[gentoo-user] *.h files in gnome applications
Hi All, I would like to ask some help. I would like to emerge Unity to my system and nautilus is part of it, but the emerge fails with this error message: libtool: compile: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -DG_LOG_DOMAIN=\Eel\ -I.. -I.. -pthread -I/usr/include/gtk-3.0 -I/usr/include/at-spi2-atk/2.0 -I/usr/include/gtk-3.0 -I/usr/include/gio-unix-2.0/ -I/usr/include/cairo -I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/include/harfbuzz -I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/include/cairo -I/usr/include/pixman-1 -I/usr/include/freetype2 -I/usr/include/libdrm -I/usr/include/gdk-pixbuf-2.0 -I/usr/include/libpng16 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib64/glib-2.0/include -pthread -I/usr/include/gail-3.0 -I/usr/include/gnome-desktop-3.0 -I/usr/include/gtk-3.0 -I/usr/include/at-spi2-atk/2.0 -I/usr/include/gtk-3.0 -I/usr/include/gio-unix-2.0/ -I/usr/include/cairo -I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/include/harfbuzz -I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/include/cairo -I/usr/include/pixman-1 -I/usr/include/freetype2 -I/usr/include/libdrm -I/usr/include/gdk-pixbuf-2.0 -I/usr/include/libpng16 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib64/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/libxml2 -I/usr/include/gsettings-desktop-schemas -DDATADIR=\/usr/share\ -DSOURCE_DATADIR=\../data\ -DGNOMELOCALEDIR=\/usr/share/locale\ -march=core2 -O2 -pipe -c eel-stock-dialogs.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/eel-stock-dialogs.o eel-gnome-extensions.c:34:50: fatal error: libgnome-desktop/gnome-desktop-utils.h: No such file or directory compilation terminated. make[2]: *** [eel-gnome-extensions.lo] Error 1 make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs make[2]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/gnome-base/nautilus-3.6.3_p0_p16/work/nautilus-3.6.3/eel' make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/gnome-base/nautilus-3.6.3_p0_p16/work/nautilus-3.6.3' make: *** [all] Error 2 Due to that it is part of the unity-gentoo overlay and it is patched heavily by the Unity team I do not ask nobody on this list to help me solve this issue. The only thing I ask is to help me understand what is it. I know here are lot of experienced people who may met issue like this. When I re-emerge the packages listed by equery g nautilus my issue remains unsolved. equery b libgnome-desktop/gnome-desktop-utils.h do not give any result. I'm in that situation when I don't understand what happens. Where this libgnome-desktop/gnome-desktop-utils.h comes from? I already reported this to the package maintainer but... you know... I cannot stay on my bottom... :) Thanks for any help in advance! András -- -- Csanyi Andras (Sayusi Ando) -- http://sayusi.hu -- http://facebook.com/andras.csanyi -- Trust in God and keep your gunpowder dry! - Cromwell
Re: [gentoo-user] h
On Friday 27 June 2008, kashani wrote: The thing about this keys is, that there is no better way than to brute force such keys. The algorithm uses a function which inverse is a known hard problem which resides in NP, which is a class of functions equal to just guessing. I don't believe this is true. The algorithm uses a function which is *assumed* to be a hard problem. You assume the problem is hard because you and anyone you know have not been able to make it easy. That does not mean that someone has not discovered some math that does make it easy. It's more than a thumb-suck assumption. In maths, assume is overloaded to have an entirely different meaning to what it has in everyday life, much like theory in science. The assumption comes from all the solid maths surrounding the NP problem. As any decent mathematician/cryptologist will tell you, cracking this one is the current holy grail in their field and the amount of man-power being applied to solving it is staggering. Neil mentioned GCHQ developing public key several years before RSA, but do note that RSA still had the same bright idea that GCHQ had, only a few short years later. There are thousands of examples in math and science of the same huge advances being made by two parties independently - because they are working from the same known base. I feel quite confident that the NP problem will be no different. -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] h
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 10:51:57 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Neil mentioned GCHQ developing public key several years before RSA, but do note that RSA still had the same bright idea that GCHQ had, only a few short years later. The important point was that they kept quiet about it. Even after RSA entered the public domain, they let everyone think it was news to them. Mind you, the UK government kept quiet about breaking Enigma after WWII was over, so they could sell these secure systems to their Commonwealth friends. -- Neil Bothwick Top Oxymorons Number 2: Exact estimate signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] h
