• 1 Post
  • 180 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 15th, 2023

help-circle






  • And it’s about a mile? Many common rifle bullets will be starting to nope-out of supersonic around that distance, so you would need something really beefy, like a .338 Lapua or even a .50 to be accurate. (A bullet will generally start tumbling when it drops sub-sonic.)

    Don’t mistake me: many bullets can and do travel past a mile regularly, especially depending on the shot angle. Yeah, they can still kill. I am referring to the uncertainty and inaccuracy at those ranges, especially if a bullet has lost a ton of speed.

    My main point is that long range sniper rifles are quite large caliber and generally require long heavy barrels. You aren’t going to swing one of those around without being noticed.

    The shot speed approximation is the easy part, believe it or not. Since the bullet must be a large caliber you can guess at about 200-300 grains for a “smaller” large caliber bullet, or between 650-900 grains for a larger one. (Maybe a few more, but I am sticking with a 338 or a 50.) Muzzle velocity is also going to be on the high end at between 2900fps and +3100fps for most all of them. The math is easy to work out with a common ballistics calculator by estimating the ballistic coefficient of available bullets in the category we are talking about. (Bullet speed at the target is the most important number to calculate.)

    Still, it’s not perfect math. If you look for a camera flash at an estimated time when a bullet was supposedly fired, you are probably going to find one, especially if you have a second or two of footage across multiple cameras.





  • I taught myself QuickBasic as it was the only thing I knew that was related to copying C64 BASIC out of magazines. (QBasic was packaged with DOS 3.11 I think and I was able to get a full copy of QuickBasic somehow. That was about +30 years ago? Dunno. I was about 12 at the time.) I didn’t know what other languages were out there besides TurboPascal. I did learn simple Pascal, but that was a short chapter.

    I actually met someone else in the area that was learning to code, and of course, we wanted to write a game. The only way to code for a mouse at the time was to write an INT33 handler, so it kicked off our interest in asm. (I still use asm for MCU stuff on occasion, but it’s limited.) I quickly diverged into writing some really nifty… eh… “boot sector code” so that kicked off my career in security.

    And yeah, it’s the same phenomenon for me: I just think in terms of bits and bytes getting shifted around and I still refuse to believe in “magic”. (Slight jab at Rust coders there, but in good fun.)

    Fast forward to today, I train “kids” fresh out of college as part of my job now. The first thing I do is start giving them weird tasks that require they actually understand how something like an fopen() actually works.

    (Funny story. I refused to “show my work” in math class for simple f(x) problems as I viewed it as unoptimized code. Lulz. I was such an autistic dork.)


  • That, 200%!

    When I started in computers, years ago, I transitioned from QuickBasic directly into assembly. Ever since then, I can kinda “read the Matrix” (Blond, Brunette, Redhead…) and forget about how confusing a raw binary or how a mess of a dmp looks to someone else. (To me, I really just see patterns and nothing massively complicated.)

    “It’s just data.” - You would be surprised how fuzzy that statement is for some people. It’s almost exactly like telling someone who doesn’t speak any English that “the sky is blue”. It’s totally cool though! Learning about the internals of any computer is really just a very long chain of “aha moments” as many concepts aren’t intuitive.


  • remotelove@lemmy.catoSelfhosted@lemmy.worldSecrets
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I would look into something like Doppler instead of Vault. (I don’t trust any company acquired by IBM. They have been aquiring and enshittifying companies before there was even a name for it.)

    Look into how any different solutions need their keys presented. Dumping the creds in ENV is generally fine since the keys will need to be stored and used somehow. You might need a dedicated user account to manage keys in its home folder.

    This is actually a host security problem, not generally a key storage problem per se. Regardless of how you have a vault setup, my approach here is to create a single host that acts as a gateway for the rest of the credentials. (This applies to if keys are stored in “the cloud” or in a local database somewhere.)

    Since you are going to using a Pi, you should focus on that being a restricted host: Only run your chosen vault solution on it. Period. Secure and patch it to the best of your ability and use very specific host firewall rules for minimum connectivity. Ie: Have one user for ssh in and limit another user account to managing vault, preferably without needing any kind of elevated access. This is actually a perfect use case for SELinux since you can put in some decent restrictions on the host for a single app (and it’s supporting apps…)

    If you are paranoid enough to run a HIDS, you can turn on all the events for any type of root account actions. In theory once the host is configured, you shouldn’t need root again until you start performing patches.


  • I dump memory more often than you would think. It’s usually not obfuscated or encrypted in any meaningful way even though it is fairly trivial to do so.

    It’s good practice to scour through any bloatware installed on windows laptops. Since bloatware is generally written by the lowest bidder, you can find all kinds of keys and phone-home urls (sometimes with all the parameters) and other weird things. Just fire up a decent hex editor and search for strings in the dump file. You don’t need to know jack about reverse engineering either.





  • remotelove@lemmy.catoscience@lemmy.worldYour Wifi Router Emits Photons - QNFO
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    It’s not a horrible write-up but it doesn’t do much to simplify things. If I had to explain these concepts as close to an ELI5 as I could, I would use less words.

    Photons have characteristics of both a wave and a particle. In many ways, it’s easier to think of a photon as an interaction point. As a wave propagates, any collision point could be thought of as a photon. You shake some electrons in one antenna, they create a wave through the air, the wave propagates until it hits another antenna and the photons are where that wave starts to shake another bunch of electrons.

    I am not quite sure what they were trying to explain about waveform collapse, TBH. There is just a probability curve about where a photon will “exist” at a specific time. You can’t predict the location of a photon, but you can observe it. There isn’t really a physical “collapse” of anything. The probability curve “collapses” into a single point once observed. There is no probability once something is observed. It’s there or it isn’t, so the math function has “collapsed”: There isn’t a need to calculate probability at that time.

    This is far from perfect, but it’s probably easier to digest. I don’t even want to know how much physics I broke with my descriptions, but I do know it’s easier to visualize.