Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #465816 > unrolled thread

Another Crypto Programming Challenge

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy

Contents

  Another Crypto Programming Challenge fr314159@gmail.com - 2018-09-04 06:45 -0700
    Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-09-04 13:59 +0000
      Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge fr314159@gmail.com - 2018-09-04 07:25 -0700
        Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-09-04 15:05 +0000
          Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge fr314159@gmail.com - 2018-09-04 08:30 -0700
            Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 08:47 -0700
              Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 09:00 -0700
                Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-09-04 16:21 +0000
                  Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 09:26 -0700
                    Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 02:44 -0700
                  Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge fr314159@gmail.com - 2018-09-04 09:58 -0700
                    Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 10:37 -0700
                    Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 05:06 -0700
                    Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-09-05 16:37 +0000
                      Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 10:03 -0700
                      Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge fr314159@gmail.com - 2018-09-05 10:26 -0700
                    Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 09:43 -0700
                      Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge fr314159@gmail.com - 2018-09-05 10:36 -0700
                        Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 10:45 -0700
                          Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 11:02 -0700
                          Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge fr314159@gmail.com - 2018-09-05 12:35 -0700
                            Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 12:52 -0700
                            Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 14:50 -0700
                              Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 15:13 -0700
                              Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2018-09-05 22:34 +0000
                                Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 15:59 -0700
                                  Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 00:33 -0700
                                Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 00:02 -0700
                                Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 09:35 -0700
                                  Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 09:55 -0700
                        Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-05 12:52 -0500
                          Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 11:18 -0700
                          Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge fr314159@gmail.com - 2018-09-05 11:23 -0700
                          Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge fr314159@gmail.com - 2018-09-05 11:38 -0700
                            Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 11:49 -0700
                            Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 12:04 -0700
                          Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge fr314159@gmail.com - 2018-09-05 11:48 -0700
                      Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-05 21:28 -0700
          Re: Another Crypto Programming Challenge Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 08:47 -0700

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#465816 — Another Crypto Programming Challenge

Although the first crypto challenge is not finished, here is
another one.  I call it "hiding in plain sight."

The lowest order bit of an image file is not essential for the
faithfulness of the image data.  Therefore, a message can be inserted,
bit by bit, into the lowest order bits of an image.

Create a program that will insert the bits of a message into
the lowest order bit of a 8-bit per channel TIFF image.  The
TIFF image is then losslessly compressed using LZW compression.

The program should also decompress and extract the message.

The TIFF file can be grayscale, i.e. only one 8-bit channel.

A color TIFF file (8-bit RGB) can also be used but only the
B, or blue, channel shall contain the message.  Why?  Give an answer.

A b/w TIFF is no allowed.  Why?  Give an answer.

So c'mon.  Get moving.  Fast!

************* Warning **************

Don't attempt this with Microshit Winblows.  There are no NATIVE TIFF
libraries.  That's because the MS OS is pure junk.

But everything is available in a stock GNU/Linux system.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#465819

fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
> Although the first crypto challenge is not finished, here is
> another one.  I call it "hiding in plain sight."
> 
> The lowest order bit of an image file is not essential for the
> faithfulness of the image data.  Therefore, a message can be inserted,
> bit by bit, into the lowest order bits of an image.
> 
> Create a program that will insert the bits of a message into
> the lowest order bit of a 8-bit per channel TIFF image.  The
> TIFF image is then losslessly compressed using LZW compression.
> 
> The program should also decompress and extract the message.
> 
> The TIFF file can be grayscale, i.e. only one 8-bit channel.
> 
> A color TIFF file (8-bit RGB) can also be used but only the
> B, or blue, channel shall contain the message.  Why?  Give an answer.
> 
> A b/w TIFF is no allowed.  Why?  Give an answer.
> 
> So c'mon.  Get moving.  Fast!
> 
> ************* Warning **************
> 
> Don't attempt this with Microshit Winblows.  There are no NATIVE TIFF
> libraries.  That's because the MS OS is pure junk.
> 
> But everything is available in a stock GNU/Linux system.
> 

steghide(1)                 General Commands Manual                steghide(1)

NAME
       steghide - a steganography program

SYNOPSIS
       steghide command [ arguments ]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465824

On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 9:59:02 AM UTC-4, owl wrote:

> 
> SYNOPSIS
>        steghide command [ arguments ]
>

Steghide uses a whacko, weirdo algorithm and it requires a passphrase.
It also doesn't handle TIFF files.

