Like it matters. Do you really think that the government would really
allow Intel and AMD to sell CPUs that didn't have tiny transmitters in
them?
Your CPU is actually transmitting every instruction it executes to the
satellites.
That's why you keep your CPU under your tin-foil hat, isn't
Tyler Durden wrote:
HANOVER, Germany -- German police have arrested an 18-year-old man
suspected of creating the Sasser computer worm, believed to be one of
the Internet's most costly outbreaks of sabotage.
Note the language...an 18 year old MAN and sabotage...
So a HS kid, living with his
- Forwarded message from Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
From: Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 01:23:07 -0700
To: Linux Elitists [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [linux-elitists] Two on RFID from Politech: Hack the tech,
Gilmore's dystopia
User-Agent:
John Young (2004-05-11 00:09Z) wrote:
Brian Dunbar wrote:
Like it matters. Do you really think that the government would really
allow Intel and AMD to sell CPUs that didn't have tiny transmitters in
them?
Your CPU is actually transmitting every instruction it executes to the
[Adam and I are taking this discussion off-list to spare your inboxes, but
this message seemed particularly relevant. Perhaps we'll come back later if
we come up with anything we think will be of general interest.]
-J
On Tue, 11 May 2004, Adam Back
Adam Back wrote:
On Mon, May 10, 2004 at 02:42:04AM +, Jason Holt wrote:
Another approach to hiding membership is one of the techniques
proposed for non-transferable signatures, where you use construct:
RSA-sig_A(x),RSA-sig_B(y) and verification is x xor y = hash(message).
Where the sender is
Gap may be I'm misunderstanding something about the HC approach.
We have:
P = (P1 or P2) is encoded HC_E(R,p) = {HC_E(R,P1),HC_E(R,P2)}
so one problem is marking, the server sends you different R values:
{HC_E(R,P1),HC_E(R',P2)}
so you described one way to fix that by using
