On 2022-04-22 02:57, Greg wrote:
I downloaded and installed the auto version of the software.
"auto version"?
I go to the director C:\google-python-exercises> *python hello.py*
I am running Windows.
What am I doing incorrectly?
I don't know, because you didn't say what did or didn't hap
I downloaded and installed the auto version of the software.
I go to the director C:\google-python-exercises> *python hello.py*
I am running Windows.
What am I doing incorrectly?
I had the zip file installed under my One Drive and then moved it to my C
drive
Patiently waiting,
Greg
--
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> On Sunday, January 25, 2015 at 5:36:02 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>> One thing that I really like doing with my Python students (full
>> disclosure: I'm a mentor with www.thinkful.com and am thus at times
>> paid to help people learn
On Sunday, January 25, 2015 at 5:36:02 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> One thing that I really like doing with my Python students (full
> disclosure: I'm a mentor with www.thinkful.com and am thus at times
> paid to help people learn Python) is some form of screen-sharing, so I
> can watch hi
learning any new language, I said, the first step would be a Hello
World program. Let's see if we can get that to work.
So my buddy creates opens the IDE they gave at the workplace, creates a
new project, adds a demo.py file, writes one line : print "Hello World",
hits Run in the IDE
would be a Hello
World program. Let's see if we can get that to work.
So my buddy creates opens the IDE they gave at the workplace, creates a
new project, adds a demo.py file, writes one line : print "Hello World",
hits Run in the IDE and indeed the display is shown at the bottom w
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Christopher J. Pisz
wrote:
> So my buddy creates opens the IDE they gave at the workplace, creates a new
> project, adds a demo.py file, writes one line : print "Hello World", hits
> Run in the IDE and indeed the display is shown at the bottom
I am trying to help a buddy out. I am a C++ on Windows guy. This buddy
of mine is learning Python at work on a Mac. I figured I could
contribute with non language specific questions and such.
When learning any new language, I said, the first step would be a Hello
World program. Let's s
Chris Angelico :
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 9:03 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> I believe passwords themselves are the wrong solution. I believe in a
>> physical, government-issue object capable of challenge-response. It
>> can then be beefed up with extra measures depending on the need.
>
> I can't
Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Michael Ströder :
>
>> Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>>> I believe in a
>>> physical, government-issue object
>>
>> Did you forget the smiley? Or where were you during the last 1,5 years?
>
> You can juggle the issues all you want. In the end, there's
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 2:48 AM, Michael Ströder wrote:
>> For instance, someone could join my wifi
>> network - all they need is the WPA2 PSK, which is well known around
>> the place - and use/abuse our internet connection; but they couldn't
>> access my PostgreSQL databases, because the firewall
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 9:03 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Michael Torrie :
>
>> Most password policies are the wrong solution.
>
> I believe passwords themselves are the wrong solution. I believe in a
> physical, government-issue object capable of challenge-response. It can
> then be beefed up with
Michael Ströder :
> Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> I believe in a
>> physical, government-issue object
>
> Did you forget the smiley? Or where were you during the last 1,5 years?
You can juggle the issues all you want. In the end, there's no escaping
the governments' underw
Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 12:35 AM, Michael Ströder
> wrote:
>> Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> Want security?
>>> Push the encryption and authentication down to a lower layer, and save
>>> yourself the trouble.
>>
>> Yes. And now for the next level: How to prevent unauthorized ma
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 12:35 AM, Michael Ströder wrote:
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>> Want security?
>> Push the encryption and authentication down to a lower layer, and save
>> yourself the trouble.
>
> Yes. And now for the next level: How to prevent unauthorized machines to
> connect to your netwo
Chris Angelico wrote:
> Want security?
> Push the encryption and authentication down to a lower layer, and save
> yourself the trouble.
Yes. And now for the next level: How to prevent unauthorized machines to
connect to your network…
Ciao, Michael.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/py
Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> I believe in a
> physical, government-issue object
Did you forget the smiley? Or where were you during the last 1,5 years?