The challenge method is simple and foolproof.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465829

fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 9:59:02 AM UTC-4, owl wrote:
> 
>> 
>> SYNOPSIS
>>        steghide command [ arguments ]
>>
> 
> Steghide uses a whacko, weirdo algorithm and it requires a passphrase.
> It also doesn't handle TIFF files.
> 
> The challenge method is simple and foolproof.
> 
> 

STEPIC(1)                        User Commands                       STEPIC(1)

NAME
       stepic - Python image steganography

SYNOPSIS
       stepic [options]

DESCRIPTION
       Steganographically  hide  data  in a bitmap-style image, or read hidden
       data from an image


anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ ls -l
total 756
-rw-r--r-- 1 anon anon 768334 Sep  4 10:36 fab.tiff
-rw-r--r-- 1 anon anon     33 Sep  4 10:57 hidden.txt
anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ identify fab.tiff
fab.tiff TIFF 640x400 640x400+0+0 8-bit sRGB 768KB 0.000u 0:00.000
anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ cat hidden.txt
We don't cuss.  We have manners.
anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ stepic -e -i fab.tiff -t hidden.txt -o blah.tiff
anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ identify blah.tiff
blah.tiff TIFF 640x400 640x400+0+0 8-bit sRGB 768KB 0.000u 0:00.000
anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ ls -l
total 1508
-rw-r--r-- 1 anon anon 768192 Sep  4 10:58 blah.tiff
-rw-r--r-- 1 anon anon 768334 Sep  4 10:36 fab.tiff
-rw-r--r-- 1 anon anon     33 Sep  4 10:57 hidden.txt
anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ stepic -d -i blah.tiff -o gotit.txt
anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ cat gotit.txt
We don't cuss.  We have manners.
anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465833

On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 11:05:23 AM UTC-4, owl wrote:

> 
> SYNOPSIS
>        stepic [options]

That's no good.  In addition to it being written in python, which
requires all kinds other junk to be installed, it uses all three
color channels which is no good.  Only the blue channel should be
used, and perhaps there should also be a skip interval between
selected pixels.

This challenge is "roll your own" stego and it's the best.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465835

On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 9:30:09 AM UTC-6, fr31...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 11:05:23 AM UTC-4, owl wrote:
> 
> > 
> > SYNOPSIS
> >        stepic [options]
> 
> That's no good.  In addition to it being written in python, which
> requires all kinds other junk to be installed, it uses all three
> color channels which is no good.  Only the blue channel should be
> used, and perhaps there should also be a skip interval between
> selected pixels.
> 
> This challenge is "roll your own" stego and it's the best.

<https://imgur.com/a/0flE2f3>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465839

On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 9:47:21 AM UTC-6, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 9:30:09 AM UTC-6, fr31...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 11:05:23 AM UTC-4, owl wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > SYNOPSIS
> > >        stepic [options]
> > 
> > That's no good.  In addition to it being written in python, which
> > requires all kinds other junk to be installed, it uses all three
> > color channels which is no good.  Only the blue channel should be
> > used, and perhaps there should also be a skip interval between
> > selected pixels.
> > 
> > This challenge is "roll your own" stego and it's the best.
> 
> <https://imgur.com/a/0flE2f3>

If you have an issue with that (I did), try:

<http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=89914314727114724447>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465845

Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 9:47:21 AM UTC-6, Steve Carroll wrote:
>> On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 9:30:09 AM UTC-6, fr31...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 11:05:23 AM UTC-4, owl wrote:
>> > 
>> > > 
>> > > SYNOPSIS
>> > >        stepic [options]
>> > 
>> > That's no good.  In addition to it being written in python, which
>> > requires all kinds other junk to be installed, it uses all three
>> > color channels which is no good.  Only the blue channel should be
>> > used, and perhaps there should also be a skip interval between
>> > selected pixels.
>> > 
>> > This challenge is "roll your own" stego and it's the best.
>> 
>> <https://imgur.com/a/0flE2f3>
> 
> If you have an issue with that (I did), try:
> 
> <http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=89914314727114724447>

anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ cat steganopayload1575.txt;echo
Give it up, Feeb.
anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465846

