Aug 2 09:37
What are less known softwares you use almost everyday?
Aug 2 09:43
Aug 2 10:22
Aug 2 10:30
Window Maker, an elegant and very low resources desktop.
Aug 2 10:43
Aug 2 10:58
Talking about very low resource window managers: fluxbox
Aug 2 21:38
How to use youtube-dl with Tor (torbrowser running with 9150 port) ? youtube-dl --proxy socks5://127.0.0.1:9150 <link to video> ? And that's all ? It will be download video trought Tor path ? Youtube or other site form extractors list don't block this connection ? Thx!
Aug 2 22:11
Aug 3 16:02
Aug 3 16:07
someone already said that.
Aug 3 16:07
Aug 3 16:08
the question was "less known", not "common as sand"
Aug 3 16:15
Aug 18 11:33
OMEGA get it here, it's free: www.cyanbyte.de
Aug 18 13:45
OMEGA rofl.... looks to me like someone tried to build an encryption tool after reading a book about crypto... but looking at the python code of OMEGA there is not much magic... I honestly doubt it's at least cryptographically secure.
Aug 18 13:46
Implementing one time pad encryption is surprisingly simple. In fact, there is pretty much nothing you even could do wrong on just the encryption, as long as you implement actual ONE TIME PAD encryption. Generating and distributing a good pad however....
Aug 18 14:50
Aug 18 15:11
How would you break it then?
Aug 18 15:13
"If you can't break it, it must be secure" is a common crypto fallacy.
Aug 18 15:22
Well said! You could build a complicated machine to drive a nail into the wall, but the best tool for the task is still a simple hammer. The very same principle applies to cryptography. and if you don't trust /dev/urandom to generate the keys, You can generate the random numbers using dedicated hardware, e.g. by geiger-counting natural radioactive decay (google for "hotbits"), or by using the avalanche effect of a Z-diode, just to name another option. More complicated technology/software is not necessarily better. It is also less transparent and as such also less trustworthy.
Aug 18 15:25
Is your approach "If I don't *BELIEVE* it to be secure, then it *MUST* be insecure." really any better? :)
Aug 18 15:31
previous post was not by the same poster you're addressing, as is this one. I guess the point they wanted to make is that generally, if crypto software has obvious signs of poor software development practices, it's a definite "SHOULD NOT USE" in terms of cryptographic credibility, since normal crypto is incredibly easy to mess up. But since OTP is basically just XORing two things together (assuming that one of those things is a properly created one time pad), that's extremely hard to get wrong.
Aug 18 16:23
1 hour ago
PIVX but it's well known already.
|Which linux do you use?||Aug 20 08:11||53|
|less known linux softwares?||Aug 20 08:02||24|
|Doh||Aug 10 22:44||3|
|MeinCoin Progress and Ideas||Aug 3 22:33||7|
|time: Response from Bitmessage Dodo Server||Aug 2 22:20||1|
|gram: Response from Bitmessage Dodo Server||Aug 2 22:18||3|
|help: Response from Bitmessage Dodo Server||Aug 2 22:12||1|
|Response from Bitmessage Dodo Server||Aug 2 12:56||5|
|Video Editor||Jul 28 16:59||18|
|Your privacy - VPN & Firefox (+ other Gecko browsers)*||Jul 27 12:28||1|