ITT: We appreciate technological creativity.
...for example:
A DSLR mounted onto a remote-controlled helicopter:
(http://www.diyphotography.net/files/images/3/helivideo_small.jpg) (http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2010/04/dslr_equipped_rc_helicopter.html)
or
The Apple IIe Twitter Ticker:
(http://hackadaycom.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/twittering-apple-iie.jpg) (http://hackaday.com/2010/04/24/apple-iie-twitter-ticker/)
or
This stroke of genius:
(http://thereifixedit.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/jimboc-wtfisgoingonhere.jpg) (http://thereifixedit.com/2009/10/14/this-will-only-end-in-tears/)
If you haven't checked out ThereIFixedIt.com, I highly recommend it.
hadn't been to thereifixedit in a while....
this vid on their front page is freakin genius!
http://www.viddler.com/player/8e41449e/
(http://thereifixedit.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/tifi-ghettosupport.jpg)
(http://thereifixedit.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/tifi-alternativebombshelter.jpg)
(http://www.ridelust.com/wp-content/uploads/129181575715091596.jpg) (http://www.ridelust.com/car-restoration-youre-doing-it-wrong/)
Waterproof ebook reader.
Quotehttp://www.markwheadon.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/02a_1468-copy1.png
I made this guitar stand after seeing a similar one on ThereIFixedIt.com
(http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/2323/dsci0096ww.jpg)
Quote from: Requia ☣ on May 25, 2010, 10:49:09 PM
Waterproof ebook reader.
Quotehttp://www.markwheadon.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/02a_1468-copy1.png
I've done that before.
Protip: Check your bag. :lulz:
Mine actually survived it pretty well. It was the casual dropping and crushing damage that I inflict on all my belongings that killed it.
Same here, I'm trying to be more careful with my second one. Though the touchscreen seems a bit more durable in general than the non touchscreens thanks to the scratchproofing, so hopefully that will help too.
I also once broke my ereader with an errant elbow rest.
Next e-reader I get is going to be non-touchscreen, and have a homemade lexan box around it, or something suitably drastic.
Quote from: Vladimir Poopin on May 18, 2010, 11:06:36 PM
(http://thereifixedit.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/tifi-alternativebombshelter.jpg)
I love this one. It would be awesome if they used that as an entry hallway to an underground comic shop or bar or something. Enter at the rear emergency exit, with steps at the front door of the bus leading down to the basement establishment.
(http://i.imgur.com/LEl7f.jpg)
When I saw that just now, my face lit up like an amazed child's first seeing a space rocket take off.
A bicycle built for two. (http://hackaday.com/2010/06/23/another-take-on-a-bicycle-built-for-two/)
http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/28/aircord-labs-n-3d-concept-turns-an-ipad-into-worlds-second-lea/
A tribute to the VCR (http://ro-ro.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=53709327677)
Nice!
I like the VFD headphone amplifier, I wonder if it could be used in a guitar effects pedal, to get a fuzzy vacuum tube sound?
Yeah, that would make an interesting preamp.
Cool stuff, all of it. I am always in awe of these things, one day I'll play around with electronics, but I've always been a software guy ...
This should be here:
(http://dailyinfographic.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/life-hacks-full.jpg)
(http://thereifixedit.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/white-trash-repairs-remember-to-slow-down.jpg)
(http://thereifixedit.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/6be9de65-6c9e-49e6-a790-73caf69638fc.jpg)
(http://thereifixedit.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/white-trash-repairs-degree-from-sierra-entertainment.jpg)
Bonus: http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2011/01/diy_ammo_box_speakers.html
Cuz fuck uHaul:
(http://thereifixedit.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/white-trash-repairs-never-give-in-to-u-haul.jpg)
(http://ctrlaltdefeat.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/ghetto-engineering.jpg)
:lulz:
Quote from: /b/earman on January 13, 2013, 09:48:34 AM
(http://ctrlaltdefeat.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/ghetto-engineering.jpg)
:lulz:
:lulz:
Quote from: El Twid on May 23, 2013, 01:00:09 AM
Quote from: /b/earman on January 13, 2013, 09:48:34 AM
(http://ctrlaltdefeat.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/ghetto-engineering.jpg)
:lulz:
:lulz:
Houston. :lulz:
Quote from: stelz on May 23, 2013, 04:26:53 AM
Quote from: El Twid on May 23, 2013, 01:00:09 AM
Quote from: /b/earman on January 13, 2013, 09:48:34 AM
(http://ctrlaltdefeat.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/ghetto-engineering.jpg)
:lulz:
:lulz:
Houston. :lulz:
I have considered doing something similar, but I'd use an inverter. Estimated cost outlay $300.
