Search Results

Search found 5685 results on 228 pages for 'encrypted partition'.

Page 50/228 | < Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >

• How do I rescue files from the encrypted home folder via live USB stick?

  - by Alexia

  I know, this has been asked and answered all over the internet already. However, I start feeling stupid, since the informations there are not helping me. Just this morning, I wanted to install the newest update to 13.10. After the download, when it came to the actual installing, the install program froze and didn't do anything for hours. At that time, I was still logged in. The computer was working and everything was accessable to me. However, I made the mistake and didn't immediately make safety copies of everything. Instead, I just rebooted. Long story short: My computer even fails to reset to a previous version via Grub. But I am able to boot from a USB stick and, after starting Nautilus, I see my home folder on the HD. I would now like to copy its contents onto an external harddisk. Problem 1: I have no rights to access the folder like that. Problem 2: It is encrypted. Problem 3: I don't know how to give myself the rights to access the folder nor do I know how to encrypt it. I assume that it might help that I still know these things: - my old login name - my old login phrase - a 32 characters long string of hexadecimal numbers that I copied to my list of passwords as "Ubuntu Encryption Code". I copied it digitally right after installing Ubuntu the first time and encrypting the home folder, so there won't be any typos. I am sure of that. The solutions that I saw so far, tell me that I need the "encryption phrase". But when I follow the instructions and use this phrase that I have in my list, I only get messages of denial. Can anyone help me through this special problem, please?

  Read the article

• If attacker has original data and encrypted data, can they determine the passphrase?

  - by Brad Cupit

  If an attacker has several distinct items (for example: e-mail addresses) and knows the encrypted value of each item, can the attacker more easily determine the secret passphrase used to encrypt those items? Meaning, can they determine the passphrase without resorting to brute force? This question may sound strange, so let me provide a use-case: User signs up to a site with their e-mail address Server sends that e-mail address a confirmation URL (for example: https://my.app.com/confirmEmailAddress/bill%40yahoo.com) Attacker can guess the confirmation URL and therefore can sign up with someone else's e-mail address, and 'confirm' it without ever having to sign in to that person's e-mail account and see the confirmation URL. This is a problem. Instead of sending the e-mail address plain text in the URL, we'll send it encrypted by a secret passphrase. (I know the attacker could still intercept the e-mail sent by the server, since e-mail are plain text, but bear with me here.) If an attacker then signs up with multiple free e-mail accounts and sees multiple URLs, each with the corresponding encrypted e-mail address, could the attacker more easily determine the passphrase used for encryption? Alternative Solution I could instead send a random number or one-way hash of their e-mail address (plus random salt). This eliminates storing the secret passphrase, but it means I need to store that random number/hash in the database. The original approach above does not require storage in the database. I'm leaning towards the the one-way-hash-stored-in-the-db, but I still would like to know the answer: does having multiple unencrypted e-mail addresses and their encrypted counterparts make it easier to determine the passphrase used?

  Read the article

• If attacker has original data, and encrypted data, can they determine the passphrase?

  - by Brad Cupit

  If an attacker has several distinct items (for example: e-mail addresses) and knows the encrypted value of each item, can the attacker more easily determine the secret passphrase used to encrypt those items? Meaning, can they determine the passphrase without resorting to brute force? This question may sound strange, so let me provide a use-case: User signs up to a site with their e-mail address Server sends that e-mail address a confirmation URL (for example: https://my.app.com/confirmEmailAddress/bill%40yahoo.com) Attacker can guess the confirmation URL and therefore can sign up with someone else's e-mail address, and 'confirm' it without ever having to sign in to that person's e-mail account and see the confirmation URL. This is a problem. Instead of sending the e-mail address plain text in the URL, we'll send it encrypted by a secret passphrase. (I know the attacker could still intercept the e-mail sent by the server, since e-mail are plain text, but bear with me here.) If an attacker then signs up with multiple free e-mail accounts and sees multiple URLs, each with the corresponding encrypted e-mail address, could the attacker more easily determine the passphrase used for encryption? Alternative Solution I could instead send a random number or one-way hash of their e-mail address (plus random salt). This eliminates storing the secret passphrase, but it means I need to store that random number/hash in the database. The original approach above does not require this extra table. I'm leaning towards the the one-way hash + extra table solution, but I still would like to know the answer: does having multiple unencrypted e-mail addresses and their encrypted counterparts make it easier to determine the passphrase used?