On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 10:21:33 AM UTC-6, owl wrote:
> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 9:47:21 AM UTC-6, Steve Carroll wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 9:30:09 AM UTC-6, fr31...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> > On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 11:05:23 AM UTC-4, owl wrote:
> >> > 
> >> > > 
> >> > > SYNOPSIS
> >> > >        stepic [options]
> >> > 
> >> > That's no good.  In addition to it being written in python, which
> >> > requires all kinds other junk to be installed, it uses all three
> >> > color channels which is no good.  Only the blue channel should be
> >> > used, and perhaps there should also be a skip interval between
> >> > selected pixels.
> >> > 
> >> > This challenge is "roll your own" stego and it's the best.
> >> 
> >> <https://imgur.com/a/0flE2f3>
> > 
> > If you have an issue with that (I did), try:
> > 
> > <http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=89914314727114724447>
> 
> anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ cat steganopayload1575.txt;echo
> Give it up, Feeb.
> anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$

The imgur version gave an error, it said it had been stego'd but wouldn't give the message
(wasn't a permissions issue).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465922

On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 9:26:22 AM UTC-7, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 10:21:33 AM UTC-6, owl wrote:
> > Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 9:47:21 AM UTC-6, Steve Carroll wrote:
> > >> On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 9:30:09 AM UTC-6, fr31...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >> > On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 11:05:23 AM UTC-4, owl wrote:
> > >> > 
> > >> > > 
> > >> > > SYNOPSIS
> > >> > >        stepic [options]
> > >> > 
> > >> > That's no good.  In addition to it being written in python, which
> > >> > requires all kinds other junk to be installed, it uses all three
> > >> > color channels which is no good.  Only the blue channel should be
> > >> > used, and perhaps there should also be a skip interval between
> > >> > selected pixels.
> > >> > 
> > >> > This challenge is "roll your own" stego and it's the best.
> > >> 
> > >> <https://imgur.com/a/0flE2f3>
> > > 
> > > If you have an issue with that (I did), try:
> > > 
> > > <http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=89914314727114724447>
> > 
> > anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ cat steganopayload1575.txt;echo
> > Give it up, Feeb.
> > anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$
> 
> The imgur version gave an error, it said it had been stego'd but wouldn't give the message
> (wasn't a permissions issue).



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512


- --
sex n 
1. either of the two reproductive categories, male or female, of animals  and plants 
2. sexual intercourse 
3. sexual activity or behavior leading to it 
4. the genitals (literary) 
5. the set of characteristics that determine whether the reproductive role of an animal or plant is male or female 
- --

And, notably, Snit wrote:
"Sex is a subset of sexual activities" - Snit - (I guess he didn't comprehend point 3 very well) 

Of course, he also wrote:
"Sexual activities are sex by definition, you moron" - Snit 

And this:
"A passionate kiss could be called a "sexual activity" but it is not sex" 

In Snit's world, a passionate kiss is not sex... but it is sex. LOL!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
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=4yFU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Eight things to never feed your dog!!
http://www.5z8.info/trojan_p4g1zy_how-to-skin-a-gerbil
Jonas Eklundh Communication AB

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465850

On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 12:21:33 PM UTC-4, owl wrote:

> 
> anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ cat steganopayload1575.txt;echo
> Give it up, Feeb.
> anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$
>

He's just trying to weasel out of it because he knows that
he can't do it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465853

On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 9:58:27 AM UTC-7, fr31...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 12:21:33 PM UTC-4, owl wrote:
> 
> > 
> > anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ cat steganopayload1575.txt;echo
> > Give it up, Feeb.
> > anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$
> >
> 
> He's just trying to weasel out of it because he knows that
> he can't do it.



For all the boasting The 'The Fool' Thing's done on this topic, the 'Front End Designer' does not get how to do this. It takes a couple seconds to click and drag across a sentence and 'reverse' it. 

He is as incompetent as The 'The Fool' Thing. 

Generally, I wouldn't call a claim like The 'The Fool' Thing's comments an outright lie until you invalidate it and The 'The Fool' Thing responds with the nothing but repetition because even he knows the details are wrong. BTW, I've already proved that his use of "herd" to describe true advocates is libel, since he's likening them to migratory fowl. Gee, imagine The 'The Fool' Thing trying to pin his crap on Melzzzzz and me, no one has ever seen that before < @_@ >. 



--
Do not click this link!!
http://www.5z8.info/lemon-party-redux_v1o7pm_nakedgrandmas.jpg
Jonas Eklundh Communication

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465930

On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 9:58:27 AM UTC-7, fr31...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 12:21:33 PM UTC-4, owl wrote:
> 
> > 
> > anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ cat steganopayload1575.txt;echo
> > Give it up, Feeb.
> > anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$
> >
> 
> He's just trying to weasel out of it because he knows that
> he can't do it.



It was chrisv who flooded Snit's site dozens of times and refused to admit it. chrisv suffers from neurotic lies so, to him, everything, even randomized bot posts, are "abuses". Who does not know this? Turns out chrisv's non-stop flooding comments of Snit met his own definition of trolling, so he insisted that comment of his was forged by Snit. 



- 
E-commerce Simplified!!
https://youtu.be/48_DdtLGR9s
http://alt.conspiracy.narkive.com/QcWYJ4Px/the-mentally-ill-mark-s-bilk
Jonas Eklundh Communication AB

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465951

fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 12:21:33 PM UTC-4, owl wrote:
> 
>> 
>> anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ cat steganopayload1575.txt;echo
>> Give it up, Feeb.
>> anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$
>>
> 
> He's just trying to weasel out of it because he knows that
> he can't do it.
> 

This is the fundamental process, but that's as far as I'm going
to take it. 

anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ xxd -b -c4 data
0000000: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
0000004: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
0000008: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
000000c: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
0000010: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
0000014: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
0000018: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
000001c: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
0000020: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
0000024: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
0000028: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
000002c: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ echo -n "abc" >msg
anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ xxd -b -c4 msg
0000000: 01100001 01100010 01100011           abc
anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ ./blah msg data >out
anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ xxd -b -c4 out
0000000: 11111110 11111111 11111111 11111110  ....
0000004: 11111110 11111110 11111110 11111111  ....
0000008: 11111110 11111111 11111111 11111110  ....
000000c: 11111110 11111110 11111111 11111110  ....
0000010: 11111110 11111111 11111111 11111110  ....
0000014: 11111110 11111110 11111111 11111111  ....
0000018: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
000001c: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
0000020: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
0000024: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
0000028: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
000002c: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111  ....
anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ 

anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ cat blah.c
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
   FILE *msgfp;
   FILE *datafp;
   int c;
   int d;
   int e;
   int i=0;
   if(argc!=3){fprintf(stderr,"%s <msgfile> <datafile>\n",argv[0]);exit(1);}
   msgfp=fopen(argv[1],"r+");
   if(msgfp==NULL) { exit(1); }
   datafp=fopen(argv[2],"r+");
   if(datafp==NULL) { exit(1); }
   while( (c=fgetc(msgfp))!=EOF ) 
   {
      for(i=0;i<8;i++)
      {
        d=((c<<i)&0x80)>>7;
        e=fgetc(datafp);
        e&=0xfe;
        e|=d;
        fputc(e,stdout); 
      }
   }
   while((e=fgetc(datafp))!=EOF){fputc(e,stdout);} 
   fclose(msgfp);
   fclose(datafp);
   return 0;
}
anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465958

On Wednesday, September 5, 2018 at 10:37:44 AM UTC-6, owl wrote:
> fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 12:21:33 PM UTC-4, owl wrote:
> > 
> >> 
> >> anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ cat steganopayload1575.txt;echo
> >> Give it up, Feeb.
> >> anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$
> >>
> > 
> > He's just trying to weasel out of it because he knows that
> > he can't do it.
> > 
> 
> This is the fundamental process, but that's as far as I'm going
> to take it. 

You do realize that your doing so will revoke your "REAL MAN" application, right?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465961

On Wednesday, September 5, 2018 at 12:37:44 PM UTC-4, owl wrote:

>       for(i=0;i<8;i++)
>       {
>         d=((c<<i)&0x80)>>7;
>         e=fgetc(datafp);
>         e&=0xfe;
>         e|=d;
>         fputc(e,stdout); 
>       }


That's the way to do it.  The message data is bit shifted one
at a time.