As it is, the generator plus window unit combo would cost as much as getting the actual a/c system of the car fixed.
Unless he stole both.
I'm here because I created my own encryption key and I was searching the internet for places that I might be able to post a sample for people to try and crack. I'm fairly certain that I came to the right place.
p3gdo^ubjucpc^2dq
Very funny, Mr NSA Man.
:tinfoilhat:
Hrmph.
Is this guy for real or is he a bot that searches for the word HACK, also why would it tag the thread with a unique identifier unless it's to act as input for another system to come along and chew through later.
If you are a BOT mr Jbookup I bet I can find other places you do this.
Lol that is hilarious. I knew this was a good place. I wish I did work for the nsa, then I'd have a job. Instead I'm unemployed and this is my first desperate attempt at making an encyrption that can't be cracked so I can sell it and have no worries. Please give it a shot. Also if you happen to know anyone good at these sort of things, which I'm sure you do, pass it along to them.
This is going to go one of two ways - Very well or very badly.
Too early to call. Care to elaborate at all new guy?
More? Or did you miss my second post?
Hrm, ok. So any hints as to what that data is, is it a string, is it a url?
I have no clue what it is. My friend advises me its a string. Its only based on the alphabet. I know very little about things. I am simply just good at math and complex patterns.
Quote from: JBookup on February 11, 2014, 03:26:44 PM
More? Or did you miss my second post?
No, but thanks for pushing me towards "Badly".
Lol why must it go badly? That was a sincere response to your post.
Quote from: JBookup on February 11, 2014, 03:47:34 PM
Lol why must it go badly? That was a sincere response to your post.
It's going fine. I'll take a crack of your encrypted string and see if I can get anything out of it or until I get bored and give up.
Thank you, any and all effort is appreciated.
Quote from: JBookup on February 11, 2014, 04:01:59 PM
Thank you, any and all effort is appreciated.
Well I can certainly set something to try and brute force it making some assumptions so it doesn't run forever.
I have no idea what any of that meant. But I'm almost positive that no program can crack it.
It's statements like that which make me think you have no idea what you're talking about.
Faust, if I'm being a bit of a prick here please feel free to give me a slap and tell me there's something of value going on.
Lol. You are correct I do not know what I speak of. And never claimed that I do know. But I do know I created a process for encrypting the letters a-z and am just curious to see if anyone can figure it out. I highly doubt a program could do it because although it is a process it is a somewhat improvised process, such improvisions that computers are incapable of mimicking.
You've heard of the NSA and similar such entities, yes?
And your process is unbreakable by them?
No. Tip - Introducing random human actions does not make a code impossible to break. If you've got an interest in this kind of thing I'd suggest looking at one time pads which to my knowledge are still the most secure method devised, provided each pad is only used once. Nothing is totally secure or infallible. Nothing.
Credit where due, you've not been totally stupid or racist so you're doing better than most. Nice to have you here, don't shit on the rug or fuck the family dog.
You are being mean Junkenstein, he created an encryption algorithm and all he wants is for someone to test the result, If it's a good encryption method it will be hard to break.
This mightn't be the thread for it certainly but give him a chance to look around first, the 50 post guideline is there for a reason.
Jbookup, I'm going to try a brute force program that tries various word letter combinations to see if they fit, that's what a brute force attack is.
Ah apologies. Shitty day bleeding over somewhat.