On 27 Jun 2008, at 00:37, Neil Bothwick wrote: On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 00:47:34 +0200, Sebastian Günther wrote: If the NSA had a sufficient algorithm, that is capable of reducing the time that much, they should also be able to prove P=NP. This is worth 1.000.000$ iirc and somehow you should get a Nobel Prize for it. I'm sure the NSA would be happy to forego the prize and keep quiet about being able to break a secure cipher. I can't help wondering if - since P=NP is such a big problem - the advantages of having this knowledge in the public domain might override the advantages of mere spying. Stroller. -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] h
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 10:44:00 +0100, Stroller wrote: I'm sure the NSA would be happy to forego the prize and keep quiet about being able to break a secure cipher. I can't help wondering if - since P=NP is such a big problem - the advantages of having this knowledge in the public domain might override the advantages of mere spying. I'm sure the holy grail for the NSA is a cipher that everyone thinks is totally secure but they can break. These agencies aren't interested in the greater good, only furthering their own goals. -- Neil Bothwick Tagline file empty. Please refill the bit bucket. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] h
kashani [EMAIL PROTECTED] at Friday 27 June 2008, 02:28:21 Here's a reference to the interesting meet-in-the-middle attack which reduced 3DES key space down to 112 bits from 192. 3DES always had an effective key size of 112 bits, because it uses the original DES algorithm applied in the following scheme E1(D2(E1(M)) with two different 56-bit DES keys. 3DES never had 192 bit keys. The meet-in-the-middle attack has nothing to do with 3DES. In fact, 3DES was designed the way it works now to _prevent_ meet-in-the-middle attacks. Such attacks can be applied to ciphers, that apply a single algorithm with two different keys: E1(E2(M)) Mathematical, the key size of the latter cipher is equal to 3DES: 56+56 = 112. But the latter cipher is vulnerable to meet-in-the-middle attacks, which is why 3DES uses the second key to apply the DES decryption function with a different key right between the consecutive DES encryptions. Obviously that was unknown when 3DES was built. I doubt. If meet in the middle was unknown at the time of 3DES development, we wouldn't have 3DES today, but 2DES, being as simple as E1(E2(M)). -- Freedom is always the freedom of dissenters. (Rosa Luxemburg) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] h
On Friday 27 June 2008, Neil Bothwick wrote: On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 10:44:00 +0100, Stroller wrote: I'm sure the NSA would be happy to forego the prize and keep quiet about being able to break a secure cipher. I can't help wondering if - since P=NP is such a big problem - the advantages of having this knowledge in the public domain might override the advantages of mere spying. I'm sure the holy grail for the NSA is a cipher that everyone thinks is totally secure but they can break. These agencies aren't interested in the greater good, only furthering their own goals. This is the spooks we are talking about so I'm sure Neil is right and they are having wet dreams about this very thing. All I can say is, thank $DEITY for open/free software and open algorithms. -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] h
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 11:08:04 +0100 Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 10:44:00 +0100, Stroller wrote: I'm sure the NSA would be happy to forego the prize and keep quiet about being able to break a secure cipher. I can't help wondering if - since P=NP is such a big problem - the advantages of having this knowledge in the public domain might override the advantages of mere spying. I'm sure the holy grail for the NSA is a cipher that everyone thinks is totally secure but they can break. These agencies aren't interested in the greater good, only furthering their own goals. Sounds like AES fits the description :D -- Best regards, Daniel -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] h
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Alan McKinnon wrote: | On Friday 27 June 2008, Neil Bothwick wrote: | On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 10:44:00 +0100, Stroller wrote: | I'm sure the NSA would be happy to forego the prize and keep | quiet about | being able to break a secure cipher. | I can't help wondering if - since P=NP is such a big problem - the | advantages of having this knowledge in the public domain might | override the advantages of mere spying. | I'm sure the holy grail for the NSA is a cipher that everyone thinks | is totally secure but they can break. These agencies aren't | interested in the greater good, only furthering their own goals. | | This is the spooks we are talking about so I'm sure Neil is right and | they are having wet dreams about this very thing. | | All I can say is, thank $DEITY for open/free software and open | algorithms. Somehow I doubt that the NSA has a magic bullet to crack AES encryption. If they did, it wouldn't be a part of the FIPS. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that the US Navy has more cryptologists, etc. than the NSA - just a guess here. It would make perfect sense, though - since they have to use radios and satellites to communicate with their ships at sea, they would be most interested in data security - we wouldn't want our enemies ordering our ships or nuclear missile subs to make attacks that weren't ordered by the President... Chris -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJIZWL8AAoJEIAhA8M9p9DAX68QAJaNlRGoASZmMcscX014NPWB R14tkXaOK/ZEcxT3GbbcUTnH8vy4ipbdelw1yGb9s76Rak1/cCXNk8NSSvGtp9J2 yqio2RTXdVy7Jd0luFDsZx+J6tAiMN5P69VUgT/0vjhAt2FDHRiI+93WHAvgh+si 3qyqjv1dP4yS0RCv1hAEB5Kl37okMAvzYWmYQXBrTD5lBpiPNgYmwMr+TRRme6vs SEKFHwSBv8/zDByN1hCNdJ9af1eUSX77fFkT3Ghh5/UTg5dMe1h1oOhHT42k09+d YKII2f7ENYzpEQ5XvZhZGVrEKIAiXc00+1eNt4GSDZufUuOm3IssOQTuhCT/PUDP jAPIdIRN1jyOT+oZhROIWX1jJBfKPZyHGx7ijXACqCqe+7ByusHPduM5yw+9GpH7 ZfM3Jmv22Xdd8oljOxGHTg0mWBp+yyJC7BNFnKDSbkF7UPrRcS8NdNQjtNP78ec7 V25lBTvl6MyVUIu7T+9U9OYlApPSap+D2nJqfwjJyBJ8MlMos3xbPIJzBfUNjOf+ 3PnP9ApUMp98JwYuOe8FCYbwAp/8Gw5DzT1fDOFgAMkYqqBTduy8Gw4itHGegTIY p/584QRpadwKbsBcCpEBJ7FyKGYqOjG2nmf08lq8vUX4Y60ofbVRSoIU1tXV7CWp NWwS0QnnE5ykHpIG1d0/ =LGqw -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] h
