Looking at you tech divers.... Looking at you...

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Why? The point is, it deprives Russia income.
They are not currently selling that gas. But the market instability may raise the price on the gas they do sell. And it makes Europe more nervous about supporting Ukraine, as they could also do that to other energy pipelines, such as the just opened one from Norway.
 
Since no one is claiming responsibility for sabotaging the pipeline, ScubaBoard should come forward and take the credit. What's a little being branded as a terrorist organization for promoting a brand?
 
Ah, but do they earn interest on it while they keep it? Enquiring minds want to know.
Was really digging at PayPal arbitrarily closing accounts of people and organisations that "offend" their hair-trigger political sensitivities.

Big thing in the UK where PayPal are doing a reverse-ferret over cancelling the Free Speech Union and the Daily Sceptic on some woke whim. Now reinstated, but people are closing their accounts in droves.

Guess it's a bigger statement about the "cashless society". Will end in tears as every transaction is tracked and profiled. Can't even buy a new regulator without SWMBO finding out! You said you were working but your statement shows you went down the pub...
 
Technology is always a 2 edge sword. When I was working on Bitlocker for Windows Vista, the FBI requested to our product unit manager to have a back door for them. He said no. We had a member from the NSA and GHCQ to make sure there were no back doors.

,,, because they already put one in RSA and didn't want to lose the monopoly?
 
,,, because they already put one in RSA and didn't want to lose the monopoly?
Unless you think there's a backdoor in AES, your comment has no basis. Now I'm not a cryptography expert, but one of my old team members is. Neils Ferguson. So I'm willing to put money that the NSA/GHCQ didn't put in a backdoor, especially as they were testing, not developing. Neither of those guys checked in one line of code.
 


 
Of course if you put in a "back door", beloved of Hollywood, then it's a racing certainty that someone will "discover" the back door and a few seconds later tweet it and internet security is now a thing of the past.

Or, simply build a very strong encryption system without the back doors, but you send the heavies around to gently ask people to yield their password keys.
 


Again, Bitlocker doesn't use RSA, so I don't care. The guy from the NSA and the one from GHCQ were doing penetration testing only.

Maybe you are smarter than me, but I have no idea how someone can insert a backdoor in a software product when they do not modify it. Feel free to enlighten me.
 
Back
Top Bottom