At 01:19 PM 08/15/2003 -0700, Major Variola (ret.) wrote:
Suppose malware appends a bogus entry to an infected machine's
/etc/hosts (or more likely, MSwindows' \windows\blahblah\hosts file).
(This constitutes a DNS attack on the appended domain name, exploiting
the local hosts' name-resolution
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Somehow I have difficulty believing the these people could be so totally lame
as to be running mission-critical stuff like this on windoze. Please say it
isn't true.
it's scary just how much mission-critical stuff runs on windows. i'll
confess right
Sarad wrote...
For a moment think of all the iraqi's with power
grids taken out now enjoying the 120+ farenhiet sun. A
few hours of luxury was gone and it was breaking news
in bbc.
Although I appreciate the sentiment, your not really getting this. The
timing was such that long-term impact was
--
James A. Donald:
What we want of a payment system, is that Alice can prove
she paid Bob, even if Bob wants to deny it, but no one else
can prove that Alice paid Bob unless Alice takes special
action to make it provable.
Major Variola (ret)
Does it help if: Alice generates a
Are you suggesting the outage was caused by carbon filaments rocketed
across transmission lines? If that was done at several points in the grid it
would account for the various finger-pointing to incidents which are claimed
to have started the usual-suspect cascade of the usual-suspect antiquated
Somehow I have difficulty believing the these people could be so totally lame
as to be running mission-critical stuff like this on windoze. Please say it
isn't true. Is the military also now dependant on windoze? Bizarre, absolutely
bizarre. And here I thought it was probably caused by people
- N+1 is the smallest integer that's not interesting.
But that's interesting in itself - so N+1 is interesting.
It breaks down after few consequtive non-interesting integers.
In fact, there is a proof somewhere that 17, 18 and 19 are not interesting at
all.
=
end
(of original
On Friday 15 August 2003 22:29, Chris Kuethe wrote:
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Somehow I have difficulty believing the these people could be so totally
lame as to be running mission-critical stuff like this on windoze. Please
say it isn't true.
it's scary just how much
Sarad AV (2003-08-16 11:26Z) wrote:
it comes to such a question-
I do a fair coin throwing experiment with 64 coins.
To represent 64 coins,i need 5 bits of information.
To represnet 64 coins,i need 6 bits of infomation :)
To deal with 65 possibilites, you need 7 bits (well, 6.022)...
The standard proof that all positive integers are interesting goes like this:
- 1 is the smallest positive integer. That's interesting.
- Suppose that you've proven that 1N are interesting.
Then either N+1 is interesting, and you continue the induction process, or
- N+1 is the
also sprach Sarad AV [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.08.16.1321 +0200]:
f(x)=2x for all x=0,1,2,... ;
f(x)=2x+1 for all x=0,1,2,...;
You need an extra bit to store which of the two is used. Otherwise,
f(x)=2x
=2*5
=10for x=5;
Decimal number 5 can be represented in binary as 101.
... you
it comes to such a question-
I do a fair coin throwing experiment with 64 coins.
To represent 64 coins,i need 5 bits of information.
To represnet 64 coins,i need 6 bits of infomation :)
Regards Sarath.
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use
12 matches
Mail list logo
