Reddit Posts
Technical Deep Dive: Bypassing Yahoo Finance’s new "Crumb" & Session protection for Options Data
[DIY Filing Alerts] Part 3 of 3: Building the Script and Automating Your Alerts
Calls on ASX: TLS after 4th of July
Nubeva Technologies Overview - Innovative Cybersecurity Technology
TLS YOLO. Bought at open fml. Sold half stop loss for 2k gain. Gonna double down again end of day. That dip messed me up.
Nubeva Validates TLS Decryption Support for Windows 11
Biden planning an executive order on cybersecurity?! ($TLS, $PLTR, $CRWD) 👀
Anyone see Telos ($TLS) crush its first earnings? Crowdstrike cybersecurity competitor and big in government contracts
Mentions
Because identity verification is an infrastructure layer, not the government service itself. We already accept this boundary elsewhere. The government doesn’t run its own certificate authority or build its own TLS implementation. It relies on private infrastructure to establish trust while retaining control of the actual service. Treasury still controls your account and decides whether to authorize access; ID.me is verifying that you’re you. You can argue identity is a layer the government shouldn’t outsource, but “it’s a government service” doesn’t mean every piece of it has to be government-run.
Timmy's Lemonade Stand Inc.'s IPO didn't go as well as planned. Despite being the highest earning lemonade stand on Finkbiner St. in that neighborhood, experts are already predicting an even sharper downturn following the summer season when school starts again. Those in the know have already begun shorting TLS Inc.
If you are moving towards growth, BGBL or IVV are both solid for diversifying away from the ASX concentration. Since RIO/TLS are already \~47% of your portfolio, adding more tickers like QAU might just clutter the portfolio without providing significant risk-adjusted benefit. Focusing your $1000 on DHHF or BGBL to smooth out that idiosyncratic risk seems more robust. On the TWR point -- it is less about dollar gains and more about understanding if your active picks (RIO/TLS) are actually generating alpha over a simple total market index after accounting for the timing of your DRPs.
Since you're looking to add another $1000, have you calculated your current allocation drift? With RIO and TLS making up nearly 50% of your portfolio, you're heavily concentrated in just two names. Instead of adding a new ticker like QAU, it might be more effective to use that $1000 to rebalance towards your core index holdings (DHHF/IOZ) to bring your idiosyncratic risk back in line. Also, when you evaluate your performance, are you looking at TWR to see how your picks are actually performing against the benchmark, or just the absolute dollar gains?
I have * **RIO:** 25.56% * **TLS:** 21.74% * **IOZ:** 15.51% * **NDQ:** 13.49% * **DHHF:** 11.39% * **GHHF:** 10.70% Looking at adding QAU unless someone has another recommendations and trying to decide between IVV and BGBL I won't sell RIO, TLS, GHHF but could be convinced. Im looking at putting another $1000 in and wondering where? Thank you
There's a technical term for this, TLS - trading like shit
At one point it was a secure payment option when you couldn’t just take for granted that online payment info was secured at all. Back when it was a lot more common to see sites without ssl/TLS encryption. It was basically universally used for “instant” cashless transactions between people when someone who wasn’t a storefront was selling some of their items online.
There a few quantum algorithms like Grover's algorithm and Shors'. That reduce the complexity of very specific problems. Quantum resistant algorithms just avoid those very specific problems to not be exposed to the exponential or super polynomial speedup Some quantum resistant algorithms include MLKEM and Sntroup, which are already deployed in the wild through openSSH and in TLS 1.3 at least for cloudflare. https://developers.cloudflare.com/ssl/post-quantum-cryptography/
Like you said DNS been around forever. It’s also lead to many big oh shit moments, so this isn’t new. It like TLS certs, everything is good until you fire that one dude who has the ‘tism for TLS certs or DNS. Just a couple years ago I think it was Mastercard or discover had an issue a security research found in DNS that woulda allowed you to receive some of their traffic, lol.
The world is already deploying post quantum cryptography to protect the Internet for things like TLS, including banks. Bitcoin is specifically weak here in ways that most of the financial world is not.
> Why is this important? PLUG being partnered with QNC makes them **the first and only energy hardware manufacturer to use Quantum backed security to be able to secure their hardware/the electrical grid.** Technobabble. You don't need "quantum backed security" to achieve quantum resistance, and you don't need a new product to get quantum resistance in current protocols. For example in TLS the ciphersuite is negotiated between the client/server, with the client sending a list of ciphers it supports in the ClientHello and the server selecting one in the ServerHello response. Changing the supported ciphersuites available for negotiation is a trivial configuration change in a serverside text file.