On Donnerstag, 26. Juni 2008, Alan McKinnon wrote: On Thursday 26 June 2008, Sebastian Wiesner wrote: Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] at Thursday 26 June 2008, 10:54:43 The calculation is quite simple - measure how quickly a specific computer can match keys. Divide this into the size of the keyspace. The average time to brute force a key is half that value. AFAIK this still averages out at enormous numbers of years, even at insane calculation rates like what RoadRunner can achieve. According to Wikipedia RoadRunner is designed for 1.7 petaflops in peak. Assuming for the sake of simplicity, that decryption can be performed within a single flop: (2^256) / (1.7 * 10^15) / 2 ~= 3.5 * 10^61 In years: 3.5 * 10^61 / 3600 / 24 / 356 ~= 10^54 Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems impossible to me, to reduce this get the required amount somewhere near to the life time of a human being ;) Even with your ultra-liberal assumptions, it still comes out to: 1 times longer than the entire universe is believed to have existed thus far (14 billion years). That is an unbelievable stupendously long period of time. Yeah, I'd agree that brute force is utterly unfeasible as a vector of attack. Not even the almighty NSA could ever pull that one off as there simply aren't enough atoms in the universe to make a supercomputer big enough. Numbers don't lie. and this is why nobody uses brute force. There a better ways to crack keys. NSA has tons of experts in mathematics and cryptoanalysis. Plus very sophisticated hardware. I am sure for most ciphers they use something much more efficient than stupid brute force. -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] h
* Volker Armin Hemmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [27.06.08 00:12]: and this is why nobody uses brute force. There a better ways to crack keys. NSA has tons of experts in mathematics and cryptoanalysis. Plus very sophisticated hardware. I am sure for most ciphers they use something much more efficient than stupid brute force. The thing about this keys is, that there is no better way than to brute force such keys. The algorithm uses a function which inverse is a known hard problem which resides in NP, which is a class of functions equal to just guessing. If the NSA had a sufficient algorithm, that is capable of reducing the time that much, they should also be able to prove P=NP. This is worth 1.000.000$ iirc and somehow you should get a Nobel Prize for it. For deeper and better insight, take some courses in cryptography and theoretical computer sience, they are quiet good at Clausthal. Sebastian -- Religion ist das Opium des Volkes. Karl Marx [EMAIL PROTECTED]@N GÜNTHER mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpjnQdD0cDAN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] h
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 00:47:34 +0200, Sebastian Günther wrote: If the NSA had a sufficient algorithm, that is capable of reducing the time that much, they should also be able to prove P=NP. This is worth 1.000.000$ iirc and somehow you should get a Nobel Prize for it. I'm sure the NSA would be happy to forego the prize and keep quiet about being able to break a secure cipher. Just like our GCHQ came up with public key cryptography several years before Rivest, Shamir and Adleman published RSA but kept it secret for over 30 years. -- Neil Bothwick If I save time, when do I get it back? signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] h
Sebastian Günther wrote: * Volker Armin Hemmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [27.06.08 00:12]: and this is why nobody uses brute force. There a better ways to crack keys. NSA has tons of experts in mathematics and cryptanalysis. Plus very sophisticated hardware. I am sure for most ciphers they use something much more efficient than stupid brute force. The thing about this keys is, that there is no better way than to brute force such keys. The algorithm uses a function which inverse is a known hard problem which resides in NP, which is a class of functions equal to just guessing. I don't believe this is true. The algorithm uses a function which is *assumed* to be a hard problem. You assume the problem is hard because you and anyone you know have not been able to make it easy. That does not mean that someone has not discovered some math that does make it easy. Here's a reference to the interesting meet-in-the-middle attack which reduced 3DES key space down to 112 bits from 192. Obviously that was unknown when 3DES was built. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_DES#Security kashani -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