Ciao, Michael.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Mark Lawrence wrote:
>
>> Bah humbug, this has reminded me of doing secure work whereby each
>> individual had two passwords, both of which had to be changed every
>> thirty days, and rules were enforced so you couldn't just increment the
>> number at the end of a word or
Michael Torrie wrote:
> Like many of you I use a password manager these days. It's pretty
> slick. But really it shows the absurdity of the situation. Instead of
> passwords we should all just use private/public keypairs and store the
> private keys in a digital wallet. Forget this password gar
In article <54bb2c5f$0$12977$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> You know that two-factor authentication doesn't offer any real security
> against Man In The Middle attacks?
The fact that TFA doesn't solve all problems doesn't change the fact
that it solves some of th
Michael Torrie :
> Most password policies are the wrong solution.
I believe passwords themselves are the wrong solution. I believe in a
physical, government-issue object capable of challenge-response. It can
then be beefed up with extra measures depending on the need.
Marko
--
https://mail.pyt
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Michael Torrie wrote:
> Like many of you I use a password manager these days. It's pretty
> slick. But really it shows the absurdity of the situation. Instead of
> passwords we should all just use private/public keypairs and store the
> private keys in a digital
On 01/17/2015 05:04 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> Related to that is another reason I've heard: if your password is
> figured out by some means other than hash theft [1], there's a maximum
> of N days to make use of it. But let's face it, if someone gets hold
> of one of your accounts, it won't take
>
>
> Password maximum age is the wrong solution to a few problems, and is
> itself a problem. Don't do it.
>
> Bruce Schneier (mostly) agrees with you:
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/11/changing_passwo.html.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> (I am very cynical about most of the "security features" the banks are
> pushing for, since in my opinion they are more about giving the banks
> plausible deniablity so they can push responsibility for security breaches
> onto the customer.
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Tim Chase
wrote:
> You think that's bad, one million Google Authenticator 2-factor
> verification codes were leaked:
>
> https://twitter.com/paulmutton/status/509991378647277568
>
> Those hackers are a wily bunch. ;-)
http://torrent-city.net/download/Li/List-of-A
On 2015-01-17 22:18, Roy Smith wrote:
> Tell me about it. I have an E-Trade ATM card. When I first got
> it, I set it up with a 6 digit PIN. I was shocked to discover some
> time later that it actually only looks at the first 4 digits. And,
> no, I'm not talking *characters*, I'm talking *digit
Roy Smith wrote:
> In article <54bb1c83$0$12979$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
>> Even that doesn't protect you, because your security is controlled by
>> websites and banks etc. with stupid security policies. E.g. I am forced
>> to deal with one bank that uses
In article <54bb1c83$0$12979$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Even that doesn't protect you, because your security is controlled by
> websites and banks etc. with stupid security policies. E.g. I am forced to
> deal with one bank that uses a cryptographic key to sign
Albert van der Horst wrote:
> In article , wrote:
>>Michael Torrie wrote:
>>> On 01/17/2015 07:51 AM, Albert van der Horst wrote:
>>> > In article ,
>>> > Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> But sure. If you want to cut out complication, dispense with user
>>> >> accounts altogether an
On 01/17/2015 11:47 AM, Michael Ströder wrote:
>> sudo makes administrators careless, lazy and it is not simple at all.
>
> Admins must have separate accounts with separate credentials for
> administrative work and must be careful when using an administrative account.
Right. This is not a bad id
Sorry for necro.
On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 5:31 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
>> Just to be clear, writing to sys.stdout works fine in Idle.
> import sys; sys.stdout.write('hello ')
>> hello #2.7
>>
>> In 3.4, the number of chars? bytes? is r
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> The merely poor reason given by the more thoughtful sys admins is, if the
> password hashes get stolen, the hacker has a maximum of N days (and
> possibly less) to crack the hashes and recover the passwords before they
> get changed. That'
Mark Lawrence wrote:
> Bah humbug, this has reminded me of doing secure work whereby each
> individual had two passwords, both of which had to be changed every
> thirty days, and rules were enforced so you couldn't just increment the
> number at the end of a word or similar.
I hate and despise sy
alb...@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) wrote:
> In article , wrote:
>> Michael Torrie wrote:
>>> On 01/17/2015 07:51 AM, Albert van der Horst wrote:
In article ,
Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> But sure. If you want to cut out complication, dispense with user
>
On 17/01/2015 16:47, c...@isbd.net wrote:
Michael Torrie wrote:
On 01/17/2015 07:51 AM, Albert van der Horst wrote:
In article ,
Chris Angelico wrote:
But sure. If you want to cut out complication, dispense with user
accounts altogether and run everything as root. That's WAY simpler!