Lol, yes, I intentionally left out the /s in my response. Never seen someone shut down TLS in the manner done above. It does a bit more than just a blue checkmark, HTTPS is a good thing!
> Sounds like we’re fucked then. As a kid, I got the elementary school version of media literacy / staying safe online course. If that education had continued through grades, we might have a reasonably well educated generation or two that can look at some bit of content and be able to make a nuanced evaluation of weather or not it's been faked or not and to what degree. I don't think all hope is lost... assuming we stop thinking that all problems have a cheap, simple, effective solution rooted in tech. Tech is not the problem, it's how it's used that is the problem. Ergo, your root cause is not the tech, it's the people using the tech. --- > Edit: this is worth a read and includes some rebuttal of your points I'm familiar w/ the article. Speaking of media literacy, it's important to know who authored that content and what they're qualifications are vs are not. Helpfully, the author has done some of that for you: > <...> making it very hard for anyone to steal the private key. (But nothing is perfect; a real security expert would assume that a serious well-resourced hacker could crack and steal. More below.) Hi, it's me, a guy that works with real security experts and moonlights as one on the side. Generally speaking, this is true; you will never be able to guarantee that hardware in hostile environment has been untampered with. If that hardware is the **root** from which all further "yep, this is real and not modified" claims will derive, you're screwed and will inevitably get false positives. If the whole point was to have something that is always trustworthy, you've done nothing but condition people to rely on something that can be made to lie to them. If there's a 1% chance that my screen shows me something that C2PA says is genuine and I have no way of knowing which content is going to be the false positive, what was the point? How is this any different from _now_ when I already look at anything my screen shows me with some skepticism. Arguably, now is _better_ because I've not been lulled into relying on a little blue check mark to "confirm" that the image is "genuine"; my guard hasn't been surreptitiously lowered! > Remember, “signature chaining”; it’s magic. It isn't magic, it's math. The math works, but only when used properly. C2PA has been shown to _not_ use this math properly [which is why/how it is possible to create obviously fake but still C2PA/Genuine image](https://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/1044-From-VIDA-to-SEAL.html); my whole point / problem is that C2PA is not perfect but is desperately trying to market itsself as something people can rely on and that'll come back to bite _everybody_. > No, because I want to protect my privacy! · A perfectly reasonable objection; <...> So: It is dead easy to strip the metadata, including the C2PA stuff, from any media file. The [NFT crowd also lost their shit over this](https://www.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/comments/10an1c4/psa_right_clicking_and_saving_an_nft_is_just_like/). I can take a screenshot to strip all of the C2PA data and retain pixel perfect accuracy (assuming scaling, resolution, color-profiles are accounted for...) I can then add my own C2PA and ... now we have two identical images that genuinely/authentically originate from two different people that both claim to be the genuine creator of $thing. What could go wrong? > No, because hackers will steal the private key and sign disinformation! · Definitely possible; I mentioned this above. When it comes to computer security, nothing is perfect. All you can ever do is make life more difficult and expensive for the bad guys; eventually, the attack becomes uneconomic. Or steal/buy the master keys from the camera maker. Data breaches are far more common than they are disclosed. Sensitive key material has been [stolen](https://www.reversinglabs.com/blog/msi-uefi-key-breach-how-safe-are-your-secrets) multiple [times](https://arstechnica.com/security/2023/08/facing-failure-after-failure-microsofts-driver-signing-program-fails-yet-again/) and we're still mopping up; a stolen master key **and every child key it's created** must be immediately revoked if there's to be any trust in the system. If a camera maker looses their keys, **every camera that's ever been manufactured using those keys must now be distrusted**. Any "offline" system that hasn't yet gotten the news that all prior keys from $cameraMaker are to be distrusted will still say that fraudulent material is genuine. Can you imagine spending a few grand on a camera and then 6 months later Cannon sends you a letter saying that nobody is going to trust any photo taken from your camera ever again through no fault of your own? Oh, and as a one-time courtesy, they'll re-key your camera for only 50% of what you paid for it if you send it in to them. No, they are not going to reimburse you for lost income while your money-making tools are in for service. Basically, it's all of the same issues we have right now / today with PKI and TLS except you're brining hardware into the mix which scales the difficulty quadratically. It's already Sisyphean task to update a fleet of devices to use new certificates at scale and that's _just_ software.
