David Buchananiboot implies the existence of uboot
Hayato Fujii
- 5 Followers
- 15 Following
- 40 Posts
cryptography enthusiast
Pierre BourdonUpdate: I got an email from Hetzner's legal team today saying they came across my blog post (nice!). Paraphrasing:
- They're monitoring and understand that there is no actual abuse being done from these Tor relays getting spoofed.
- They emphasized that they do not routinely take action on this kind of abuse complaints, and that's why they forward them without requiring reply/action from the customer.
Love hearing this, and I'm actually impressed by Hetzner's response! Major props.
Graham Sutherland / Polynomialif you work in an intel datacenter doing physical relocation of servers, does that mean you mov rax?
what do you say when your code performs badly?
O(no)
MistyMac users: if you're a fan of The Unarchiver but you're annoyed by the analytics and stuff the new owners have been putting in, give Keka a try. It's free (or $7 on the app store), and so far it seems to support pretty much anything The Unarchiver does.
abadideaI can't possibly be the only one looking into the actual executable instructions of the backdoor right now but that is absolutely what I am doing and I just want to say: AHHHHHH
I am not very far but I am far enough to say this isn't amateur work
AndresFreundTecI accidentally found a security issue while benchmarking postgres changes.
If you run debian testing, unstable or some other more "bleeding edge" distribution, I strongly recommend upgrading ASAP.
*Ada Freya ⋆.˚🦦⋆🦌 - Neptuwuniumhttps://www.swift.org/blog/adwaita-swift//
Apple just... indirectly acknowledged Asahi Linux??
paloma kop ⁂i just recieved one of the most unhinged spam emails of my years as a user of email. it sounds like it was written by a person locked in a room with nothing but a thesaurus and a 10-strip of acid. the fact that it ends in the usual fake paypal invoice only makes it funnier.
Mark NelsonDidn't expect to see boolean logic lead a Supreme Court opinion today.
Does the phrase "does not have A, B, and C" mean:
(not A) and (not B) and (not C)
which by De Morgan's laws is equivalent to:
not (A or B or C)
***or***, does it mean
not (A and B and C)
equiv. to: (not A) or (not B) or (not C)
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled earlier today 6-3 in favor of the first interpretation (at least in this specific context), in a split that didn't fall along traditional ideological lines. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-340_3e04.pdf