  Read the article

• What is an efficient way to write password cracking algorithm (python)

  - by Luminance

  This problem might be relatively simple, but I'm given two text files. One text file contains all encrypted passwords encrypted via crypt.crypt in python. The other list contains over 400k+ normal dictionary words. The assignment is that given 3 different functions which transform strings from their normal case to all different permutations of capitalizations, transforms a letter to a number (if it looks alike, e.g. G - 6, B - 8), and reverses a string. The thing is that given the 10 - 20 encrypted passwords in the password file, what is the most efficient way to get the fastest running solution in python to run those functions on dictionary word in the words file? It is given that all those words, when transformed in whatever way, will encrypt to a password in the password file. Here is the function which checks if a given string, when encrypted, is the same as the encrypted password passed in: def check_pass(plaintext,encrypted): crypted_pass = crypt.crypt(plaintext,encrypted) if crypted_pass == encrypted: return True else: return False Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• How can I partition a vector?

  - by Karsten W.

  How can I build a function slice(x, n=2) which would return a list of vectors where each vector except maybe the last has size n, i.e. slice(letters, 10) would return list(c("a", "b", "c", "d", "e", "f", "g", "h", "i", "j"), c("k", "l", "m", "n", "o", "p", "q", "r", "s", "t"), c("u", "v", "w", "x", "y", "z")) ?

  Read the article

• Table Partitioning

  - by Ankur Gahlot

  How advantageous is it to use partitioning of tables as compared to normal approach ? Is there a sort of sample case or detailed comparative analysis that could statistically ( i know this is too strong a word, but it would really help if it is illustrated by some numbers ) emphasize on the utility of the process. Thanks, Ankur

  Read the article

• Powermock Slows Down Test Startup on Eclipse/Fedora 10 when on NTFS partition

  - by MrWiggles

  I've just started having a proper play with Powermock and noticed that it slows down test startup immensely. A quick look at top while it was running shows that mount.nfts-3g was taking up most of the CPU. I moved Eclipse and my source directory to ext3 partitions to see if that was a problem and the tests now startup quicker but there's still a noticeable delay. Is this normal with Powermock or am I missing something obvious?

  Read the article

• using Linq to partition data into arrays

  - by user200295

  I have an array of elements where the element has a Flagged boolean value. 1 flagged 2 not flagged 3 not flagged 4 flagged 5 not flagged 6 not flagged 7 not flagged 8 flagged 9 not flagged I want to break it into arrays based on the flagged indicator output array 1 {1,2,3} array 2 {4,5,6,7} array 3 {8,9}

  Read the article

• How to find the latest row for each group of data

  - by Jason

  Hi All, I have a tricky problem that I'm trying to find the most effective method to solve. Here's a simplified version of my View structure. Table: Audits AuditID | PublicationID | AuditEndDate | AuditStartDate 1 | 3 | 13/05/2010 | 01/01/2010 2 | 1 | 31/12/2009 | 01/10/2009 3 | 3 | 31/03/2010 | 01/01/2010 4 | 3 | 31/12/2009 | 01/10/2009 5 | 2 | 31/03/2010 | 01/01/2010 6 | 2 | 31/12/2009 | 01/10/2009 7 | 1 | 30/09/2009 | 01/01/2009 There's 3 query's that I need from this. I need to one to get all the data. The next to get only the history data (that is, everything but exclude the latest data item by AuditEndDate) and then the last query is to obtain the latest data item (by AuditEndDate). There's an added layer of complexity that I have a date restriction (This is on a per user/group basis) where certain user groups can only see between certain dates. You'll notice this in the where clause as AuditEndDate<=blah and AuditStartDate=blah Foreach publication, select all the data available. select * from Audits Where auditEndDate<='31/03/10' and AuditStartDate='06/06/2009'; foreach publication, select all the data but Exclude the latest data available (by AuditEndDate) select * from Audits left join (select AuditId as aid, publicationID as pid and max(auditEndDate) as pend from Audit where auditenddate <= '31/03/2009' /* user restrict / group by pid) Ax on Ax.pid=Audit.pubid where pend!=Audits.auditenddate AND auditEndDate<='31/03/10' and AuditStartDate='06/06/2009' / user restrict */ Foreach publication, select only the latest data available (by AuditEndDate) select * from Audits left join (select AuditId as aid, publicationID as pid and max(auditEndDate) as pend from Audit where auditenddate <= '31/03/2009'/* user restrict / group by pid) Ax on Ax.pid=Audit.pubid where pend=Audits.auditenddate AND auditEndDate<='31/03/10' and AuditStartDate='06/06/2009' / user restrict */ So at the moment, query 1 and 3 work fine, but query 2 just returns all the data instead of the restriction. Can anyone help me? Thanks jason

