You don’t partially decrypt passwords. You either get the full thing or you get gobble.
So if they get 1, they still don’t know you use <DiscordTag> or <Disco> or <DiscordSeevice> etc. I wouldn’t just straight up say “Netflix” in my service tagging.
You can take this a step further to segregate passwords as well.
Reusing passwords across devices is bad. If one gets compromised you don’t want a password being out into a brute force table to be used with all your other accounts elsewhere.
This method of tagging using HTML markup styles in your passwords lets you keep the same core passphrase but alter the tagging, specific to the service.
You can do this easily while also giving you artificial password complexity.
Example:
Core passpgrase is “yogurt”
Password for gmail becomes markup with a <mailPassGoog>yogurt</mailPassGoog>
I only need to remember yogurt.
Every device just gets a truncated service tag appended to the beginning and end using HTML style tags.
Suddenly you have a 26+ character password that you don’t forget and doesn’t compromise you across other services because each is different.
Most modern cancer drug treatment is sequenced to at least the specific proteins of the type of cancer it is.
Have breast cancer? Cool. We figure out which of the many variations so that we can give you medications for that exact type of breast cancer.
This sort of specific targeting has been increasing and increasing for the last 20 years. MRNA is the next step of that and is highly likely to be a means or become or for treatments in many other areas.
Aluminum oxynitride is transparent aluminum, but alpha aluminum oxide, which is also transparent, is called Corundum.
What is the diagnosis and cure for the disease that has ravaged me for the last 13 years?
Thanks.
Opinion letter.
None of the accusations in the title can be substantiated, more than a dozen other apps and technologies are backed by the same organization the article mentions funds part of a signal’s budget.
Assertions that TOR has a governmental back door, that the CIA wants people to use Signal, are not substantiated, and the article states at the same time that there are fears the anonymity of Signal threatens western governments. Can’t have it both ways.
The only definitive thing this article can prove or cite is where some OTF funding goes, which was publicly disclosed since it’s inception. It reads like a /r/superstonk GME reeeeeee post equivalent for communication security by a ti foil hat.
Sure it does, but that doesn’t make it bad.
Open source code is not the only solution to secure communication.
You can be extremely secure on closed source tools as well.
If they found specific issues with Signal aside from not being allowed to freely inspect their code base, I suspect we would be hearing about it. Instead I don’t see specific security failings just hat it didn’t make the measure for their security software audit.
As an example of something that is closed source and trusted:
The software used to load data and debug the F-35 fighter jet.
Pretty big problem for 16 countries if that isn’t secure… closed source. So much s you can’t even run tests against the device for loading data to the jet live. It’s a problem to sort out, but it’s an example of where highly important communication protocols are not open source and trusted by the governments of many countries.
If their particular standard here was open source, ok, but they didn’t do anything to assure the version they inspected would be the only version used. In fact every release from that basement pair of programmers could inadvertently have a flaw in it, which this committee would not be reviewing in the code base for its members of parliament.
@sudoshakes
@reddthat.com