weak] hash functions
The only reason it was horribly weak is they fed the password in 7 or 8
bytes at a time. So if you go the hash, you could brute-force a
14-character password by brute-forcing two 7-character passwords.
That would be weak even if you were using DES to do the hashing.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Heh, I know! I said how cool it is, *and* made a pun. Yay for me!
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=puns
Amusing, but not specifically directed towards you. Just relevant.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 08:44:22 -0700, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom>
wrote:
>Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> Heh, I know! I said how cool it is, *and* made a pun. Yay for me!
>
>http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=puns
>
>Amusing, but not specifically directed towards you. Just relevant.
I do wish you hadn't posted that Darren, he's not funny (negative pun
intended :)
Do you think American4Life would read better?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 10:24:53 -0400, Warp wrote:
> andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> It was a very powerful concept, e,g, if it was still alive today we
>> could easily implement a POV: device such that copying a file into that
>> device would render that file.
>
> AFAIK in the current MacOS X you can create folder-specific scripts
> which are automatically run on files which are copied to that folder
> (and maybe on some other events as well). For example some people use
> the feature to automatically create thumbnail versions of images when
> those images are copied to a certain folder. I assume you could easily
> achieve that povray-rendering feature as well, if you wanted.
Hmmm, I wonder how hard it would be to implement this in *nix using FUSE?
I've seen some interesting things implemented as FUSE filesystems, like
MP3 file ID3 tag editors...
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 10:20:59 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>>> Yeah, AD works completely differently to the SAM - even down to using
>>> a different hash function IIRC. Good luck with that!
>>
>> I think it still uses MD4 for NTLM authentication (seems to me that's
>> what it was), but you can disable that and it uses something a bit more
>> advanced.
>
> I am almost 100% certain that no product before Windows 2000 actually
> uses a hash function devised by cryptographers. AFAIK, right up until
> Windows NT4, M$ were using their own custom-designed [and horribly weak]
> hash functions for passwords. The only reason Windows 2000 and later
> don't is that [finally!] they use an industry standard - Kerberos.
NetWare uses an RSA algorithm, and has for many, many years. By
extension, eDirectory does, which is used in many non-NetWare application
environments as well.
The algorithm was outlined in a Dr. Dobbs article back in the 80's, and
even then it didn't need to be changed.
eDirectory now provides a function called "Universal Password" which can
optionally be used, but the 'traditional' password can also be used in
most cases.
Oh, and it supports Kerberos and GSSAPI now as well. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 22:27:47 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> There's a significant difference between "I couldn't find the
>> documentation" and "it doesn't appear to be documented". ;-)
>
> Not as much as you might think you're implying. "The documentation
> hasn't appeared before me" and "I couldn't find the documentation" are
> pretty darn close. ;-)
Perhaps, but they're still not the same statement; the way Andy came
across was as if he was saying "it's not documented", which softened to
"I couldn't find it".
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 10:30:40 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>> Quantity discount. My DSL line is provided by Covad, even though the
>> telco to the house is Qwest. My DSL service is actually cheaper than
>> Qwest's DSL service.
>>
>> Makes perfect sense to shop around.
>
> Now, see, that makes absolutely no sense at all.
>
> That's like those telephone providers where you dail a special prefix
> and then the number you actually want to call. They direct your call
> from the UK, across the Atlantic to the USA, route the call, and direct
> it back to the UK, and *this* works out cheaper than BT? WTF?!? o_O
>
> Similarly, when I looked into this, several places online could sell me
> an Apple Mac. It turns out the most expensive place to buy one is...
> from Apple. WHAT?? It's more expensive to buy it from the manufacturer
> than from some middle-man who has a whole bunch of extra costs and
> overheads to cover?
>
> Reality doesn't make sense to me...
It's called "bulk pricing". Covad can buy telco service in bulk. I
can't. :-)
> Anyway, you get your DSL cheaper, but what if it breaks? If it's
> actually a Qwest DSL line, presumably only Qwest can actually fix it if
> it breaks. And that means that if it breaks, you have to spend 3 hours
> on the phone to Covad to convince them that it's broken, and then they
> have to spend 3 hours on the phone to Qwest, and then *maybe* somebody
> will fix it?
That is a fair point. Had a lightning strike here a few years ago (at
the Covad CO), and they couldn't track it down. They blamed Qwest, and
Qwest blamed them.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> own custom-designed [and horribly weak] hash functions
>
> The only reason it was horribly weak is they fed the password in 7 or 8
> bytes at a time. So if you go the hash, you could brute-force a
> 14-character password by brute-forcing two 7-character passwords.
>
> That would be weak even if you were using DES to do the hashing.
The point being, they made a very simple and basic security mistake. If
they had used an established standard rather than trying to invent a
wheel from scratch themselves, this wouldn't have happened. (As I say,
they now use Kerberos, so there's some hope it works properly.)
Not the first time either. The world uses DNS, M$ invents WINS. What was
THAT about??
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Reality doesn't make sense to me...
>
> It's called "bulk pricing". Covad can buy telco service in bulk. I
> can't. :-)
Riiight... so why don't Qwest just match Covad's price [which obviously
they can trivially do] and put Covad out of business?
>> Anyway, you get your DSL cheaper, but what if it breaks? If it's
>> actually a Qwest DSL line, presumably only Qwest can actually fix it if
>> it breaks. And that means that if it breaks, you have to spend 3 hours
>> on the phone to Covad to convince them that it's broken, and then they
>> have to spend 3 hours on the phone to Qwest, and then *maybe* somebody
>> will fix it?
>
> That is a fair point. Had a lightning strike here a few years ago (at
> the Covad CO), and they couldn't track it down. They blamed Qwest, and
> Qwest blamed them.
Ah yes, the "it's nobody's fault" syndrome. ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
