I mean kill count as in death by premeditated stuff, fights, attacks etc, not natural disasters.
Two unrelated keys are used
Right after wannacry, govt held press meet and said they had backup they could just load up. Nop. 1000s were hired to digitalise hardcopy. I found revenue dpt data and medical records from that time on darkweb. Data from hdfc, IIT, govt hospitals in kerala are available for free.
The metadata may indicate the data in fact contains ciphertext, if prepending or appending, anyone can simply check that. But I guess my whole concept is unnecessary as I could just do the prepend/append after encrypting metadata!
By non-secret metadata posing danger I simply mean, if attacker can confirm there is metadata or ciphertext, it open up an attack vector, even though realistically is overblown. Simply revealing metadata data does not compromise ciphertext, in that sense, metadata is non secret.
A simple example scenario would be; user has a buch of random looking files with no indication about what it is, user hid the actual secret file among them. Bad guy cannot know which is which (plausible deniability) but user could go through all of them with metadata key, and confirm if any file has cilphertext.
Well, just encrypting metadata and adding it to the end of ciphertext solve the thing. Thanks.
Key based steganography - hiding metadata about ciphertext
The scenario: Given a ciphertext, and if one or two non-secret metadata is needed to decrypt it, but the simple knowledge about the metadata itself can pose danger to the ciphertext owner, I decided hiding the metadata inside or along with the ciphertext is feasible, considering the alternative. Ignoring complexities of managing separate keys, is there such a standard algorithm?
Simply put, user should be able to give the steganography key to hide and retrieve the metadata, without destroying any ciphertext, given the "container" has enough space for both.
I've wrote a simple thing, builds list of random indices from the key, copy bytes from those indices to another fixed place in the container, then metadata is copied into those indices. The code is crappy, sometimes it messes with ciphertext weirdly and most importantly I'm not a math person so this implementation is probably stupid.
PS. This is just an experiment, looking to learn steganography.
Edit: The "container" or the file should simply look like random data at the end, no need for it to be an image or anything a human can perceive. Assume the metadata looks like random bytes, or that is is encrypted.
It's real. Also people in Karnataka, AP and MP will NOT get it and you need be on unlimited plan of 239 or above
I'm actually surprised there aren't much leaks/hacks. I know our core cybersecutiry of government is good, and some private entities, like hospitals, has it good. But the weakest point of any security system, especially cibersecurity, is the human and by god, everyone in village office to taluk office to govt hospitals are dumb. Had first hand experience with them, right after the wannacry attack.
Windows xp was being used in 2018-2019 in a LSGD dpt in a specific location. Govt doctors, AE etc were using outdated digital signatures etc. Do I need to talk about passwords? Do I need to talk about not following circulars and guidelines?
Heads up. Recently, protein powders sold in India was found to have inaccurate information, and some contains toxins. They are still being sold.
Yess! I thought nobody was even aware of this show. Maybe I'm a dill weed.
if quantum physics was normal then it wouldn't be a separate branch genius /s
This has always bothered me. How come most animals can drink dirty water and not fall sick (most of the time) but a human will (most of the time)? In that sense, how is human immunity better? And it seems like there's a ton of upper respiratory infections in humans?
The way I myself make sense of this is that humans are generally cleaner from birth, thus we don't properly develop immunity against a lot of pathogens.
But I'm just making assumptions...All I wanna do is drink water from random puddle and not get sick, and not do plumbing for drinking water, imagine all the crap we would not have to build
At first I read "when I was 14, a pair of boobs walked in". I think I should sleep.
I'm having an urge to take a bite out of it.
Thanks! I only learned a tiny bit of blender, to do very siimple visualisation of furniture ideas and story settings. I never bothered to even learn to render... but boy this this sub makes me wanna go all in
You don't have to go super expensive to get proper audiophile devices but its not cheap.
Purely from experience, "normal" headphones adds color to the sound, boost certain frequencies etc. This makes some sound bleed into other frequencies. Essentially hides/muddies those other frequencies. Literally dumbs down details.
Audiophile devices are close to studio audio devices, trying to stay as close to the original frequencies, for each sound/instrument. This doesnt directly mean better listening experience but you will here more details on any cheap audiophile headphones. Depending on brands and types some may boost certain frequencies.
Tldr: I'm speaking purely from a consumer perspective and in now way an expert. But an audiophile thing will deliver more details and each instrument will sound closer to the real thing.
What separates the audiophile earbuds from the mainstream earbuds?
Earbuds