Linuxers April 2002

linuxers@mm.ilug-bom.org.in

85 participants
122 discussions

Re: [ILUG-BOM] [OT] the dictionary and bamboozled
by Amish Mehta 01 Apr '02

01 Apr '02

Well Ranjeet, I had said if you dont like MSN dont read ahead. Anyway its your anti-MSN(or MS) thinking talking here. If you check 1) Merriam-Webster: http://m-w.com OR 2) http://www.dictionary.com You will find that one of the meanings of 'hacker' there will hurt you again. And I hope you will principally not use those websites too. :-). Amish. P.S. I am a bit against MS too but not blindly against MS. Also point to think over is MS will not earn any money by adding that meaning to hacker. ranjeet(a)nttindia.com wrote: >and i got four meanings .. out of which one hurted me .... (first one) > >and i got reason why not to use that ;)

1 0

RE: [ILUG-BOM] Re: the dictionary and bamboozled
by Amarendra Godbole (Intl Vendor) 01 Apr '02

01 Apr '02

>>http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=bamboozled >> >>bam*boo*zle >> To take in by elaborate methods of deceit; hoodwink. >> See Synonyms at deceive. I am late in this thread, and I don't exactly know what is being discussed. Adding my thoughts, based on the above discussion, check http://www.dict.org/ for any and every kind of word that you ever want. Here is what it says about bamboozle: 2 definitions found

1 0

Re: [ILUG-BOM] [OT] the dictionary and bamboozled
by Amish Mehta 01 Apr '02

01 Apr '02

Dont continue reading if you dont like MSN. :-). http://dictionary.msn.com is good too. Amish. Sameer D. Sahasrabuddhe wrote: >Inspired by the recent discussion about dictionaries, we have > >http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=bamboozled > >bam�boo�zle > To take in by elaborate methods of deceit; hoodwink. > See Synonyms at deceive.

2 1

Wanda the GNOME Fish
by Philip S Tellis 01 Apr '02

01 Apr '02

Has anyone seen Wanda the GNOME fish today? -- Some programming languages manage to absorb change, but withstand progress. -- Epigrams in Programming, ACM SIGPLAN Sept. 1982

3 2

Re[2]: [OT] Re: Brute force against MD5
by Vinay Pai 01 Apr '02

01 Apr '02

>> The MD5 hash is 128 bits long. This means that there are >> 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456 values. This means >> that even if you could try a TRILLION combinations a second it would >> take you 10,790,283,070,806,014,188 years to break! >> >> A brute force attack against MD5 won't work. > > try a distributed attack. use the processing power of every computer on > the planet. Do the calculations.... even a trillion machines (which would about 167 such machines for every person on the earth), each capable of a trillion tests a second, it would still take 10,790,283 years > > actually, thinking of it this way, wouldn't it just make sense to create > a reverse lookup table of every possible password and its encrypted > value. As for storing the lookup table... creating the lookup table will take as much time as mentioned above... And where ru going to store it? Even if you could store one lookup table entry on one single electron, the storage device (for 10^38 entries) would weigh 10,000 tons. Regards, Vinay <vinay(a)vinaypai.com>

3 2

ide drive errors on bootup
by Kunal Jhunjhunwala 01 Apr '02

01 Apr '02

Hey, Whenever I boot up my linux machine, it gets stuck on the following : hda : irq timeout : status 0x50 { DriveReady SeekComplete } I am running red hat 7.2.. and its a fresh install.. any suggestions on how to fix this?? Regards, Kunal Jhunjhunwala "Minds think with ideas, not information. No amount of data, bandwidth, or processing power can substitute for inspired thought." - Clifford Stoll

4 5

Re: Brute force against MD5
by Vinay Pai 01 Apr '02

01 Apr '02

> Random strings are harder to get, but still possible with a brute > force > approach (a cracker that tries every combination of n letters, digits > and special characters that exist). This however takes very long and > is > not feasible for most. "not feasible for most" is a gross understatement. The MD5 hash is 128 bits long. This means that there are 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456 values. This means that even if you could try a TRILLION combinations a second it would take you 10,790,283,070,806,014,188 years to break! A brute force attack against MD5 won't work.

4 4

Re: [ILUG-BOM] dictionary
by Tahir Hashmi 01 Apr '02

01 Apr '02

Try GDict client for MIT Dictionary Server or have a look at the Galeon's Smart Bookmarks - you can specify your own server in the latter. Both require Internet access to work, though. --- Tahir Hashmi (VSE, NCST) http://www.ncst.ernet.in/~tahir tahir AT ncst DOT ernet DOT in __________________________________ We, the rest of humanity, wish GNU luck and Godspeed See Dave Matthews Band live or win a signed guitar http://r.lycos.com/r/bmgfly_mail_dmb/http://win.ipromotions.com/lycos_02020…

1 0

Re: [ILUG-BOM] Re: Brute force against MD5
by vinayak hegde 01 Apr '02

01 Apr '02

At 09:03 PM 3/31/02 +0530, you wrote: >>Random strings are harder to get, but still possible with a brute >>force >>approach (a cracker that tries every combination of n letters, digits >>and special characters that exist). This however takes very long and >>is >>not feasible for most. > >"not feasible for most" is a gross understatement. > >The MD5 hash is 128 bits long. This means that there are >340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456 values. This means >that even if you could try a TRILLION combinations a second it would take >you 10,790,283,070,806,014,188 years to break! > >A brute force attack against MD5 won't work. However a dictionary attack is much more likely to work against this algorithm. That is not due to any weakness of the algo but due to human tendency of picking works like "god" , "password" etc as passwords. -- vinayak hegde

2 1

[Admin] User temporarily disabled from lug list
by Philip S Tellis 01 Apr '02

01 Apr '02

Please note, the user shahazad(a)linuxplanet.nu has been bouncing mails regularly, and delivery to this account has been temporarily disabled. If you are this person, please take corrective action. If you know this person, please inform him of this and ask him to take corrective action. You can reactivate your account through the regular mailman account administration screen or through the mail interface. -- Nothing is but what is not.

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

Linuxers April 2002