New guy, have a look around AI, particularly the Prism and bitcoin threads. You may need to get a handle quite a few things before touting an unbreakable encryption algorithm. Though if that is indeed what this is then I'll shut up and you can take all of my money.
Forgive me for my confidence. It is truly foolishly placed seeing as how this is my first attempt at writing an encryption algorithm. One that is only 26 keys none the less. And as I think about this brute force method I fear I may be beaten. But I remain confident that on a 256 key scale the brute force method would be ineffective. But once again let me reitterate I do not know what I am talking about. This is merely speculation based on the very little knowledge that I have. And as a side note about myself my limited knowledge will not stop me from making assumptions or from drawing conclusions. Although I may often be mistaken, I never stop. For it is from those mistakes that I learn the truth.
Right, you're growing on me. You've got a lot to read up on though, I think you may be a little shocked at how much effort has been devoted to breaking significantly more complicated encryptions.
So, tell us about yourself. Thread was being used for little else anyway.
I am fully aware of the effort. I also remember a time when an encryption was put out to be decyrpted and the person that ended up cracking it after I think a couple years had ended up saying it was one of the most simple encryptions they ever saw. Not that mine is dynamically complex or anything. It seems fairly simple to me, but then again what has always been simple for me has always seemed so difficult for others.
Me? I am nobody. I am nothing. I am useless. And I am lost.
I have a friend who is all about encryption stuff, I can give this to him if you'd like.
Please do. And love the quote btw. This whole time I thought I was the only one that knew most of everyone is a slave.
Quote from: JBookup on February 11, 2014, 08:05:40 PM
Please do. And love the quote btw. This whole time I thought I was the only one that knew most of everyone is a slave.
Thanks!
It seems like you are, indeed, in the right place. :)
I might not find what I'm looking for here, but I knew this place was for me as soon as I found out what principia discordia meant.
Quote from: JBookup on February 11, 2014, 08:39:16 PM
I might not find what I'm looking for here, but I knew this place was for me as soon as I found out what principia discordia meant.
Hey could you let us know what principia discordia means? We keep trying to figure it out and nobody tells us. :sad:
Lol. Hilarious. I guess I can elaborate. It's not solely just what it means that affected my judgement. It was a multitude of things that caught my attention. Starting with it's meaning being principles of disorder. Just that in itself somehow calls to me. Then I find out its a book and I'm immediately impressed and I can tell that this is a book that of read and understood properly it would teach value and affect ones views. Value and views that I'm certain parallel mine. And that is what the name of this website is, awesome. Then I read the topics of discussion and everything is in one way or another relevant to my interests.
GOOBLE GOBBLE ONE OF US
For the fun of it I had a look at the possibility that this wasn't a strongly encrypted cypher, I didn't have my tools with me so I did it the old fashioned way, please bare in mind I'm not great at cryptography and some gross assumptions are made here:
p3gdo ^ ubjucpc ^ 2dq
The repetition of characters and their mostly being within the regular ascii range made me think maybe the ^ symbol is either a space or a dot
if the ^ is a space than:
01011110 ^
00100000 (space) first and last bits static everything else inverted didn't really give me much to go on, I tried the same adjustment on the other characters. No dice.
So then I took the assumption that ^ corresponded to a dot, its likely the three characters are a domain so I tried .com and .net
if ^ was dot
01011110 ^
00101110 .
01110000 mask1
0110010 2
01100011 c
01010001 mask2
01100100 d
01101111 o
00001011 mask3
01110001 q
01101101 m
00011100 mask4
No pattern I can derive from the masks
Same with .net
if ^ was dot
01011110 ^
00101110 .
01110000 m1
01101110 n
00110010 2
01011100 m2
01100101 e
01100100 d
00000001 m3
01110100 t
01110001 q
00000101 m4
01110000
01011100
00000001
00000101
so I tried some basic fitting
p3gdo^ubjucpc^2dq
becomes
p3goo.ubjucpc.com
and if the middle is a dictionary word
cpc is likely to be ses
which makes it become
e3goo.ubjuses.com
or
u3goo.ubjusus.com
I'm probably barking up the wrong tree entirely with this approach.
