troed

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

I can see this work as a cab service. Pick me up at home and drop me off at my destination hotel/office. Within a single country this will shorten travel time enormously and for those paid enough by the hour that might come out to be cheaper than wasting time on travel.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 month ago (1 children)

but ... but ... everyone knows 'to 86' someone means to KILL THEM!!!!1

a bit harsh

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah, I mean, are we sure he's really born in the USA?

[–] [email protected] 42 points 1 month ago (1 children)

oh wow that really put the trust back into Ventoy. Nice! Thanks for the link

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Agree, I was just commenting on why 255 in itself isn't "weird". I find myself doing comparisons of the "value == variable" type even in languages where you cannot assign by mistake. Some of us old farts code from muscle memory ... :)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

a limit of 255 character. Why not 256? Why such a weird number in general?

255 chars + '\0' = 256

Not weird at all.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

No, it most definitely does not need to be private. The idea with salt is to invalidate rainbow tables. If you're "keeping it private" it's just another password.

The salt and the password (or its version after key stretching) are concatenated and fed to a cryptographic hash function, and the output hash value is then stored with the salt in a database. The salt does not need to be encrypted, because knowing the salt would not help the attacker.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_(cryptography)

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

Sure, but when we talk about the computation then the number of rounds is by far the more important factor compared to password length.

The discussion is about whether 24 characters indicate cleartext though - not whether password lengths should be in the gigabytes.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago

That's the same as "cleartext" for someone who works in security though, since that means anyone with the private key can decrypt the password.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (3 children)

While I'm not arguing for doing the crypto client side, the salt isn't needed to be private - only unique.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It does.

/80's hacker turned Software Engineer turned Cybersecurity professional

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Don't worry, I'm autistic myself and understand how difficult it can be to parse "it's thus irrelevant how many characters the user's password consists of" to mean something besides "all implementations must accept an unlimited amount of characters".

I do believe the point was understood by the general reader however.

view more: ‹ prev next ›