  Read the article

• ideas for algorithm? sorting a list randomly with emphasis on variety

  - by Steve Eisner

  I have a table of items with [ID,ATTR1,ATTR2,ATTR3]. I'd like to select about half of the items, but try to get a random result set that is NOT clustered. In other words, there's a fairly even spread of ATTR1 values, ATTR2 values, and ATTR3 values. This does NOT necessarily represent the data as a whole, in other words, the total table may be generally concentrated on certain attribute values, but I'd like to select a subset with more variety. The attributes are not inter-related, so there's not really a correlation between ATTR1 and ATTR2. Any ideas for an efficient algorithm? Thanks! I don't really even know how to search for this :)

  Read the article

• Losing partitions after every reboot

  - by Winston Smith

  I have an Acer laptop with one hard disk, which up until yesterday had 4 partitions: Recovery Partition (13GB) C: (140GB) D: (130GB) OEM Partition (10GB) I read that the OEM partition has all the stuff needed to restore the laptop to the factory settings, but since I'd already created restore disks and I needed the space, I wanted to get rid of it. Yesterday, I used diskpart to do that. In diskpart, I selected the OEM partition and issued the delete partition override command which removed it. Then I extended the D: partition into the unused space using windows disk management. Everything worked fine, until I rebooted my laptop, at which point the D: drive vanished. Looking in windows disk management again, I can see that there's an OEM partition of 140GB, which is obviously my D: drive. So I used EASEUS Partition Master and assigned a drive letter to the 'OEM' partition and I was able to access my files again. However, every time I reboot, it reverts back. How do I fix this permanently?

  Read the article

• Copy the data of one partition to another hardisk partition..

  - by user326613

  Hi everyone.. Has anybody use CloneMaxx...i need to know that what this software actually does and how...?

  Read the article

• How to partition a plane

  - by puls200

  Let's say I have a fixed number (X) of points, e.g. coordinates within a given plane (I think you can call it a 2-D point cloud). These points should be partitioned into Y polygons where Y < X. The polygons should not overlap. It would be wonderful if the polygons were konvex (like a Voronoi diagram). Imagine it like locations forming countries. For example, I have 12 points and want to create 3 polygons with 4 points each. I thought about creating a grid which covers the points. Then iterate across the points, assigning them to the closest grid cells. Maybe I miss the obvious? I am sure there are better solutions. Thanks, Daniel I just found an optimization (kmeans++) .Maybe this will yield better results..

  Read the article

• Is it possible to put only the boot partition on a usb stick?

  - by Steve V.

  I've been looking at system encryption with ArchLinux and i think I have it pretty much figured out but I have a question about the /boot partition. Once the system is booted up is it possible to unmount the /boot partition and allow the system to continue to run? My thought was to install /boot to a USB stick since it can't be left encrypted and then boot from the USB stick which would boot up the encrypted hard disk. Then I can take the USB key out and just use the system as normal. The reason I want to do this is because if an attacker was able to get physical access to the machine they could modify the /boot partition with a keystroke logger and steal the key and if they already had a copy of the encrypted data they could just sit back and wait for the key. I guess I could come up with a system of verifying that the boot has been untouched at each startup. Has this been done before? Any guidance for implementing it on my own?

  Read the article

• Dealing with three Windows partitions in dual boot installation

  - by Tim

  For dual-boot installation of Ubuntu after Windows. Quoted from ubuntuguide If a Windows boot partition exists as a second NTFS partition, it should be left alone. If there is a Windows recovery partition also installed, it can also be left alone as long as there are only two NTFS partitions total on the hard drive (i.e. there is no NTFS boot partition as well). If there are a total of 3 NTFS partitions on the hard drive, then the third Windows NTFS partition (the recovery partition) should be removed after creating Recovery CDs from it (see here). In the last case where Windows has three partitions, I was wondering why it says the recovery partition shall be removed? Is it possible to keep the three and create another extended partition with several logical partitions for installing Ubuntu and dual-booting the two OSes? I plan to dual-boot install Ubuntu 10.04 with existing Windows 7. Following is the layout of the current partitions of my hard drive viewed from Windows 7: So must I remove the Lenovo_Recovery (Q:) partition for the same reason you give for the first question? Thanks and regards!

  Read the article

• Can I safely delete the Ubuntu 12.04 partition and use the unallocated space for my Elementary OS?

