![]() ![]() MIRC trojans often use Base 64 as mIRC has functions for this inbuilt: $encode(text,m) and $decode(text,m). Plugwash is right, of course, unless there's a key the password could easily be decrypted by reverse engineering the executable that reads it. If someone has access to the encrypted password then they almost certainly have access to the key as well! Plugwash 01:26, 19 December 2005 (UTC) Reply It's my expectation that Mozilla consider the password as stored in clear text, and use Base64 not for 'encryption' but rather in case the password contains special characters (such as the space). contribs) 00:25, 19 December 2005 (UTC) Reply Unless the user is asked to enter a key then the ONLY purpose encrypting the key serves is to prevent someone accidentally remembering a password they shouldn't when poking around in a config file.Preceding unsigned comment added by Henrique Moreira ( talk I know this is not the right placeholder for software considerations: but I found outstandingly interesting to find even Mail User Agents (MUA) use the basic concepts of Mail-encoding (as is Base64 mainly used!) for obscuring plain-text passwords. Of course, both Mozilla and Thunderbird offer an option for symmetric cyphers (increasingly more difficult to decode) on all Managed Passwords. that can be able to decode these passwords quite easily and deliver them worldwide. ![]() The majority of users will not notice these security flaws, nor even bother their personal data is subject of Trojans in their desktops. that's why I posted this opinion in this discussion article). This does not detract nor diminishes the great software provided by Mozilla (subjective opinion I know. The password can be easily decoded, and is: Monkey. Type stands for your username in a Windows XP distribution, for example. I updated recently this article to include the vast usage possible for Base64, including in freeware applications like Mozilla and Thunderbird.Ĭ:\Documents and Settings\\Application Data\Thunderbird\Profiles\.default Paolo Liberatore ( Talk) 17:00, 30 November 2005 (UTC) Reply Obviously, there is not much to say about the numeral system, except that it is the base of the base64 encoding. Sorry folks, I made a mistake here: in spite of what I remembered, the numeral system used by the Babylonians was base 60, not 64 (we also divide time in 60th for this reason). Ilmari Karonen ( talk) 15:52, 30 November 2005 (UTC) Reply Plugwash 15:47, 30 November 2005 (UTC) Reply I rather agree, particularly since the numeral system isn't particularly notable except for its use in the encoding. The page describes a numeral system and then goes onto describe its uses I see nothing wrong with this structure. I'm not sure i'd call them completely different after all a binary file is really just a very big number if you think about it. Paolo Liberatore ( Talk) 15:05, 30 November 2005 (UTC) Reply Anyway, I think that a split with a disabiguation page is in order. Actually, I think that the numeral system should be "Base 64" with a space, but I am not sure.The page currently is about two completely different things: ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |