03:21 שםש om [mezuza@die.m0f0.com] has joined #phrack 03:22 fucking talktive tonight 03:23 why would a chan ban ~*@*.* 03:23 people without ident 03:24 or people without spoofs ;p 03:24 שםש flatline` [~lick@flatline.xs4all.nl] has joined #phrack 03:24 f ident 03:24 yo spendy 03:24 yo yo 03:24 doing some elec stuff heh 03:24 you should give a #phrack lecture on grsecurity 03:25 i could 03:25 COOL 03:25 i could lecture on other topics as well 03:25 שםש SignOff simon-: #phrack (Disconnected) 03:25 שםש SignOff om: #phrack (changing servers) 03:25 LIKE? 03:26 hrm, like set theory, cardinality, proofs 03:26 cool 03:26 physics 03:26 i think phrack could use a good lecture on cardinality 03:26 cardinality is nifty 03:26 שםש SignOff democow: #phrack (Ping timeout: no data for 244 seconds) 03:26 have you taken a class on it yet? 03:26 שםש om [mezuza@die.m0f0.com] has joined #phrack 03:26 no i have no knowledge on the subject, i desire very much to hear your lecture ;)) 03:27 haha 03:27 teach us spendy! 03:27 hrmm 03:27 שםש SignOff int1r: #phrack ([BX] They killed Kenny! THOSE BASTARDS!) 03:27 ok 03:27 so numbers can be broken up into different categories 03:27 נ LiLTrip74/#phrack returned (6m29s) 03:27 according to their size 03:27 שםש _bl [blazt@ghettobox.eurocompton.net] has joined #phrack 03:27 the size of a set of numbers is its cardinality 03:28 y-0 _bl we're having a #phrack lecture 03:28 cardinality is a relatively new field of mathematics...only a hundred years or so old 03:28 <_bl> oh ya? what's the topic 03:28 שםש mode/#phrack [+v _bl] by abhaya 03:28 so, you have finite sets of numbers, denumerable sets, and uncountable sets 03:29 denumerable sets are infinite in size, but can still be counted 03:29 cool can you tell us what cantor did with infinite sets? 03:29 the natural numbers are an example 03:29 yea 03:29 there's the cantor schroeder berstein theorem 03:29 dj bersteni? 03:30 berstein 03:30 which says that two sets are equal in size if a one-to-one relationship exists between them 03:30 meaning there's a one-to-one from set A to set B, and a one-to-one from set B to set A 03:30 thats injective right? 03:30 the_uT: not sure.. 03:30 yes 03:30 שםש SignOff om: #phrack (changing servers) 03:30 onto is surjective 03:30 both onto and one-to-one is bijective 03:30 kool 03:31 sets are also equal in size if a bijection exists between them 03:31 yeah i think dj berstein helped formulate that theorem 03:31 why are they called natural numbers, if numbers are all artificial - ie, dictated by the mind of man and defined as such? 03:31 he's offering $500 to anybody that can disprove the theorem 03:31 haha 03:31 well 03:31 שםש om [mezuza@die.m0f0.com] has joined #phrack 03:31 heh 03:31 it's unprovable that there's any sets between aleph naught and the continuum 03:32 it's called the continuum hypothesis 03:32 it's been proven that it's unprovable ;p 03:32 so...the set { 1, 2, 3} is finite 03:32 the natural numbers are denumerable 03:32 שםש int1r [~entropy@pool-151-202-182-105.ny5030.east.verizon.net] has joined #phrack 03:32 the rational numbers are denumerable also 03:33 שםש inc [~inc@81.84.4.162] has joined #phrack 03:33 because it's equivalent to the set N x N 03:33 "denumerable" 03:33 how can a numeral be denumerable? 03:33 haha 03:33 sigh this is boring, now i remember why i slept thru discrete maths 03:33 it has to do with the sizes of the sets 03:34 so it means you can't put a specific number on it 03:34 because it's infinite 03:34 but it can still be counted 03:34 cantor says if you arrange all the natural numbers in a box diagonally 03:34 you can play checkers! 