Welcome to the Discordian Society, JBookup!
If the cipher doesn't shift at all as it progresses, there are dozens of potential strings that fit that pattern. I am choosing to believe that the string is "urban.ephesus.com" or "enjoy.aliases.com".
When he says he only encrypted the alphabet, though, it sounds as though we're not working with a cipher that can handle a dot?
We can sit here and endlessly offer suggestions that fit the string but if newguy doesn't know himself what the string is, we have no way to confirm and too small a sample to reverse engineer the process used to create the string. Similarly I can tell you that 8SFO{ is an encrypted string, but that doesn't give you anywhere near enough information to do anything with it.
Realistically, though, it's been proven time and time again that the most robust encryption algorithms don't rely on the process being secret, but well known, well read and examined, but irreversible without the key regardless of this. "I'm not telling you how I made this string" tends to be the hallmark of an obscure, but weak encryption method.
Quote from: JBookup on February 11, 2014, 10:15:10 PM
Lol. Hilarious. I guess I can elaborate. It's not solely just what it means that affected my judgement. It was a multitude of things that caught my attention. Starting with it's meaning being principles of disorder. Just that in itself somehow calls to me. Then I find out its a book and I'm immediately impressed and I can tell that this is a book that of read and understood properly it would teach value and affect ones views. Value and views that I'm certain parallel mine. And that is what the name of this website is, awesome. Then I read the topics of discussion and everything is in one way or another relevant to my interests.
You should definitely stick around.
Do not check out the pool on the roof. I mean, you can if you want. But check out the Black Iron Prison and the Chao Te Ching for sure.
Just to ask the obvious, why would any would-be encryptor provide a result that was meaningless upon de-encryption?
I mean, c'mon.
Do you mean why would I offer meaningless strings that fit that text? I was trying to illustrate that even with a simple known cipher, where each letter becomes the same symbol each time, that string could have a multitude of meanings, many of which are totally sensible statements.
When we start to consider letter pairs being represented by symbols and symbols changing meaning depending on their place in the string, that sample given could decrypt into, at its most trivial, any sequence of characters of equal length. Many ciphers simply remove spaces and let those be added in manually after the decryption, so if you can think of a series of words with the same number of letters as that string, it's just as good a solution as any, given the information we have so far. A more complex encryption method which also allows for compression of the message would allow that string to represent a much longer statement, but gives us no clue as to whether the statement is "All hail Eris, all hail Discordia" or "This sentence is encrypted." and I'm sure we could come up with a series of steps that converts either of those two statements into the sample given.
Quote from: Pæs on February 12, 2014, 06:54:14 AM
If the cipher doesn't shift at all as it progresses, there are dozens of potential strings that fit that pattern. I am choosing to believe that the string is "urban.ephesus.com" or "enjoy.aliases.com".
When he says he only encrypted the alphabet, though, it sounds as though we're not working with a cipher that can handle a dot?
We can sit here and endlessly offer suggestions that fit the string but if newguy doesn't know himself what the string is, we have no way to confirm and too small a sample to reverse engineer the process used to create the string. Similarly I can tell you that 8SFO{ is an encrypted string, but that doesn't give you anywhere near enough information to do anything with it.
He could confirm it by running his encryption method on the suggestions we post assuming there output would always be static (no salting or hashing?) but yeah, this is probably not going to get any kind of result.
Yeah, if the relationship worked in reverse, but the inclusion of numbers in the ciphertext suggests that there isn't a two-way relationship here. Does he have the encryption program? I thought his buddy just gave him the ciphertext?
He said he made the encryption, but maybe it isn't on his machine?
Thank you for welcoming me. Man I'm so confused. I have no idea what any of you are talking about. The best I can tell you is there is no dots or spaces. It is strictly a-z. I would like to take your samples and convert them but it would give away too much because its a set in stone key. There is no variation.
A=
B=
C=
Etc.
But I do believe I can make an algorithm that would allow sample testing. Though it would be still set in stone, but with multiple letters having the same encrypted counterpart.
