Aside from that, the key really is the resource,
which you'd somehow need to protect in order to stop invalid user
agents just spoofing all this info. In that respect it's very similar
to swf verify, which doesn't work.
I should say: I deliberately didn’t ask for a cryptographic critique.
I'm trying to work out if this thread is a genuine idea being proposed
or if it was simply to highlight the futility of SWF Verification. If
it was the latter: Well demonstrated! ;)
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Paul Webster p...@dabdig.com wrote:
And for practical purposes ... the UserAgent
We're going to be committing Blu-Ray compatible encoding in x264 soon, which
will be the first open-source Blu-Ray compatible encoder, and we plan to
release a free downloadable Blu-Ray image to coincide with this. We really
don't want to release something like Big Buck Bunny or Elephants Dream
And for practical purposes ... the UserAgent field changes with version
updates.
So - as software gets updated it would mean that the back-end would also
have to go through the library and re-generate keys for old material (or
recalculate it on the fly on access).
Taking just an invariable
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 13:00, Kieran Kunhya kie...@kunhya.com wrote:
We're going to be committing Blu-Ray compatible encoding in x264 soon, which
will be the first open-source Blu-Ray compatible encoder, and we plan to
release a free downloadable Blu-Ray image to coincide with this. We really
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 14:23, Paul Webster p...@dabdig.com wrote:
And for practical purposes ... the UserAgent field changes with version
updates.
You would think, wouldn’t you…
So - as software gets updated it would mean that the back-end would also
have to go through the library and
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 14:23, Iain Wallace ikwall...@gmail.com wrote:
It's the access to the referrer part that I don't understand. Why is
it any harder for an invalid client to access it than a valid one?
This is locking the door and then putting the key under the mat. Once
everyone realises
I think I replied from an address which isn't registered with the list
earlier, so here's what I said again:
The fact that this is all presumably going to be sent in the clear as
opposed to encrypted means this would be technically very easy to
reverse engineer. Aside from that, the key really is
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 13:50, Iain Wallace ikwall...@gmail.com wrote:
I think I replied from an address which isn't registered with the list
earlier, so here's what I said again:
The fact that this is all presumably going to be sent in the clear as
opposed to encrypted means this would be
I had tried to get Sita released in SVG format.
unfortunately Nina wasn't happy with SVG output from Adobe source
files, in particular some transparencies are lost in the conversion,
and there doesn't appear to be a work around. .
regards
Jonathan
On 9 Mar 2010, at 13:21, Mo McRoberts
10 matches
Mail list logo