I
In article , wrote:
>Michael Torrie wrote:
>> On 01/17/2015 07:51 AM, Albert van der Horst wrote:
>> > In article ,
>> > Chris Angelico wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> But sure. If you want to cut out complication, dispense with user
>> >> accounts altogether and run everything as root. That's WAY si
Michael Torrie wrote:
> On 01/17/2015 07:51 AM, Albert van der Horst wrote:
> > In article ,
> > Chris Angelico wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> But sure. If you want to cut out complication, dispense with user
> >> accounts altogether and run everything as root. That's WAY simpler!
> >
> > I didn't excep
On 01/17/2015 07:51 AM, Albert van der Horst wrote:
> In article ,
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>>
>> But sure. If you want to cut out complication, dispense with user
>> accounts altogether and run everything as root. That's WAY simpler!
>
> I didn't except this strawman argument from you.
> Of c
Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 1:51 AM, Albert van der Horst
> wrote:
> > In article ,
> > Chris Angelico wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>But sure. If you want to cut out complication, dispense with user
> >>accounts altogether and run everything as root. That's WAY simpler!
> >
> > I did
In article ,
Chris Angelico wrote:
>On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 4:02 AM, Steve Hayes wrote:
>> On 08 Jan 2015 12:43:33 GMT, alb...@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst)
>> wrote:
>>
>>>I don't trust sudo because it is too complicated.
>>>(To the point that I removed it from my machine.)
>>>I do
>
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 1:51 AM, Albert van der Horst
wrote:
> In article ,
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>>
>>But sure. If you want to cut out complication, dispense with user
>>accounts altogether and run everything as root. That's WAY simpler!
>
> I didn't except this strawman argument from you.
In article ,
Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>But sure. If you want to cut out complication, dispense with user
>accounts altogether and run everything as root. That's WAY simpler!
I didn't except this strawman argument from you.
Of course you need a distinction between doing system things as
root, and
On 2015-01-08, Michael Torrie wrote:
> On 01/08/2015 10:02 AM, Steve Hayes wrote:
>> On 08 Jan 2015 12:43:33 GMT, alb...@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst)
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't trust sudo because it is too complicated. (To the point that
>>> I removed it from my machine.) I do
>>
>> H
On 01/08/2015 10:02 AM, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On 08 Jan 2015 12:43:33 GMT, alb...@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst)
> wrote:
>
>> I don't trust sudo because it is too complicated.
>> (To the point that I removed it from my machine.)
>> I do
>
> How do you do that?
>
> I avoided Ubuntu bec
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 4:02 AM, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On 08 Jan 2015 12:43:33 GMT, alb...@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst)
> wrote:
>
>>I don't trust sudo because it is too complicated.
>>(To the point that I removed it from my machine.)
>>I do
>
> How do you do that?
>
> I avoided Ubuntu
On 08 Jan 2015 12:43:33 GMT, alb...@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst)
wrote:
>I don't trust sudo because it is too complicated.
>(To the point that I removed it from my machine.)
>I do
How do you do that?
I avoided Ubuntu because it had sudo, and then discovered that Fedora had it
as wel
On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 16:31:22 +0200, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> alister :
>
>> On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 16:06:16 +0200, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>>> An administrator doesn't need the users' passwords for anything but
>>> should be assumed to know them.
>>
>> The administrator may be able to change them but h
alister :
> On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 16:06:16 +0200, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> An administrator doesn't need the users' passwords for anything but
>> should be assumed to know them.
>
> The administrator may be able to change them but he should NEVER know
> them (or need to)!
When you are under an adm
On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 16:06:16 +0200, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Chris Angelico :
>
>> With sudo, you get MUCH finer control. I can grant some user the power
>> to run "sudo eject sr0", but no other commands. I can permit someone to
>> execute any of a large number of commands, all individually logged
Chris Angelico wrote:
> With sudo, you get MUCH finer control.
But it's very hard, almost impossible, to really implement fine-grained
control with sudo. Too many programs provide shell exits.
Well, it's off-topic here.
How about taking this to news:comp.security.unix ?
Ciao, Michael.
--
https
Chris Angelico :
> With sudo, you get MUCH finer control. I can grant some user the power
> to run "sudo eject sr0", but no other commands. I can permit someone
> to execute any of a large number of commands, all individually logged.