03:34 you can count them all 03:34 haha 03:34 that too 03:34 ;p 03:35 how can you count them all 03:35 another fact is the power set of a set results in a set of greater cardinality 03:35 well 03:35 you can't count horizontally 03:35 or vertically 03:35 because if you do that, you'll go on forever on the first line 03:35 and will never get to the second line 03:35 what about the power set of R 03:35 שםש SignOff int1r: #phrack ([BX] The Power Rangers use BitchX. Shouldn't you?) 03:35 שםש SignOff mr44y_: #phrack (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 03:35 what about the power set of the null set 03:36 haha 03:36 the power set of R has greater cardinality than R 03:36 R is an uncountable set 03:36 it has cardinality of c 03:36 continuum 03:36 spendy?? 03:36 the power set of the null set is the null set heh 03:37 i should have clarified and said sets having elements ;p 03:37 so whats the cardinality of the null set and what is the cardinality of the null set's power set 03:37 ok 03:38 how can it security professionals utilize the concept of these 'sets' in their day-to-day work? 03:38 hrmm 03:38 well 03:38 it actually has lots of applications 03:38 wow 03:38 set theory can be used in security models 03:38 lets say you have two subjects 03:38 each containing objects, with specific permissions to each object 03:39 kinda like the grsec ACLs? 03:39 the intersection of the two subjects gives useful information 03:39 as does the union 03:39 yes 03:39 cooooool 03:39 שםש akcess [~akcess@visp151-27.visp.co.nz] has joined #phrack 03:39 haha 03:39 yo 03:39 but there's also lots of other applications 03:39 like partitions 03:39 like? 03:39 שםש SignOff om: #phrack (Read error: Operation timed out) 03:39 i wont even try to get into this convo 03:40 i lub math 03:40 partitions?? 03:40 yea 03:40 filesystem structure in general 03:40 is based on set theory 03:40 ;p 03:40 cantor diagonalizations are yummy 03:40 שםש om [mezuza@die.m0f0.com] has joined #phrack 03:40 oh wait 03:40 partitions are sets wherein each set is not the empty set 03:40 so how come you can count them diagonally 03:40 but not left-to-right etc 03:40 שםש SignOff method: #phrack (Ping timeout: 180 seconds) 03:41 because 03:41 what you're counting is N x N 03:41 reminding me of discrete !0! 03:41 so think of a graph 03:41 you have x coordinates and y coordinates 03:41 the coordinates go on forever 03:41 agree 03:41 so if you start at (0,0) and begin counting right 03:41 you'll never stop counting that line 03:42 and you'll miss all the stuff above 03:42 k 03:42 and you'll miss all the stuff above 03:42 i dont understand what u mean 03:42 like 03:42 you'll miss the point (0,1) 03:42 and (0,2), (1,2)...etc etc 03:42 everything above the x axis 03:43 this isnt interesting 03:43 haha 03:43 spendy 03:43 CONTINUE 03:43 i know it isn't for your aempirei ;p 03:43 it is 03:43 so points on a graph i am missing. 03:43 :P 03:43 go on 03:43 stfu aempirei or im gonna lock down this channel like the rLOCKsley 03:43 well, but the points represent a pair of rational numbers 03:44 ok, well... 03:44 so what happens when u count diagonally 03:44 1,1 2,2 3,3 4,4 ad infinitum 03:44 ? 03:44 an interesting corrolary of the cantor schroeder bernstein theorem 03:44 no no 03:44 שםש SignOff om: #phrack (changing servers) 03:44 it would be like 03:44 no acceleration. 03:44 שםש nawk [nawk@66.252.6.10] has left #phrack [] 03:44 (0,0), (1,0), (0,1), (2,0), (1,1), (0,2) 03:45 שםש om [mezuza@die.m0f0.com] has joined #phrack 03:45 so not like the line f(x) = x 03:45 but f(x) = -x + c 03:45 where c is 0, 1, 2, 3, etc 03:45 so anyways 03:46 שםש NetSplit: irc.arcti.ca split from ircd.arcti.ca [03:46am] 03:46 שםש BitchX: Press ^F to see who left ^E to change to [irc.arcti.ca] 03:46 the diagonalization for a proof of countability of Q is so cheesy cause the arbitraty elimination of reducable fractions seems so ad hoc 03:46 שםש sandnig0r [sandnigg0r@user-uinj1h3.dialup.mindspring.com] has joined #phrack 03:46 r u saying you can count all numbers in a set that stretches infinitely in both directions on a number line? 03:46 well, you don't use that to prove it ;p 03:46 שםש SignOff cripy: #phrack (Read error: Operation timed out) 03:46 you prove by showing a bijection exists 03:46 the_uT: but it doesn't 03:46 שםש SignOff glaive: #phrack (Ping timeout: 180 seconds) 03:46 each time it's a finite set 03:47 a denumerable collection of finite sets 03:47 'but it doesnt' <- hardly an answer to a question of the form 'are you saying...' 03:47 nerd shit 03:47 which is denumerable 03:47 :) 03:47 <_bl> eckis, 4real 03:47 שםש glaive [glaive@maia.vaned.net] has joined #phrack 03:47 like the first time, you have 1 element, then 2 elements, then 3... 03:47 all finite 03:48 but you must an infinite times, no? 03:48 now if this only had a point i would cream. 03:48 yes, a denumerable number of times 03:48 it's infinite, but countable 03:48 spender, if u had an infinite set of data... say in the form of an mysql database.... how long would it take me to rm it? 03:48 lol 03:48 the_ut 1 : spendy 0 03:48 dye, #phrack 03:48 well it would depend on if i were running openbsd 03:48 ;p 03:48 lol 03:48 thx spender btw i havent learned about it in school :D 03:49 f openbsd do debian+grsec 03:49 haha 03:49 well 03:49 since i carry across ip tagging over stream unix domain connections 03:50 everybody knows theres no security holes in grsec... except for the one `cat /proc/1/fd/ssh_login_passwords` 03:50 haha 03:50 /proc restrictions wouldn't allow that 03:50 i rewrote them recently so that the directory isn't even displayed if you don't have permissions to view inside it 03:50 /proc/self sorry 03:51 chroots also can't view outside processes 03:51 ptrace them, or do about 30 other things ;p 03:51 all architecture-independent 03:51 but anyways 03:51 cool 03:51 as i was going to say 03:51 cause im sure returning -ESYS is highly architecturee dependent 03:51 the cantor schroeder bernstein theorem relies on the axiom of choice 03:52 no, -EPERM or -EACCES actually 03:52 ahhhh 03:52 doing a ptrace restriction would normally be architecture-dependent 03:52 since each architecture provides its own implementation 03:52 שםש Netjoined: irc.arcti.ca ircd.arcti.ca 03:52 שםש thn [~ech0@h68-147-17-177.cg.shawcable.net] has joined #phrack 03:53 right cause 03:53 שםש _metaray [~joe@Ottawa-HSE-ppp258802.sympatico.ca] has joined #phrack 03:53 but i did a trick to deny ptraces and a bunch of other things (kill, setsid, setpgid, etc) all in one pice of code 03:53 causing ptrace to return -EPERM if you're chrooted is highly architecture dependent! 03:53 cool 03:53 שםש SignOff om: #phrack (Read error: Operation timed out) 03:53 so anyways 03:53 some mathematicians don't like the axiom of choice 03:54 because if you believe the axiom of choice, there's other things you must believe as well 03:54 some of them seem rational, others seem very strange 03:54 there is a god? 03:54 שםש om [mezuza@die.m0f0.com] has joined #phrack 03:54 i just saw joowee in cnn 03:54 so if it's possible to prove something without the axiom of choice, mathematicians like it better if you do that 03:54 talkin bout the mssql wurm 03:55 said he was an ex hacker and know published writer 03:55 speaking of worms, anyone know what he mp3 file attribute was that was overflowable in xp a month or two ago? 03:55 i think he should be hangin from a tree, with no vaseline 03:55 so one of the cool corollaries of the CSB theorem is you can take all the points in a real-valued line of length 10, and make it into a filled in box of 100 square units 03:56 just a match, and a littel bit of gasoline 03:56 ok 03:56 שםש mode/#phrack [+v spendy] by the_uT 03:56 שםש mode/#phrack [+m] by the_uT 03:56 haha 03:57 go spendy, its your birthday, gogogo 03:57 hmm 03:57 i forget an example of the axiom of choice that is really strange 03:57 the pressures of sucess no doubt 03:57 maybe :\ 03:57 got anything else u can lecture on? 03:57 שםש om^ [scb@62.128.45.224.knet.co.il] has joined #phrack 03:58 what classes are you taking again 03:58 well there's lots of other stuff related to set theory that i didn't talk about 03:58 oh 03:58 right now i'm taking mechanics, differential equations, discrete structures (it's a repeat of the logic and proofs class i took last semester), electrical engineering, and a mips assembly class 03:59 cool 03:59 you gonna do some irix exploits 03:59 ?? 03:59 haha 03:59 maybe for a project 03:59 well 03:59 שםש subd [~Hulac@syr-66-67-98-42.twcny.rr.com] has joined #phrack 03:59 we're learning mips32 03:59 the r2k r3k processors 03:59 im in introduction to algebra 03:59 :D 03:59 awesome, lots of irix binaries are still in O32 format 03:59 you could own a lot of shit if u pay attention in that class 03:59 that's true 03:59 haha 04:00 well i've been playing with that and x86 assembly 04:00 can you lecture about some broad topics in mechanics 04:00 risc is much better 04:00 for the beginner? 04:00 mechanics is crap 04:00 the stuff we're doing right now is just a repeat of physics I 04:00 heh 04:00 and calc III for that matter 04:00 ;p 04:00 שםש aempirei [jibbs@midget.love] has left #phrack [] 04:01 just tell us a bit about mechanics or electrical engineering 04:01 hmm 04:01 שםש bagel- [~teller@216-119-135-241.ipset15.wt.net] has joined #phrack 04:01 ok, well i'm taking static mechanics 04:02 which deals with systems that don't move 04:02 haha 04:02 fun! 04:02 dynamics is the next mechanics course 04:02 which i don't think i have to take 04:02 (in which case i won't) 04:02 שםש aempirei [jibbs@midget.love] has joined #phrack 04:02 so we've just been reviewing stuff like dot products and cross products 04:02 particle equilibrium and stuff 04:03 it's easy 04:03 cool 04:03 tell us about dot products 04:03 ok, a dot product is an operation on two vectors 04:04 it's defined as A*B = |A||B|cos(theta) 04:04 where |A| is the magnitude of the vector 04:04 and theta is the angle between the two vectors 04:04 if they were placed tail to tail 04:04 can u use tat in computer security? 04:04 nope 04:04 damn 04:05 but it's used in computer graphics 04:05 maybe some phrack article could use it tho 04:05 haha 04:05 i mean there is a broad expanse of topics 04:05 i'll think about it 04:05 ;p 04:05 some, like hacking streetlights 04:05 שםש SignOff om: #phrack (changing servers) 04:05 haha 04:05 שםש SignOff om^: #phrack (i am just a man , fighting another man , for land , for land) 04:06 שםש om [mezuza@die.m0f0.com] has joined #phrack 04:06 i personally take offense to the article on hacking streetlights 04:06 i think it was a poor and sadistic jab at sk0t 04:06 haha 04:07 שםש mode/#phrack [+o eckis] by the_uT 04:07 my friend was killed by a traffic light 04:07 i found the article to be insensitive and discriminatory 04:07 how did it discriminate 04:07 ? 04:08 it violated my right to feel comfortable 04:08 yo continue on the 'dot' stuff 04:08 ok 04:08 so, what it tells you is how much of one vector is in the direction of another 04:09 and it's useful in solving equations, generally for theta 04:09 is this like when a guy is paddling upstream , and to the left? 04:09 well 04:09 not really 04:09 that's addition of vectors 04:09 heh 04:09 שםש mollo [~mollo@denali.ccs.neu.edu] has joined #phrack 04:10 like if he was going straight, but the stream was pulling him in a certain direction 04:10 hmm so give us an example 04:10 שםש aempirei is now known as RotProdct 04:10 you want to know the actual vector from his starting point to where he is at a given time 04:10 an example of where dot products are useful? 04:10 nah an example with #'s and a solution 04:10 they're also needed to calculate vector projections 04:11 oh ok 04:11 so let's say you have two vectors 04:11 the dot product of them is a scalar 04:11 like follows: 04:11 <1,3> * <4,2> = 1*4 + 3*2 = 10 04:11 tha tlooks kinda like perl 04:11 the magnitude of the first vector is sqrt(10) 04:12 the magnitude of the second vector is sqrt(20) 04:12 here is an easy to understand website with colorful pictures on dot products 04:12 http://mathforum.org/~klotz/Vectors/why.dot.prods.html 04:12 cool eckis 04:12 שםש RotProdct is now known as aempirei 04:12 spendy, you know much about vector/tensor analysis? 