It asks for a wallet private key to 'link'. They've got all the TLS certs working, the urls look clean on the mobile app. But I still think it's a scam, a very well executed scam
$MDB MongoDB is trash and the Indian CEO is pretty much a scammer. He is lying like he breathes. He and the company will most likely end up in lawsuit. They also have no more tech advantage… I have 3 main reasons why MongoDB will end worthless. The quotes in reason 1 and 2 are just from investor meeting from 18.09.2025, so pretty much new and you can watch it at YouTube at MongoDB‘s channel. Only by listening CEO‘s one single speech it was enough for me to understand he is a big liar (yes, I am back-end software engineer and I use all databases). ⸻ Reason 1: No tech advantage anymore while Hyperscalers eating MongoDB up • CEO Quote: “There’s limits to what these platforms can do because they were not architected from day one to be a native JSON database.” → Lie: PostgreSQL JSONB has been mature since 2014, widely used, and more powerful (especially with relational + json support it is hybrid, MongoDB is not!). And, and, and it is free! Even OpenAI is using Postgre… • CEO Quote: “We offer a semantic engine and a lexical search engine.” → Lie: Atlas Search is just Lucene — the same engine used by Elasticsearch, OpenSearch, etc. Not unique at all. • CEO Quote: “We also offer world class embedding and reranking models.” → Lie: Mongo only recently bolted on vector search. Pinecone, Weaviate, Milvus, AWS, Azure, GCP are far ahead. Mongo is catching up, not leading. ⸻ Reason 2: CEO keeps blatantly lying, speaks half-truth and presented wrong charts yesterday in Investor Meeting • CEO Quote: “In Postgres, if you add JSON support. Any document over two kilobytes in size has to do something called off-row storage… adds performance overhead.” → Lie: Half-truth. TOAST applies to all large fields (TEXT, BYTEA, XML), not just JSON. Overhead is minimal unless constantly querying huge JSON blobs. • CEO Quote: “You want to be trusted that you’re secure, available, and performant in demanding use cases.” → Lie: Half-truth. Hyperscalers’ DBs (DynamoDB, CosmosDB, Bigtable) are more trusted for mission-critical workloads. Mongo criticized for cost, scaling, and licensing. • Investor Presentation Slide: Postgres marked “X” under Flexible Model. → Lie: PostgreSQL supports relational tables and unstructured JSONB. Often more flexible. • Investor Presentation Slide: Postgres marked “X” under Native Queryable Encryption. → Lie: PostgreSQL already supports pgcrypto, SSL/TLS, TDE forks. Not unique to MongoDB. • Investor Presentation Slide: Postgres marked “X” under Run Anywhere. → Lie: PostgreSQL runs everywhere (bare metal, Docker, VMs, Kubernetes, managed clouds). • Investor Presentation Slide: Postgres marked “X” under Managed Offering. → Lie: Every cloud has managed Postgres (Supabase, Timescale, Neon, Crunchy, AlloyDB). • Investor Presentation Slide: Postgres marked “X” under Scaling & Sharding. → Lie: Postgres has sharding via Citus, CockroachDB, Yugabyte. Advantage shrinking. ⸻ Reason 3: Stock setup is broken and valuation insane • Stock has already been removed from an index, losing passive inflows. • Price action weak, volume extremely low, no retail interest. • MongoDB did buybacks with no real cash flow just to support price, while insiders keep dumping (0 insider buys in history). • CEO himself said DB market is $100B+, but MongoDB has <2% share. Despite that, its market cap is $27B — massively overpriced. • Forward P/E ~80, even higher than AWS, Microsoft, Google, Oracle — all of which dominate DB market with real profitability
Asked ChatGPT to do this. IRA: •. VOO – ~$8,300 (~22%) • VGT – ~$5,700 (~15%) • VUG – ~$4,500 (~12%) • IBN (ICICI Bank) – ~$3,500 (~9%) Total IRA: ~$22,000 (~47% of total portfolio) Brokerage • NVDA – $2,073 (~7.2%) • DAL (Delta) – $2,050 (~7.1%) • BTC (Coinbase) – $2,615 (~9.1%) • NIO – $697 (~2.4%) • Speculative Plays (TLS, Unity, LPSN) – $620 (approx) (~2.2%) Total brokerage: ~$8,055
I'm not saying it's a y2k thing, but I expect industry migrations to take at least a decade: see how long the move off of TLS 1.0 took. But we're getting into software maintenance talk, not investing. :)
Is privacy concerns really an issue anymore, given that cloud flare hosts like half the internet through their servers and does TLS termination, so they are able to read your traffic in cleartext.