I can't remember ever having a need for that. I sometimes use s
In article ,
Chris Angelico wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 11:43 PM, Albert van der Horst
> wrote:
>> I don't trust sudo because it is too complicated.
>> (To the point that I removed it from my machine.)
>> I do
>> su
>> ..
>> #
>> su nobody
>>
>> Who needs sudo?
>
>With sudo, you get MUCH finer
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 11:43 PM, Albert van der Horst
wrote:
> I don't trust sudo because it is too complicated.
> (To the point that I removed it from my machine.)
> I do
> su
> ..
> #
> su nobody
>
> Who needs sudo?
With sudo, you get MUCH finer control. I can grant some user the power
to run "
number of chars? bytes? is returned and written also.
>>
>> Whether you mean something different by 'stdout' or not, I am not sure. The
>> error is from writing to a non-existent file descriptor.
>
>That's because sys.stdout is replaced. But stdout itself, file
>de
On Fri, 26 Dec 2014 15:13:25 +1100, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Deep in the brain, well underneath the level of modern languages and
> consciousness, there is a deeper "machine language" of the brain. If you
> can write instructions in this machine language, you can control
> people's brains. Back
alex23 wrote:
> On 24/12/2014 2:20 AM, Grant Edwards wrote:
>> And even _with_ all the technical jibber-jabber, none of it explained
>> or justified the whole "writing a virus to infect the brain through
>> the optic nerve" thing which might just have well been magick and
>> witches.
>
> While I
On 24/12/2014 9:50 PM, alister wrote:
what feels like 3 or 4 chapters in & it is still trying to set the scene,
an exercise in stylish writing with very little content so far.
even early scifi written for magazines on a per word basis were not this
excessive (because if they were they would proba
On 24/12/2014 2:20 AM, Grant Edwards wrote:
And even _with_ all the technical jibber-jabber, none of it explained
or justified the whole "writing a virus to infect the brain through
the optic nerve" thing which might just have well been magick and
witches.
While I love SNOW CRASH, I do think it
On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 16:20:10 +, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2014-12-23, Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
>> Chris Angelico wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 12:15 AM, Roy Smith wrote:
If I really didn't trust something, I'd go to AWS and spin up one of
their free-tier micro instances and
Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2014-12-23, Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
>> Chris Angelico wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 12:15 AM, Roy Smith wrote:
If I really didn't trust something, I'd go to AWS and spin up one of
their free-tier micro instances and run it there :-)
>>>
>>> How do yo
Rustom Mody wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 9:50:22 PM UTC+5:30, Grant Edwards wrote:
>>
>> And even _with_ all the technical jibber-jabber, none of it explained
>> or justified the whole "writing a virus to infect the brain through
>> the optic nerve" thing which might just have well been
On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 9:50:22 PM UTC+5:30, Grant Edwards wrote:
>
> And even _with_ all the technical jibber-jabber, none of it explained
> or justified the whole "writing a virus to infect the brain through
> the optic nerve" thing which might just have well been magick and
> witches.
Yo
On 2014-12-23, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 12:15 AM, Roy Smith wrote:
>>> If I really didn't trust something, I'd go to AWS and spin up one of
>>> their free-tier micro instances and run it there :-)
>>
>> How do you know it won't create console ou
O thats nothing.
Ive eaten cookies. Given by strangers can contain narcotics you know!
Ive even walked on the road. Mines? Youve heard of them right?!? People get
their legs blown off [shivers]
Only computers I dont use -- Just too dangerous.
If cars and bikes can have bombs -- why not a compu
On 23/12/2014 01:39, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 12:37 PM, MRAB wrote:
And a programming newsgroup isn't really the plaice for it anyway!
And yet we do carp on a bit, don't we...
ChrisA
Gordon Bennett what have I started? You dangle a bit of bait and...
--
My fellow Py
Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 12:15 AM, Roy Smith wrote:
>> If I really didn't trust something, I'd go to AWS and spin up one of
>> their free-tier micro instances and run it there :-)
>
> How do you know it won't create console output that stroboscopically
> infects you with a
On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 12:37 PM, MRAB wrote:
> And a programming newsgroup isn't really the plaice for it anyway!
And yet we do carp on a bit, don't we...