04:12 so divide 10 by sqrt(10) * sqrt(20) 04:12 take the arccosine 04:12 and you have the angle between the two vectors 04:12 nope 04:13 how did u get 'sqrt(20' ? 04:13 sqrt(4^2 + 2^2) 04:13 שםש aempirei [jibbs@midget.love] has left #phrack [] 04:13 the magnitude of the vector 04:14 just pythagorean theorem ;p 04:14 -walker-(walker@217.b.001.ncl.iprimus.net.au) hunted 04:14 שםש SignOff beet0l: #phrack (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 04:14 thank you sir for letting me know 04:14 שםש beet0l [hemroid@250-208.resnet.stonybrook.edu] has joined #phrack 04:14 spendy: given u = <2, -2>, v = <5, 8>, and w = <-4, 3> find each of the following: u * v, (u * v)w, u * (2v), ||w||2 04:14 i will be ever vigilant and watchful 04:14 ahhh 04:14 שםש SignOff om: #phrack (changing servers) 04:14 umm 04:14 שםש aempirei [jibbs@midget.love] has joined #phrack 04:14 ok 04:15 u * v = 10 - 16 = -6 04:15 שםש mod6 [~mod6@loaks-171-199.goldengate.net] has joined #phrack 04:15 שםש om [mezuza@die.m0f0.com] has joined #phrack 04:15 (u * v) w = -6 < -4, 3> = <24, -18> 04:15 25, -18 04:15 haha 04:15 שםש amad3us- is now known as Rhaaw 04:15 off by 1 04:15 you lose 04:15 no 04:15 that is an error 04:15 on the page 04:15 i am correct 04:16 שםש SignOff epic_: #phrack (excess love) 04:16 6 * 4 is most certainly 24 ;p 04:16 this is from no page 04:16 except a page in my brain 04:16 then you are wrong 04:16 :) 04:16 shall i continue? hehe 04:17 given u = i - 2j + k, and v = 3i + j - 2k, what is v*u? 04:17 quick 04:17 3 - 2 - 2 = -1 04:18 spendy 04:18 explain base-b digit reversal 04:18 hm? 04:19 digit reversal on geometric dot products 04:19 no clue 04:19 שםש SignOff _bl: #phrack ($$$$$$$$$$) 04:19 שםש SignOff om: #phrack (changing servers) 04:19 שםש SignOff akcess: #phrack () 04:19 do you know how to divide fractions 04:19 HUH? DO YOU? 04:19 שםש om [mezuza@die.m0f0.com] has joined #phrack 04:19 haha 04:20 a simple case, for any base b, is the number N = b^k, which has the representation 100..000 (k zeros) in the base b 04:20 in this case the vector is just the k-term geometric series {b^k,b} = [1, b, b^2, b^3, ..., b^k] 04:20 ok 04:21 שםש SignOff sky-: #phrack ([BX] Wouldn't it be great if the dog could walk itself?) 04:21 שםש aempirei is now known as I_RULE 04:21 if we take the dot product of this geometric vector with itself we have {b^k,b}.{b^k,b} = 1 + b^2 + b^4 + b^6 + ... + b^2k 04:21 שםש SignOff pos-: #phrack () 04:21 ok 04:21 which of course is just the euclidean formula for the kth partial sum of the geometric series in b^2 04:21 שםש I_RULE is now known as ADD_n_2_x 04:22 haha 04:22 שםש SignOff subd: #phrack () 04:22 eckis your turning me on 04:22 if we replace one of the vectors on the left hand side with a more general vector of the form {N,b} for an arbitrary integer N with k+1 digits in the base b, its not hard to show that the dot product is given by the formula: 04:22 you're typing faster than me, or pasting ;p 04:22 {N,b}.{b^k,b} = N_k + N_(k-1) b + N_(k-2) b^2 + ... + N_0 b^k 04:22 and i type pretty darn fast ;p 04:22 im typing this all 04:22 שםש prole [rbot@198.232.133.21] has joined #phrack 04:23 haha 04:23 i think eckis has one of those watcom drawing tablets 04:23 hehe 04:23 שםש ADD_n_2_x is now known as addNtoX 04:23 you must have lots of practice typing non-alphanumeric characters in with alphanumeric characters 04:23 lets just say 04:23 i have more formulas than gerber 04:23 שםש mode/#phrack [-m] by eckis 04:23 שםש addNtoX is now known as dot-com 04:23 addntox.com 04:23 haha 04:23 שםש dot-com is now known as aempirei 04:23 שםש aempirei was kicked off #phrack by eckis (Niq flood (3 nicks in 18secs of 30secs)) 04:23 שםש aempirei #phrack They aren't on that channel(from ircd.secsup.org) 04:23 word 04:23 haha 04:24 imagine 04:24 if you cared about 04:24 maths 04:24 furthermore 04:24 imagine if you were 04:24 שםש aempirei [jibbs@midget.love] has joined #phrack 04:24 spender 04:24 שםש mode/#phrack [+v aempirei] by filthj 04:24 and? 04:24 where's the punchline? 04:24