@Xander I guess it's true for most password cracking, but it's still very useful.

@J.J arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/08/…

> Alleged “snake oil” crypto company sues over boos at Black Hat [Updated]

Damn, we're going to need more popcorn

I feel proud that I was alerted to this by @J.J long before it became mainstream.

"I was laughing at TIME AI before it was cool!"

... before it was cool?

:&)

I can't words today

Congratulations you're now a hipster. God have mercy on your soul ;p

> But the buzz from the presentation was so bad that Crown Sterling is now suing Black Hat for not upholding its standards of conduct for attendees and for violating the terms of Crown Sterling's "sponsorship package"—the thing that allowed Grant to present at Black Hat in the first place—by allowing "a premeditated, orchestrated attack on [Crown Sterling], staged by certain industry detractors and competitors."

I've got enough sleep and new music. So I'm probably in better shape then the past week ;p

I'm on a polyphasic sleep schedule (read: I have insomnia and take naps a lot).

But that also means I'm too tired to think from time to time.

@MechMK1 P5$$w0rd probably passes most tests. Its also terrible.

@forest I work shifts, so I end up having to do that

and yeah, that's kinda how I am ;p

That snakeoil guy paid $115,000 for that sponsored talk. O_o

Actually that sounds like a great scam

you get people to invest 200k in you. Spend 20k on an office and a website and employees...

Oh it's certainly a scam. Just look at the other things that company comes out. The company, whose director of cryptography spent the last 15 years looking for secrets encoded in the pyramids of Giza that prove sacred geometry!

then you buy into a conf and have a talk you know people will tear apart

I honestly don't know if he knew they'd tear him apart.

then you sue the company running the conf, make a profit, (optionally) pay off the investors and take the rest of the money and run

Judging by the other crap that company comes out with, they seem to be hedging their bets on people being ignorant. They didn't realize how vocal and non-passive cryptographers are.

....

Most IT folks are very tough crowds

@JourneymanGeek But there's no way they'll win that case.

Indeed.

Most of the crap that company comes out with are "skin care solutions".

@forest its ok, as long as the investors believe they will

It puts the lotion on the skin?

Or else it gets the cryptographer hecklers again.

snort

that's actually funny

Or I've not gotten enough sleep

You just haven't gotten enough sleep. But neither have I, so it's all good. :P

Someone yelling down a well "OI YOUR ALGO SUCKS? WHAT DID YOU DO, ROLL YOUR OWN?"

lel

eh got 7 hours last night, and maybe 4 in the afternoon cause I was an idiot...

It puts the chosen plaintexts in the basket...

"Who cares about what is considered best practice? I think my solution works and y'all are just jealous you didn't think of it earlier."

@forest I read the lawsuit. It's pretty hilarious. Much as the article you quoted suggests, basically it boils down to that they feel they didn't get their money's worth because people were mean to them and hurt their feelings. They just repeat about 20 different variations on that theme.

Oh, and also it was a setup by the industry, who is threatened by the fact that they're going to replace with RSA, which they still seem to inexplicably believe is the only cryptographic algorithm currently in existence.