ChrisA
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 2014-12-23 01:03, sohcahto...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, December 22, 2014 4:56:13 PM UTC-8, Roy Smith wrote:
In article ,
Tim Chase wrote:
> On 2014-12-22 19:05, MRAB wrote:
> > On 2014-12-22 18:51, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> > > I'm having wonderful thoughts of Michael Palin's favourite Pyt
On Monday, December 22, 2014 4:56:13 PM UTC-8, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article ,
> Tim Chase wrote:
>
> > On 2014-12-22 19:05, MRAB wrote:
> > > On 2014-12-22 18:51, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> > > > I'm having wonderful thoughts of Michael Palin's favourite Python
> > > > sketch which involved fish sl
On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article ,
> Tim Chase wrote:
>
>> On 2014-12-22 19:05, MRAB wrote:
>> > On 2014-12-22 18:51, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>> > > I'm having wonderful thoughts of Michael Palin's favourite Python
>> > > sketch which involved fish slapping.
>> > >
>>
In article ,
Tim Chase wrote:
> On 2014-12-22 19:05, MRAB wrote:
> > On 2014-12-22 18:51, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> > > I'm having wonderful thoughts of Michael Palin's favourite Python
> > > sketch which involved fish slapping.
> > >
> > Well, ChrisA _has_ mentioned Pike in this thread. :-)
>
> B
On 12/22/2014 05:29 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Dave Angel wrote:
I figure I must be misunderstanding something in your explanation, since a
brute-force password guesser would seem to only need four billion tries to
(probably) crack that.
As to the assump
On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Dave Angel wrote:
> I figure I must be misunderstanding something in your explanation, since a
> brute-force password guesser would seem to only need four billion tries to
> (probably) crack that.
>
> 1) Are you assuming that the cracker can read the source code, b
On 12/22/2014 12:25 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
There's one exception. Writing your own crypto is a bad idea if that
means reimplementing AES... but if you want something that's effective
on completely different levels, sometimes it's best to write your own.
I had a project a while ago that needed
On 2014-12-22 19:05, MRAB wrote:
> On 2014-12-22 18:51, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> > I'm having wonderful thoughts of Michael Palin's favourite Python
> > sketch which involved fish slapping.
> >
> Well, ChrisA _has_ mentioned Pike in this thread. :-)
But you know he does it just for the halibut...
-
On Mon, 22 Dec 2014 16:18:33 +, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2014-12-21, Tony the Tiger wrote:
>> On Sat, 20 Dec 2014 23:57:08 +1100, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>
>>> I am in total awe.
>>
>> I'm not. It has no real value. Write your code like that and you'll
>> soon be looking for a new job.
>
>
On 2014-12-22 18:51, Mark Lawrence wrote:
On 22/12/2014 16:23, Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2014-12-21, Roy Smith wrote:
In article <54974ed7$0$12986$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Obviously you don't write obfuscated code like this for production use,
except in su
On 22/12/2014 16:23, Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2014-12-21, Roy Smith wrote:
In article <54974ed7$0$12986$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Obviously you don't write obfuscated code like this for production use,
except in such cases where you deliberately want to wri
On 22/12/2014 15:39, Skip Montanaro wrote:
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Steven D'Aprano
mailto:steve%2bcomp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info>> wrote:
> Don't try this at home!
>
>
> # download_naked_pictures_of_jennifer_lawrence.py
> import os
> os.system("rm ――rf /")
And because Steven *kno
On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Grant Edwards wrote:
>> Heh. I once worked on a C++ project that included its own crypo code
>> (i.e. custom implementations of things like AES and SHA-1).
>
> Damn. Should I ever start to do something like that (for a real
> product), I hereby officially request
Skip Montanaro wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Steven D'Aprano <
> steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote:
>> Don't try this at home!
>>
>>
>> # download_naked_pictures_of_jennifer_lawrence.py
>> import os
>> os.system("rm ――rf /")
>
> And because Steven *knows* some fool will "try
for production use.
>
> Yes, my initial reaction was "that's awesome".
>
> And my second thought was that it was scary.
>
> I ran it. It worked, and printed "Hello world". I was awed.
>
> But what if I had run it and it reformatted my hard disk?
