|
Title: Why do they call it man-in-the-middle attack? Post by: Xenland on September 14, 2011, 10:07:13 PM When mallory is in the middle?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/Man_in_the_middle_attack.svg/200px-Man_in_the_middle_attack.svg.png Title: Re: Why do they call it man-in-the-middle attack? Post by: Stalin-chan on September 14, 2011, 10:14:13 PM WO-man in the middle.
Title: Re: Why do they call it man-in-the-middle attack? Post by: Xenland on September 14, 2011, 11:02:44 PM WO-man in the middle. Imma edit wikipedia right now You are the man!! WO-man that is.... wait are you man? Title: Re: Why do they call it man-in-the-middle attack? Post by: ctoon6 on September 15, 2011, 03:27:16 AM WO-man in the middle. Imma edit wikipedia right now You are the man!! WO-man that is.... wait are you man? man in the middle is when somebody sits in the middle of a connection. if it were not for "trusted authorities" when certs are initially exchanged, somebody could swap out the certs with their own, so the man in the middle could read the messages and re encrypt them with his keys that they also both had. it may sound confusing, but thats why we have verisign and other idiots running around doing nothing but signing shit with their certs for large sums of capital, sometimes thousands for a single signature. Title: Re: Why do they call it man-in-the-middle attack? Post by: Xenland on September 15, 2011, 05:00:29 AM Hawt diggity dawg learn something new everyday.
WO-man in the middle. Imma edit wikipedia right now You are the man!! WO-man that is.... wait are you man? man in the middle is when somebody sits in the middle of a connection. if it were not for "trusted authorities" when certs are initially exchanged, somebody could swap out the certs with their own, so the man in the middle could read the messages and re encrypt them with his keys that they also both had. it may sound confusing, but thats why we have verisign and other idiots running around doing nothing but signing shit with their certs for large sums of capital, sometimes thousands for a single signature. Title: Re: Why do they call it man-in-the-middle attack? Post by: theymos on September 15, 2011, 06:34:57 AM In English, it is acceptable to use "masculine" words when the gender of the person is unknown. This is often the best stylistic choice. For example, it is better to say "he" than "they" when talking about a single person with unknown gender.
Title: Re: Why do they call it man-in-the-middle attack? Post by: indicasteve on September 15, 2011, 07:45:16 AM In English, it is acceptable to use "masculine" words when the gender of the person is unknown. This is often the best stylistic choice. For example, it is better to say "he" than "they" when talking about a single person with unknown gender. IDK...more and more computer texts I read use the female type instead of the s/he absurdness. But I'd really watch out cuz if Alice and Mallory every got their shit together they would totally kick the loving fuck out of Bob in a heartbeat. Title: Re: Why do they call it man-in-the-middle attack? Post by: Xenland on September 15, 2011, 03:36:43 PM In English, it is acceptable to use "masculine" words when the gender of the person is unknown. This is often the best stylistic choice. For example, it is better to say "he" than "they" when talking about a single person with unknown gender. IDK...more and more computer texts I read use the female type instead of the s/he absurdness. But I'd really watch out cuz if Alice and Mallory every got their shit together they would totally kick the loving fuck out of Bob in a heartbeat. I lawled! Good analogy.... horrible thought just now..... |
