“Pencil” Reference to wargames of course. Passwords are fundamentally broken. Don’t blame the post it note nor the person making it. Blame the concept of passwords.
IT departments that apply arbitrary constraints to passwords are fundamentally broken. Users that do not use password management, which allows easily creating unique, strong passwords for everything, are using a fundamentally broken workflow.
That’s significant because (n^m) - 1 is divisible by n - 1.
So, for example, 125320078^35785332 - 1 is divisible by 125320077 and, hence, not a prime.
So, this problem has been solved for all n>2.
n^m + 1 is a more difficult problem. For example, for n=10, we get 2: prime, 11: prime, 101: prime, 1001: composite, 10001: composite, etc (at least the 8,000 following are composite. See https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2108085/is-there-a-...)
Is it? I mean I feel like the amount of people putting things straight out to the internet should be more minimal than ever with people just using more private networks these days.
Misguided. Circumstances are that he either is or is not qualified for a single point of failure job like that. If not it’s management failure. If the human is “qualified” for a single point of failure responsibility like that, he’s now fired.
Clearly some mistakes are bigger than others. Simply counting mistakes is overly simplistic. I’m not suggesting that this single mistake is necessarily big enough to deserve an immediate firing, but there certainly are mistakes that do.
when you're dealing with processes as critical as this one...
there should be no single point of failure.
Even our President has a backup, a failsafe, and a safeguard for the purposes we're discussing here. And that backup has a backup, a failsafe, and a safeguard. Etc etc etc.
Not really true. Thanks to advances in technology POTUS had 10 minutes to launch by the 1970s before Washington was toast.
It was an open secret that nuclear retaliation could be instigated without White House or even Pentagon approval if the Soviets tried to decapitate Nato.
"Of course, the whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost if you KEEP IT A SECRET!"
A rational player would only put effort into a retaliatory strike capability to the extent that actually having a retaliatory strike capability strengthened the enemy's perception that they would be obliterated if they struck first.
So, gross management failure. Or, more likely, a hack. Although I don’t see how they would lie that one person really has such power, knowing the truth would likely leak.
This isn’t a newbie getting set up on his dev db who was given too much access to production. They’re pointing the finger so that mechanism that facilitates single point of failure should be independently audited
someone needs to do independent audits in the form of a zero knowledge proof to say “ok I understand why the wizards and warlocks are at battle”. Used to be that we would say to ourselves, “we should consider It likely Obama flipped once in office because he saw confidential stuff that would make you sick”, which is a more cosmo view
In other words you can implement arbitrary dynamic trust, Opening up the possibility of arbitrary hierarchies, and much more efficient and robust mechanisms of establishing truth. Authorities could be designed arbitrarily and evolve on top of this core protocol. This so far sounds closer to tcp/ip foundation. Bitcoin would be more like Series of children with a dynamic system of never ending strings and Styrofoam cups.
I bet there is already CS research theory ready to apply to this design. (Easier said than done and I am just guessing really).