So you're doing a 1-to-1 substitution cypher? That is, each "real" letter corresponds with a single symbol or character, without changing?
That's one of the easiest codes to crack by brute force, given enough of a sample size. Your example "p3gdo^ubjucpc^2dq" may not be large enough, but given enough examples of the code, I'm pretty sure it can be cracked.
Unless you're using a twist you're not telling us about?
Okay so this seems ridiculously simple to me, and only took about 1 min to write. But ill post it anyways. So imma post the original string in this new method then anyone can ask for me to write their sample in it too.
99699633333936396
That's why I was worried about the brute force thing but after given some thought if I wrote out a different string and incorporated numbers,letters, or symbols that are not encrpyted and plugged them in randomly it would take a lot of work to figure out which ones need to be changed and which ones stay the same.
Example: k^dg6ks2a0$9gcsf
So, the symbols you're randomly inserting into the cypher are the same symbols used when coding the message?
In other words, "All Hail Discordia" is "Akll Ha3diL Disc0rejdiqwa"?
How is the legitimate receiver of this message supposed to know which symbols are to be skipped, if you're putting them in at random?
It could be numbers, symbols, or letters that need to be skipped. This is for encrypting passwords and what not to make it impossible for them to decrypt. Now if me and someone were exchanging encrypted messages. Obviously that other person would have the key and would be able to figure out what doesn't belong. Also these are not programs, I know nothing of those sort of things, though very soon will be trying for I have an ingenious idea. But for the time being these are written out on paper and calculated in my head.
Back up. This is a way to make stronger passwords?
Oh. That's different.
Two things to note:
(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/password_strength.png)
And
(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/security.png)
See, unless you're guessing that the user will tend towards certain passwords more than others, someone trying to hack a password isn't seeing "p3gdo^ubjucpc^2dq", they're seeing "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx", where "x" can be literally any letter, number, or symbol. So it doesn't matter if you have some wonderful technique for scrambling a password, unless you're really, really bad at coming up with unscrambled passwords.
This is why I came here. To learn these things. I now realize the password protection plan is flawed. But hope is still alive in the encrypted message aspects. I think anyways O.o
Encryption is all fine and dandy for legal/semi-legal communications. Ie. ones where the risks of the message being deciphered are negligible but I'm of the firm opinion that if you really want your shit not to get read, you're much better hiding the message. Stick some morse code in the alpha channel of a .png image or shift some bits in an audio track then use the original audio track as the key. While the spooks are busy looking for encrypted messages, we're posting our plans for world domination via funny cat gifs on facebook 8)
Quote from: JBookup on February 12, 2014, 02:48:10 PM
It could be numbers, symbols, or letters that need to be skipped. This is for encrypting passwords and what not to make it impossible for them to decrypt. Now if me and someone were exchanging encrypted messages. Obviously that other person would have the key and would be able to figure out what doesn't belong. Also these are not programs, I know nothing of those sort of things, though very soon will be trying for I have an ingenious idea. But for the time being these are written out on paper and calculated in my head.
So the key explains which numbers and letters need to be skipped? Rather than being more like a password to unlock the string, as a 'key' often is in cryptography, this is more of a series of instructions? Or would the other person decrypt the string, even with the random noise added, then remove the random symbols simply by taking out the stuff that doesn't make sense?
When you say "impossible to decrypt" do you mean "impossible to decrypt without the key" or is this a one way function from which the original text cannot be retrieved?
Quote from: JBookup on February 12, 2014, 01:54:06 PM
Though it would be still set in stone, but with multiple letters having the same encrypted counterpart.
Whaaaa?
Is there a method by which the decrypter knows which of the many encrypted counterparts you are using?
Impossible to decrypt without the key/legend. With the legend the person decrpyting would know which letters, numbers, and symbols didn't belong. The method used for creating my legend is impossible to reverse engineer. Without the introduction of random numbers, letters, or symbols a brute force attack could easily break through. But with the introduction of numbers, letters, or symbols at random intervals I think a brute force attack would be ineffective.