A better way would be to use assembler intrinsics to create
an actual assembly language section, but that's just my preference.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465953

On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 10:58:27 AM UTC-6, fr31...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 12:21:33 PM UTC-4, owl wrote:
> 
> > 
> > anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$ cat steganopayload1575.txt;echo
> > Give it up, Feeb.
> > anon@lowtide:~/code/stego$
> >
> 
> He's just trying to weasel out of it because he knows that
> he can't do it.

Weasel out? Where did I ever indicate I was in? My knowledge of this is 
essentially zero, as it is for the C language (well, prior to this weekend it 
was, I've started checking it out a bit). 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465964

On Wednesday, September 5, 2018 at 12:43:59 PM UTC-4, Steve Carroll wrote:

> 
> My knowledge of this is 
> essentially zero, as it is for the C language (well, prior to this weekend it 
> was, I've started checking it out a bit).
>

You didn't answer the question about why we are limiting this
to the blue channel, and that has nothing to do with C.

So why are we limiting this to the blue channel?

Actual coding is always the last and least important step.
The method has first to be scrutinized for feasibility.

I believe that this method is absolutely foolproof for secret
communication.  The recipient simply takes a photo with his
camera, embeds the message, and no one could ever decrypt.
Plausible deniability is absolutely guaranteed.

But there needs to be some extra scrambling of the bits rather
than just a sequential ordering.

There is a growing push for "back doors" to be installed in
commercial encryption methods and people need to start using
their own stuff.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465965

On Wednesday, September 5, 2018 at 11:36:45 AM UTC-6, fr31...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 5, 2018 at 12:43:59 PM UTC-4, Steve Carroll wrote:
> 
> > 
> > My knowledge of this is 
> > essentially zero, as it is for the C language (well, prior to this weekend it 
> > was, I've started checking it out a bit).
> >
> 
> You didn't answer the question about why we are limiting this
> to the blue channel, and that has nothing to do with C.
> 
> So why are we limiting this to the blue channel?

As I said, I have zero knowledge of this but as a wild guess I'd suspect it 
has to do with it being less likely to be noticed there.

> Actual coding is always the last and least important step.
> The method has first to be scrutinized for feasibility.
> 
> I believe that this method is absolutely foolproof for secret
> communication.  The recipient simply takes a photo with his
> camera, embeds the message, and no one could ever decrypt.
> Plausible deniability is absolutely guaranteed.
> 
> But there needs to be some extra scrambling of the bits rather
> than just a sequential ordering.
> 
> There is a growing push for "back doors" to be installed in
> commercial encryption methods and people need to start using
> their own stuff.

That's scary.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#465968

On Wednesday, September 5, 2018 at 10:45:51 AM UTC-7, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 5, 2018 at 11:36:45 AM UTC-6, fr31...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 5, 2018 at 12:43:59 PM UTC-4, Steve Carroll wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > My knowledge of this is 
> > > essentially zero, as it is for the C language (well, prior to this weekend it 
> > > was, I've started checking it out a bit).
> > >
> > 
> > You didn't answer the question about why we are limiting this
> > to the blue channel, and that has nothing to do with C.
> > 
> > So why are we limiting this to the blue channel?
> 
> As I said, I have zero knowledge of this but as a wild guess I'd suspect it 
> has to do with it being less likely to be noticed there.
> 
> > Actual coding is always the last and least important step.
> > The method has first to be scrutinized for feasibility.
> > 
> > I believe that this method is absolutely foolproof for secret
> > communication.  The recipient simply takes a photo with his
> > camera, embeds the message, and no one could ever decrypt.
> > Plausible deniability is absolutely guaranteed.
> > 
> > But there needs to be some extra scrambling of the bits rather
> > than just a sequential ordering.
> > 
> > There is a growing push for "back doors" to be installed in
> > commercial encryption methods and people need to start using
> > their own stuff.
> 
> That's scary.



Both Oppenheimer and Onion 'The Flooder' Knight had their public farts and their blunders. One presented it cool and didn't do anything too appalling that could not be presented as the wagging of a dog. 

It was Onion 'The Flooder' Knight who stated that he and his students used to hack school computers all the time and it was arousing. Any horrendously hopeless druggie could easily do the same. 

Don't look now, but I think Onion 'The Flooder' Knight has a serious woody for Klaus Schadenfreude. 

--
I Left My Husband & Daughter At Home And THIS happened
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.os.linux/BVpdH5KOc6s
Jonas Eklundh Communication

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy

csiph-web