Damus

Recent Notes

note1mq372...
Jacob Christian Munch-Andersen profile picture
@nprofile1q... @nprofile1q... I don't want to draw the conclusion too broadly, it is most certainly complicated, with a lot of "depends". I don't recall all that much about Go, but doesn't it allow you to make a simple array of structs? (Probably called something different.) That would have the same effect on garbage collection.

Of course struct-of-arrays can be faster regardless of language if your access pattern happens to favour that paradigm.
note1vag0r...
Jacob Christian Munch-Andersen profile picture
@nprofile1q... @nprofile1q... That is probably mostly an artefact of coding around the garbage collector. An array of 1M objects with 10 simple values each is 1000001 objects, whereas 10 arrays of 1M simple values each is 10 objects.

You have effectively broken garbage collection, but you have also reduced the number of objects that the collector has to consider so much that even a quite badly coded collector can't do much performance damage.
Soatok Dreamseeker · 4w
nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyd968gmewwp6kyqpqq2q3v2cfmwnz8nhmv3wvva5vgmmkdty0gd5kd7mpn9smkplzjuusts26t9 Not to my knowledge
Tom Forsyth · 8w
nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyd968gmewwp6kyqpqq2q3v2cfmwnz8nhmv3wvva5vgmmkdty0gd5kd7mpn9smkplzjuusts26t9 Ah, it would be in 2029. Derp. Well spotted!
Jacob Christian Munch-Andersen profile picture
So, I was just casually checking my Gmail spam box, and i found an email from Google. Of course you would just think that this is some scammer impersonating Google, but everything checks out. It is from the google.com domain, SPF, DKIM and DMARC all pass.

The content of the email is telling me that "because EU" I get to configure whether or not particular Google services are linked.

I wonder how that made it to the spam folder.

#google #gmail #eu #regulation #antitrust

Jacob Christian Munch-Andersen profile picture
@nprofile1q... I read your old post on key sizes, unfortunately still relevant: https://blog.cr.yp.to/20151120-batchattacks.html

I noted two points that it probably should mention, but doesn't:

1. That the issue also apply to random number generators, all cryptographic algorithms are vulnerable if their key stems from an RNG with 128 bits of state.

2. That mitigation is free. For most symmetric algorithms a change that increases key/state size does not have to increase computation.
1
Daniel J. Bernstein · 10w
nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyd968gmewwp6kyqpqq2q3v2cfmwnz8nhmv3wvva5vgmmkdty0gd5kd7mpn9smkplzjuusts26t9 Yeah, it's very low cost to just use 256-bit secrets everywhere. I commented on this in more detail in https://cr.yp.to/papers.html#bruteforce.
Jacob Christian Munch-Andersen profile picture
Idea: Single use virtual memory.

Don't bother ever reusing the same virtual memory space, you always allocate in a new place, and once you free it is gone.

If you have a true 64 bit virtual memory space then this is surprisingly practical. There is no remotely realistic scenario where you are ever going to run out.

Upsides include a dead simple allocator, and a guarantee that use-after-free will result in a hardware exception. What is not to like?
Poul-Henning Kamp · 17w
nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyd968gmewwp6kyqpqq2q3v2cfmwnz8nhmv3wvva5vgmmkdty0gd5kd7mpn9smkplzjuusts26t9 nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyd968gmewwp6kyqpqtjrq2yl9k9fqwq6wt0k8n22xf7uhxsdz9d7gqtzrp4t0asarazeqrxucdq nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyd968gmewwp6kyqpqechk2en2f6vv9e2nn...