generic
into a
AlwaysWrong always likes to show how he can always be wrong.
THey don't need to be broken, AlwaysWrong. There are always easier ways to get what's wanted. That's the point, DimBulb.
Man, you really *are* always wrong, AlwaysWrong. You good at one thing, at least.
Which, silly man, is the basis for the kernels used in the current OS family. Though now a full re-write, it is still the NT kernel paradigm that is being utilized.
It has been ever since Windows 2000 as far as OSes not specifically named "NT". They killed the name. They did not kill the concept.
Otherwise, there would be exactly ZERO dual CPU motherboards out there, and multi-core would never have become a reality either. At least not by this point in time.
generic
into a
Why would anyone believe that a crypto system has never been broken ?
The Enigma encryption system was developed in Germany in the 1930's for commercial traffic encryption. The German Army/Luftwafe/Marine used Enigma during WW2 and assumed it was completely safe and used it as an idiot proof system, but in practice, it was broken by the allies.
However, after the end of WW2, it was a state secret in Western countries that the Enigma had been broken and hence Enigma devices could be sold to various unsuspected countries after 1945 as a completely secure system, while the allies were fully aware that they were fully capable of deciphering the messages on a regular basis.
Windows NT 3.51 was the best OS version that MS has ever produced.
Windows NT is a scaled down version of VAX/VMS :-). In the 1970's the VAX 11/782 was dual processor version and the family continued with various dual processor machines (8200/8300) in the VAX range running VMS.
No, you just need a pretty good random number generator. And you can put a lot of random bytes on a pair of DVDs.
You can also xor the plaintext with any number of pads, and transport that number of DVDs to the receiver through various paths. Every path would have to be compromised to crack the text.
Party X can send pads to sender A and receiver B Different party Y can send pads to sender A and receiver B Different party Z can send pads to sender A and receiver B
X, Y, and Z all need to be disloyal for the code to be broken.
John
But they started breaking it right after he finished, by moving more and more unreliable and insecure Microcrap into the kernel space.
John
you
Vista? No, thanks.
XP is the best DOS that Microsoft has delivered.
John
Hell, no. I have work to get done.
Hopefully won't be, either, for a few more years.
John
generic
into a
and
In practice, it wasn't so much that Enigma was broken than the *use* of Enigma allowed it to be broken. The encryption itself was fairly strong but the users did incredibly dumb things, like sending text in both the clear and deciphered, sending a known messages, and other really dumb things.
Yep. It was classified for at least a couple of decades. Long after anyone used it, its break had a lot of educational value. One such lesson was that smart people assumed that their crypto could be broken. Of course that lets AlwaysWrong out. He still believes in such fairy tales.
No way. 3x was buggier than hell. 2K wasn't too bad, though.
Any similarities between NT and VMS are limited to its chief architects. The OSs are nothing alike.
generic
into a
and
That is not what I said, idiot. I said that the ONE system which I mentioned never has, and it never will either. Learn to read.
No, it was not. It was not, in fact, broken until they actually obtained one of the encryptor devices. So, it was not broken, it was deciphered by way of knowing what the entire code was, and the method of encryption. after that, it was simple to do. Without the device, they would never have done it during the war itself.
Just like I said, go find one of these IP encryptors I mentioned, and you will not only not break it, but would likely go to prison for trying.
Whoopie doo. In today's world, we know what has or has not been broken. Yesterday's world, and gullible idiots that buy into it, are the only ones that do not get what they paid for.
If you guys were not at least ten years behind the top minds in the world, you would know that successful unbreakable encryption is already a reality.
Wrong. It was an OS for the x86 processor family and had nothing to do with VAX/VMS.
You are mixing my declaration about PCs and PC operating systems with mini and mainframe realm. Totally unrelated. Update your reading skill as well.. that is the second time you failed to read correctly and mouthed off incorrectly about your incorrect comprehension of what you read.
It gets even tougher when real time elements like timestamps are included in the key system.
Koltner"
companies
generic
into a
and
everthing.
I spent two years in the U.S. Army Signal Intelligence Corp, in North Africa and Italy, in charge of a team intercepting German field messages. Some of the better CW operators would even break into a net and try to get someone to repeat something in plain text. It often worked!
The guys in London had an "emulator" that reproduced the rotor positions of the machine. Turing was one of those working on the Enigma problem, and was one of the first to use computers to break the code. The site is now a museum open to the public.
Anybody that had been even remotely "What the mind of man can conceal, the mind of man can reveal."
The RAF bombed Germany with their own weather reports we picked up at Vint Hill, decrypted, re-crypted and sent back to the UK. The code was all numbers...it got tiresome sitting with your fingers on the number keys only. A number pad would have really helped!
Bill should never have broken his agreement with IBM during the OS/2 realm. What we use now would be different if he had remained partnered with them.
One solution to that equation is "none."
John
you
We've got code in products that are being shipped now, and probably will be for another 5-10 years, that were created with tools that cannot be run under Win7/64. I guess we have to archive O/S as well as the tools ... and verify that they'll produce exactly the same code under emulation before the XP machines can be retired (no real rush, but sometime in the next few years).
I don't imagine it will be much longer before they deliberately prevent XP from being installed on new machines by dropping some element of backward compatibility. Typical consumers won't notice or care.
Best regards, Spehro Pefhany
you
ANY
Wrong.
Actual DOS releases were far better than any VDM any windows OS ever offered. Best bet is to use that OS in a realm that allows its use.
Nope. That isn't true either. It was the capture of an actual machine that turned the corner on the effort.
You're an idiot. If the answer was none, I would have said none, dipshit.
You should really consider removing this retarded and disingenuous crap from ALL of your posts.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required