>
&g
On 2014-12-21, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article <54974ed7$0$12986$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
>> Obviously you don't write obfuscated code like this for production use,
>> except in such cases where you deliberately want to write obfuscated code
>> for production
On 2014-12-21, Tony the Tiger wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Dec 2014 23:57:08 +1100, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
>> I am in total awe.
>
> I'm not. It has no real value. Write your code like that and you'll soon
> be looking for a new job.
I think you'll find that people who know enough to write code like
th
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Jussi Piitulainen
wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano writes:
>
>> Don't try this at home!
>>
>> # download_naked_pictures_of_jennifer_lawrence.py
>> import os
>> os.system("rm ――rf /")
>
> Not sure what that character is (those characters are) but it's not
> (they aren't) th
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Steven D'Aprano <
steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote:
> Don't try this at home!
>
>
> # download_naked_pictures_of_jennifer_lawrence.py
> import os
> os.system("rm ――rf /")
And because Steven *knows* some fool will "try this at home", he cripples
the rm co
Steven D'Aprano writes:
> Don't try this at home!
>
> # download_naked_pictures_of_jennifer_lawrence.py
> import os
> os.system("rm ――rf /")
Not sure what that character is (those characters are) but it's not
(they aren't) the hyphen that rm expects in its options, so:
>>> os.system("rm ――rf
Roy Smith wrote:
> If I wanted to write something evil, I wouldn't write it to
> look obfuscated. I'd write it to look like it did something useful.
That's an order of magnitude harder than merely obfuscating code.
If you wanted to write something evil, better to just rely on the fact that
most
In article <87egrrrf2i@elektro.pacujo.net>,
Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Roy Smith :
>
> > If I really didn't trust something, I'd go to AWS and spin up one of
> > their free-tier micro instances and run it there :-)
>
> Speaking of trust and AWS, Amazon adminsâand by extension, the NSAâhav
Roy Smith :
> If I really didn't trust something, I'd go to AWS and spin up one of
> their free-tier micro instances and run it there :-)
Speaking of trust and AWS, Amazon admins—and by extension, the NSA—have
full access to the virtual machines. That needs to be taken into account
when running s
On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 12:15 AM, Roy Smith wrote:
> If I really didn't trust something, I'd go to AWS and spin up one of
> their free-tier micro instances and run it there :-)
How do you know it won't create console output that stroboscopically
infects you with a virus through your eyes? Because
In article <5497e1d5$0$12978$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Steve Hayes wrote:
>
> > Yes, my initial reaction was "that's awesome".
> >
> > And my second thought was that it was scary.
> >
> &
? :-)
> >
> >
> >Obviously you don't write obfuscated code like this for production use,
> >except in such cases where you deliberately want to write obfuscated code
> >for production use.
>
> Yes, my initial reaction was "that's awesome"
Steven D'Aprano :
> Steve Hayes wrote:
>> But what if I had run it and it reformatted my hard disk?
>>
>> How would I have known that it would or wouldn't do that?
>
> That's why I didn't run it myself :-)
Well, I admit having run
yum install python3
as root.
> Ultimately, I'm trusting the
Steve Hayes wrote:
> Yes, my initial reaction was "that's awesome".
>
> And my second thought was that it was scary.
>
> I ran it. It worked, and printed "Hello world". I was awed.
>
> But what if I had run it and it reformatted my hard disk
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Chris Angelico :
>
>> Level 0: Why implement your own crypto?!?
>
> Licensing concerns come to mind.
>
> For example, the reference implementations of MD5 [RFC1321] and SHA1
> [RFC3174] are not in the public domain.
Which would you prefer?
Chris Angelico :
> Level 0: Why implement your own crypto?!?
Licensing concerns come to mind.
For example, the reference implementations of MD5 [RFC1321] and SHA1
[RFC3174] are not in the public domain.
Marko
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Steve Hayes wrote:
> But a hacker who can write that kind of stuff can probably bypass any
> safeguards built into the OS.
This isn't magic. You can't just do more of it to get past the
firewalls, like in sci fi. It's much MUCH easier to attack the humans
than the
On Mon, 22 Dec 2014 17:33:10 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
>On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Steve Hayes wrote:
>> Yes, my initial reaction was "that's awesome".
>>
>> And my second thought was that it was scary.
>>
>> I ran it. It worked, and prin
1 - 100 of 199 matches
Mail list logo
