-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Jan 8, 2015, at 3:37 PM, John Levine jo...@iecc.com wrote:
Do the fake certs validate in web browsers?
No, they do not validate.
If you go (went) to a Youtube, Vimeo, etc. site, URL, embedded whatever, you'd
get the expected browser
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Jon Callas j...@callas.org wrote:
Well, I'll be. I am on a Gogo-enabled flight even as we squeak, and I just
turned my VPN off to go get you one of their certs. They're letting me get
to YouTube and Vimeo just fine now. I guess someone got some sense. It was
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Jan 6, 2015, at 8:34 AM, shawn wilson ag4ve...@gmail.com wrote:
You can smartly limit resolution in squid - I don't trust this is what
they were doing, but you could provide a better experience like this.
It is what they are doing. I am an
It is what they are doing. I am an unhappy (for many reasons) regular (for many
other reasons) Gogo customer, and noticed pretty quickly when they started
doing
it. I looked at their certs and it's an awful-user-experience way of blocking
videos, and I strongly suspect that the rotten user
You still don't get any meaningful security if old band members are
assumed to be untrusted and you don't use a public checkpointing mechanism.
Transfer of the title of being the real group must be a one-time only thing
for each version of the group, and must be impossible to backtrack from.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 08/01/15 07:03, realcr wrote:
I think the naive solution I proposed in my first message is more
efficient than using Bitcoin, because it does not involve proof of
work or flooding stuff.
Shortly: Whenever a person is added to the band, all
On 7 Jan 2015 16:57 -1000, from yoz...@gmail.com (Open eSignForms):
But if you are not a high value target, your crypto may
provide adequate security as there's unlikely a cabal who will
invest the resources to attempt to crack it. Life is short and
freedom to explore is your right!
You mean
Hey, thanks again for the reply.
The only notable difference is that in my version you are checkpointing
the change in th blockchain.
You still have the very same form of signing, but you sign a slightly
different message (transfer of a colored coin, one Satoshi worth of
Bitcoin, to a new
Den 8 jan 2015 08:03 skrev realcr rea...@gmail.com:
Hey Natanael, Thanks for your response.
It's the chain of signatures always published in an accessible way so
that the original members can't doublespend and claim to be the task
group? Otherwise the blockchain approach is useful for you.
Den 8 jan 2015 11:54 skrev realcr rea...@gmail.com:
Hey, thanks again for the reply.
The only notable difference is that in my version you are checkpointing
the change in th blockchain.
You still have the very same form of signing, but you sign a slightly
different message (transfer of a
Now the original members b,c,d create an alternative history:
I assume that the original band has a majority of correct members.
Therefore at least two out of {b,c,d} are correct, and they will not create
alternate history.
The original formulation is included:
Assume that the world contains
Sorry, I should've read your formulation more carefully.
Don't worry about it :) We wrote lots of stuff since the first message,
it's hard to trace it back to the original message.
@Natanael: I think I understand now that our different opinions are due to
different concepts of adversarial
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 08/01/15 13:21, realcr wrote:
Now the original members b,c,d create an alternative history:
I assume that the original band has a majority of correct members.
Therefore at least two out of {b,c,d} are correct, and they will
not create
13 matches
Mail list logo