As to the question about the multiple letters with the same encrypted counterpart, I didn't really think that through... I guess at the moment they would have to do a lot of guess and check work to decrypt it even with the legend.
So the random chaff you've thrown in doesn't have legitimate uses in the legend? If ^ is a random symbol, it never corresponds to a letter?
Paes, remember that this was originally meant for a password, not a message.
In which case, it's irrelevant if a hacker can guess the original password, they just need to find out the sequence of characters.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on February 12, 2014, 09:09:37 PM
Paes, remember that this was originally meant for a password, not a message.
In which case, it's irrelevant if a hacker can guess the original password, they just need to find out the sequence of characters.
If they're brute forcing it by trying every possible character, but if you could reverse engineer any of the rules you could make minor modifications to existing dictionary attacks to speed up the process.
It seems to me, JBookup, like you may be underestimating how quickly a computer can try all permutations of the string which keep the order intact and systematically remove groups of characters, then see if any words fit into the pattern presented.
Do you know if, while attempting to decipher this, the answer will be obvious?
Is it going to say "this is the plaintext" or similar? Because I can make assumptions about which characters are chaff and make it say "to be carried" or "you will not" or similar.
Here's some stuff on what I was saying earlier, about security by obscurity and secret encryption processes not being reliable or desirable.
http://www.networkcomputing.com/data-protection/just-say-no-to-proprietary-cryptographic/229502394
https://www.schneier.com/essay-028.html
https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Guide_to_Cryptography#How_to_determine_if_you_are_vulnerable
Mathematically sound cryptography remains secure even if the process is known, so long as the key is not.
Really I was just trying to make a way to encrypt the alphabet through the use of math. As to what the encryption is intended for I have no idea. At the moment I am bouncing around in which ever direction holds the most promise for what I've already made, though I have what I think are better processes for creating a larger scale more complex legend. Though I am waiting for the results of this first test. The first string I posted does not include random letters, numbers, or symbols. And is fairly obvious. The second string that has Example: preceding it does include random numbers, letters, and symbols.
Quote from: JBookup on February 11, 2014, 07:13:12 PM
But I remain confident that on a 256 key scale the brute force method would be ineffective.
What does this mean to you and how does it apply to what you've made here?
It sounds as though you've got a substitution cipher and I can't tell where the complex math comes in. Did you use a complex process to decide which letter turned into which symbol, because that complexity isn't going to translate forward into the complexity of cracking, it's still a matter of rotating the meaning of each character until readable text is produced.
Are you willing to discuss the process of encipherment so it can be examined in more depth? If that explanation breaks the encryption, I'm afraid you'll have trouble profiting from the scheme.
Most importantly. How many words are in this string? More than one? How are spaces handled?
I use the correct horse battery staple method most of the time. It absolutely drives me bugshit when some sites require me to use a combination of capitals, lower case, symbols and numbers, because it's not creating a more secure password, it's just increasing the likelihood that I'll forget it.
It's not for everyone, but I use hashapass.com which will take a word like "facebook" and master password I use everywhere like "horsebatterystaple" and give me a password with a combination of numbers, symbols and different cases. If I forget that password, I go to hashapass and enter "facebook", "horsebatterystaple" and it uses the same math to crunch those together and give me "dL;t8sDG" again.
If the service I'm using sucks at security, and HAXORS get my password, it only works for facebook and there is no way for them to turn it back into "horsebatterystaple" and figure out my password anywhere else.
Quote from: Pæs on February 13, 2014, 07:42:58 PM
It's not for everyone, but I use hashapass.com which will take a word like "facebook" and master password I use everywhere like "horsebatterystaple" and give me a password with a combination of numbers, symbols and different cases. If I forget that password, I go to hashapass and enter "facebook", "horsebatterystaple" and it uses the same math to crunch those together and give me "dL;t8sDG" again.
If the service I'm using sucks at security, and HAXORS get my password, it only works for facebook and there is no way for them to turn it back into "horsebatterystaple" and figure out my password anywhere else.