  - by d4ryl3

  I have this setup: I've decided to switch to Elementary OS Luna (fork of Ubuntu 12.04) as my main Linux distro. Now I need to delete my Ubuntu partition so I could add capacity to my eOS which only has 10Gb. Currently my eOS is in /dev/sda9, and Ubuntu in /dev/sda8/. I forgot where my bootloader is installed, so I ran bootinfoscript, which returned this: `============================= Boot Info Summary: =============================== = Grub2 (v1.99) is installed in the MBR of /dev/sda and looks at sector 1 of the same hard drive for core.img. core.img is at this location and looks in partition 94 for . sda1: __________________________________________ File system: ntfs Boot sector type: Windows Vista/7: NTFS Boot sector info: No errors found in the Boot Parameter Block. Operating System: Boot files: /bootmgr /Boot/BCD sda2: __________________________________________ File system: ntfs Boot sector type: Windows Vista/7: NTFS Boot sector info: No errors found in the Boot Parameter Block. Operating System: Windows 7 Boot files: /bootmgr /Boot/BCD /Windows/System32/winload.exe sda3: __________________________________________ File system: ntfs Boot sector type: Windows Vista/7: NTFS Boot sector info: No errors found in the Boot Parameter Block. Operating System: Boot files: /bootmgr /boot/bcd sda4: __________________________________________ File system: Extended Partition Boot sector type: - Boot sector info: sda5: __________________________________________ File system: ntfs Boot sector type: Windows Vista/7: NTFS Boot sector info: According to the info in the boot sector, sda5 starts at sector 2048. Operating System: Boot files: sda6: __________________________________________ File system: swap Boot sector type: - Boot sector info: sda7: __________________________________________ File system: ext4 Boot sector type: Grub2 (v1.99) Boot sector info: Grub2 (v1.99) is installed in the boot sector of sda7 and looks at sector 851823520 of the same hard drive for core.img, but core.img can not be found at this location. Operating System: Boot files: /grub/grub.cfg /extlinux/extlinux.conf sda8: __________________________________________ File system: ext4 Boot sector type: Grub2 (v1.99) Boot sector info: Grub2 (v1.99) is installed in the boot sector of sda8 and looks at sector 860224256 of the same hard drive for core.img. core.img is at this location and looks for (,msdos9)/boot/grub on this drive. Operating System: Ubuntu 13.04 Boot files: /etc/fstab sda9: __________________________________________ File system: ext4 Boot sector type: - Boot sector info: Operating System: elementary OS Luna Boot files: /boot/grub/grub.cfg /etc/fstab /boot/grub/core.img` I need advice as to how to proceed. I mean, could I simply delete /dev/sda7/ and /dev/sda8/? Please help, thank you.

  Read the article

• What are the appropriate mount options for a shared NTFS partition on an SSD in a dual boot Ubuntu/Windows setup?

  - by Andreas Jonsson

  I have Ubuntu 13.10 and Windows 7 installed in dual boot on a single SSD. In addition they share an NTFS partition where I put all my data and documents. What is the optimal way to mount this NTFS partition in /etc/fstab (considering performance and minimizing wear of the SSD)? Similar questions have been asked, but I could not find answers to this particular scenario. As I understand it, the mount option 'discard' is not supported for NTFS and so should not be used (although it is recommended here). Another often quoted mount option is 'noatime'. I use it for my ext4 partitions. Does it apply to NTFS? My current /etc/fstab line is: UUID=XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX /dos ntfs defaults,nls=utf8,uid=1000,gid=1000 0 0

  Read the article

• How large of a swap partition is needed to hibernate?

  - by Closure Cowboy

  I've read this question, but it doesn't definitively answer my question. If I want my computer to be able to hibernate, do I need to have a swap partition as large as my RAM, or will Ubuntu wisely be able to hibernate if the swap partition can fit the currently-in-use RAM? I'm about to install Ubuntu on a computer with a lot of RAM, and a relatively small hard drive, so I don't want to use more hard drive space than necessary. I wanted to avoid giving my actual specifications to keep this question more general, though I'll give them if necessary.

  Read the article

• Recovery from hell - undeleting partition overwritten by Xubuntu 12.10 installer?

  - by DaimyoKirby

  This is turning into a nightmare - following my initial recovery of my two partitions, I went to install Xubuntu 12.10 (again). At this time I had two partitions - one of ~39 GB had Zorin OS 6 installed on it, and another of ~33 GB had nothing installed, just a few files in it that I had manually backed up (moved) there. When I got to the partitioning step, I chose "Replace Zorin OS 6 with Xubuntu 12.10", along with LVM, naturally thinking that the installer wouldn't touch the second partition, since Zorin wasn't installed on it. I was dead wrong. Upon booting my newly installed Xubuntu 12.10, I found in gparted that there were only two partitions - ~255MB, which appears to have the boot stuff in it (it's flagged boot in gparted), and another of ~74 GB. Question: Is there any way to salvage my old files on the non-Zorin ext3 partition? I'm really upset I made such a dumb move (again...), and any and all help is appreciated very, very much!

  Read the article

• How do I move my LVM 250 GB root partition to a new 120GB hard disk?

  - by Dennis Schma

  I have the following situation: My current Ubuntu installation is running from an external HDD (250 GB) because I was to lazy to buy an new internal hdd. Now i've got a new internal (120GB) and i want to move everything to the internal. Installing Ubuntu new is out of disscussion because its to peronalized. Luckily (i hope so) the root partition is partitioned with LVM, so i hope i can move the partition to the smaller internal HDD. Is this possible? And where do i find help?

  Read the article

• large tmpfs /run partition - must it be so big?

  - by Stevod

  I am running Ubuntu 11.10 desktop on a couple of 8G RAM Wintel boxes. Both have been created automatically by the default installer with a 1.6GB tmpfs /run partition, where I suspect this amount of RAM could be more usefully used elsewhere in the system. I suspect that the installer takes 20% as the default, which is probably OK for boxes with lots less RAM, but seems overkill for an 8GB system. My question is - can I change its size, if so, how, and what are the risks in doing so? The /run partition does not appear in the /etc/fstab file so it must be set up elsewhere.

  Read the article

• Same Salt, Different Encrypted Password is not working? Using Linq to update password.

  - by Xaisoft

  Hello, I am running into a wall regarding changing the password and was wondering if anyone had any ideas. Here are the database values prior to changing the password: Clear Text password = abc1980 Encrypted Password = Yn1N5l+4AUqkOM3WYO7ww/sCN+o= Salt = 82qVIhUIoblBRIRvFSZ1fw== After I change my password to abc1973, salt remains the same, but the Encrypted Password changes which is supposed to happen: Encrypted Password = rHtjLq3qxAl/7T1GfkxrsHzPsNk= However, when I try to login with abc1973 as the password, it does not login. If I try abc1980, it logs me in. It is updating the database, is it caching the values somewhere? Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Is there an encrypted write-only file system for Linux?

  - by Grumbel

  I am searching for an encrypted filesystem for Linux that can be mounted in a write-only mode, by that I mean you should be able to mount it without supplying a password, yet still be able to write/append files, but neither should you be able to read the files you have written nor read the files already on the filesystem. Access to the files should only be given when the filesystem is mounted via the password. The purpose of this is to write log files or similar data that is only written, but never modified, without having the files themselves be exposed. File permissions don't help here as I want the data to be inaccessible even when the system is fully compromised. Does such a thing exist on Linux? Or if not, what would be the best alternative to create encrypted log files? My current workaround consists of simply piping the data through gpg --encrypt, which works, but is very cumbersome, as you can't easily get access to the filesystem as a whole, you have to pipe each file through gpg --decrypt manually.

  Read the article

• Is there an encrypted write-only file system for Linux?

  - by Grumbel

  I am searching for an encrypted file system for Linux that can be mounted in a write-only mode, by that I mean you should be able to write/append files, but not be able to read the files you have written. Access to the files should only be given when the filesystem is mounted via a password. The purpose of this is to write log files and such, without having the log files themselves be accessible. Does such a thing exist on Linux? Or if not, what would be the best alternative to create encrypted log files? My current workaround consists of simply piping the data through gpg --encrypt, which works, but is very cumbersome, as you can't get easy access to the file system as a whole, you have to pipe each file through gpg --decrypt manually.

  Read the article

• Is it possible to create a full "encrypted worried about privacy" VPS, but still being externally us

  - by Somebody still uses you MS-DOS

  I've been reading a lot of things about privacy, "being in control of your data" and everything, and now a project called diaspora* is trying to be an OSS Facebook alternative. Fact is: you still have to use a server. Even if you use a VPS somewhere, they still have access do your data, so diaspora* isn't that protective shell people are looking for absolute power over your data unless you create a server on your basement. My question is: is it possible to create a really encrypted usable server using a VPS? From database to source files? If not, what it can be "obfuscated" or encrypted? (And just a mention, not really my question, do you think is diaspora* really possible to be made?) (I know if you really want privacy you shouldn't be even using these services and being social, but I'm asking if it's possible to at least avoid companies using your data)

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >