Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

R.I.P. Tim Berners Lee

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 3:02

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 9:35

Web is going to be closed-source as well with obfuscated WebAssembly

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 9:37

:(

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 13:23

>>2
The web is already filled with obfuscated Javascript. The only solution to that is to install the librejs extension and to advocate for the liberation of Javascript programs.

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 13:52

>>4
There is a gulf of difference between binary WebAssembly and minified text scripts.

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 13:55

>>4
The only winning move is not to play.

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 14:01

>>5
What is that gulf? From what I understand, minified JS programs are as good as decompiled object code - nobody is going to practically tinker with programs in this form.

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 14:12

>>7
prettifying JS is fairly simple and can be automated. on CTFs, RE with obfuscated JS are usually worth less points than the ones with binary blobs - and for a good reason

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 14:21

>>7
Minified JS can be deobfuscated and prettified, formatted to recover most of pre-minification state(even giving descriptive variable names).
Now imagine a WebAssembly blob AJAX-loads random pieces of encrypted WebAssembly which it decrypts with public key and loads to execute. Now add a few obfuscation steps(junk instructions, self-modifying code) and anti-debugger tricks, dependence on temporary server data and verification DRM.

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 14:30

>>9
What retarded kind of comparison is minified javashit vs. obfuscated and encrypted assembly with DRM and server-side tricks? Just don't post if you can't make an actual point.

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 14:41

>>10 Look at OP's article. Add WebAssembly. Activate neuronal almonds.

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 14:48

>>11
Most of that shit is already applicable to javashit, you mental midget. The only reason you ignore this for javashit is that your point would fall apart if you didn't.
Also, you can't decrypt with a public key.

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 14:51

>>9
Minified JS can be deobfuscated and prettified, formatted to recover most of pre-minification state(even giving descriptive variable names).
I am extremely skeptical of this claim. The only reason why I think this can legitimately happen is because the minifier algorithm does a shit job of translating program identifiers into minified variants. I presume that most minifier algorithms do an adequate job of disconnecting the identifiers by actually minimizing the character count of the program.

Now imagine a WebAssembly blob AJAX-loads random pieces ...
There have always been a problem with web services. Webassembly doesn't make things any more difficult than before.

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 14:53

>>10
its part of a continuum

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 14:55

>>12
Most of that shit is already applicable to javashit, you mental midget.
It amplifies the problem, because you deal with opaque and obfuscated binary data.
you can't decrypt with a public key.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public-key_cryptography

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 14:58

>>15
In a public key encryption system, any person can encrypt a message using the public key of the receiver, but such a message can be decrypted only with the receiver's private key
I beg your pardon.

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 15:05

>>16 read further down:
In a public key signature system, a person can combine a message with a private key to create a short digital signature on the message. Anyone with the corresponding public key can combine a message, a putative digital signature on it, and a known public key to verify whether the signature was validโ€”made by the owner of the corresponding private key. Changing the message, even replacing a single letter, will cause verification to fail: in a secure signature system, it is computationally infeasible for anyone who does not know the private key to deduce it from the public key or from any number of signatures, or to find a valid signature on any message for which a signature has not hitherto been seen. Thus the authenticity of a message can be demonstrated by the signature, provided the owner of the private key keeps the private key secret.[3][4]

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 15:14

>>16 Instead of arguing about semantics, read the spec:
https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/CR-encrypted-media-20160705/

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 15:16

>>15
Then compare that instead of the nonsense you wrote in >>9.

>>17
Signature verification is not encryption.

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 16:27

>>19
Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 16:54

which it decrypts with public key
Hahaha, lol

Name: Anonymous 2017-03-02 20:22

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ
I claim these dubz in the name of the United States of America
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List