Nice find. Been meaning to update my passwords for forever. This will do nicely. Probably write my own, right enough, imagine if hashapass.com was an NSA shill :tinfoilhat:
Doesn't that make hashapass.com a single point of failure? The security there must be airtight.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on February 13, 2014, 07:56:06 PM
Doesn't that make hashapass.com a single point of failure? The security there must be airtight.
They're not storing anything, just hosting javascript which securely hashes your password, using the parameter like "facebook" as a salt to influence the result. You can take their code and read it, host it yourself, make a command line tool which will always give the same results, if you like.
EDIT: This is the code for the bookmarklet http://pastebin.com/gwWstQka
Most of that is formatting a little UI for usability. I just have an offline version saved on my phone and because I'm becoming decreasingly paranoid, I have the master password weakly encrypted so I don't have to type my 50 char password every time. Just open the app, type "facebook", login. Makes my phone a point of failure for all of my logins, if people figure out what that button does, but if I lose the phone I disable it remotely anyway.
The sophistication of the attack that would be needed to find a hash collision, where two strings turn into the same hash, are so excessive IMO as to render flying to my house and stealing my computer while I'm on it a more likely approach for anyone who wants to force me to like their page.
That's a less sophisticated attack than the one that would betray my master password, which is less likely.
The more paranoid of us can read hashapass's source every time, or host it and check it's hash regularly for tampering, because it *is* possible that someone hack hashapass and change the source temporarily. Which may be what you meant, LMNO?
Let's chalk it up to me not fully understanding the process. I think I have it now.
It's not impossible to attack, but it's less likely and their FAQ does a good job of enumerating the risks and offering solutions.
I can remember random strings pretty well, so know most of my hashpasswords, so for me it's more a matter of using a totally unique password on every service.
How effective would something like this be?
Bhijadrbo = adverbial = rbxtiavrf = encrypted
What you're making there is a cryptogram which is a puzzle used alongside newspaper crosswords.
For either of those nonsense strings, a simple online cryptogram solver (http://rumkin.com/tools/cipher/cryptogram-solver.php) will generate the two words you chose along with the hundreds of other words that fit. With a larger sample, it would start to find words there which didn't allow for other words in the string to be created, rule those keys out and continue until it had the only viable key. Unless you have a way to preserve your intended word choice, your method would mask the intended message from your recipient, defeating the purpose.
They would have the legend and know exactly what it translates to without using a program.
If there's a legend, what is the purpose of the intermediate steps?
To make it harder to decipher. You decipher once and get a noncoherent message that is readable but makes no sense.
Okay, but it doesn't do that. You seem to be talking about a form of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deniable_encryption
But when you're making a simple cipher, rather than an encryption scheme based on factoring large primes or similarly mathematically complex systems, "bhijadrbo" and "rbxtiavrf" are identical. They look like "123456718", the individual letters don't matter, there are eight unique symbols and one is reused, that's the pattern you're cracking. So your decipherment scheme adds complexity for the intended recipient but doesn't add any for a cracker.
Super easy no legend needed...
831331247748569838838296247655247
Quote from: JBookup on March 08, 2014, 07:04:28 PM
Super easy no legend needed...
831331247748569838838296247655247
Some kind of axial symmetry around the central character on the string,
831331247748569838838296247655247 Original
742556742692838838965847742133138 String reversed
111221505156331000133651505522111 differences between the two
Annnnd I'm out of time to look at that any further.
I like how I say its super easy and you go and do something complicated. But I'm actually loving the idea of that and will probably make something that works like that. But as of right now it is really simple.
Okay last string I posted is "whatupplaya". This is an somewhat more complicated string unfortunately I did not incorporate Faust's idea of reversing and counting differences. Its straightforward no rearranging needed, only mathematical ingenuity. And if you figure out the math you might have to guess around a little bit as to what your final numbers correspond to. In the end you are gonna have 4 numbers that correspond to 4 letters of the alphabet in numerical and alphabetical order but not 1-26. This is a 4 letter word please try to solve.
78642008877532165994187424169990
Fresh take on old communication hack:
Altoid Box Laser FM transmission - (upgraydable)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=pvj3KDp8Ae8