TLS below 200 tomorrow definitely maybe
TLS. Like bbai but 250mcap, huge contract,good balance sheet and revenue
Ty, instead of implementing a TLS strategy buying popular daily mover stocks at the peak and panic selling (trading like shit) I'm focused on wheeling the S&P and gaining good long term dividend stocks. It's slow, but it's working better than what I was doing previously lol
Simple, don't TLS. (Trade like sh*t) I'm fucking joking, it sucks doesn't it? If a stock you hold is up 4% and it starts bombing, sell in the profit zone and buy the dip. If you can't be awake during certain hours (trust me I get it, I'm AU so US market hours suck for me) just set a stop loss/profit take on GTC 90 day with open orders at certain prices to reload, and adjust as needed based on your circumstances.
TLS seems too risky: Overview: Telos Corporation, along with its subsidiaries, offers cyber, cloud, and enterprise security solutions globally and has a market cap of $254.78 million. Operations: The company generates revenue through its Secure Networks segment, which accounts for $47.47 million, and its Security Solutions segment, contributing $75.49 million. Market Cap: $254.78M Telos Corporation, with a market cap of US$254.78 million, is expanding its TSA PreCheck enrollment centers across the U.S., enhancing its footprint in consumer services. The recent on-ramp as a prime contractor for the U.S. Navy’s SeaPort Next Generation contract could provide future revenue opportunities until 2028. Despite being debt-free and having strong short-term asset coverage over liabilities, Telos remains unprofitable and has seen increasing losses over five years. Its stock trades at a significant discount to estimated fair value, yet it holds sufficient cash runway for over three years based on current free cash flow levels.
That's true, too. But in terms of finance, TLS is a steady and sustainable part, low-risk Low-return. And AISP is like a high-return high-risk.
Cooperative relations with the government, and like Palantier and Big Bear relations, ACN with TLS
Whats the drive behind TLS?
I see, is it because the AISP outlook looks better than the TLS outlook?
I’m holding BBAI as well not going to sell, but considering adding TLS as well as AISP
Penny stocks are notably tough to decipher what is a PnD, short play, or a long-term breakout candidate. As with all other stocks you have to diversify your penny portfolio so one bad news day doesn’t completely decimate your portfolio. Breakout candidates: GRRR, INBS, MBOT, KULR Recent buys: LFWD, LUCD, CPSH, TLS
> Unhackable... how do you know this? Because someone told you?? I work as a programmer and part of my job is IT security. Yes, Bitcoin is unhackable. I've been through the source code and I'm familiar with the security protocols. Do you know how long it would take you to "guess" someone's bitcoin private key given a public key? Over 100 billion years, and that's assuming you had a Amazon's worth of computing power for half the earth's population... and 4 billion copies of earth... in 4 billion galaxies each with 4 billion copies of earth. So basically impossible. Not to mention that most if not ALL of the encryption algorithms essentially use the same protocols, so if bitcoin gets hacked, so has TLS, HTTPS and basically all security that we use electronically.
> Unhackable... how do you know this? Because someone told you?? I work in IT and part of my job is IT security. Yes, Bitcoin is unhackable. I've been through the source code and I'm familiar with the security protocols. Do you know how long it would take you to "guess" someone's bitcoin private key given a public key? Over 100 billion years, and that's assuming you had a Amazon's worth of computing power for half the earth's population... and 4 billion copies of earth... in 4 billion galaxies with copies of earth. So basically impossible. Not to mention that most of not ALL of the encryption algorithms essentially use the same protocols, so if bitcoin gets hacked, so has TLS, HTTPS and basically all security that we use electronically.
I like how it's 2024, google is free, AI is free, and STILL people parrot shit about crypto that they have no actual knowledge on aside from what 1 or 2 articles they read. "QuANtUm cOMpuTiNG wIlL MakE BTc wORtHlEss" is used way too much. Like QC will make everything internet currently useless. TLS itself would be broken. But they're crying over BTC at that point rather than all sensitive PII becoming public lol.
Quantum computing will harm TLS and most other crypto more than it’ll harm most of Bitcoin. The more recent taproot change will be unhappy but isn’t very widely used. If you don’t reuse addresses an attacker needs to find the preimage of a hash function to get anywhere and quantum computing doesn’t help with that at all. The RSA and ECDSA algorithms securing all your https traffic though are exactly what quantum computers are significantly better at. That said, with today’s numbers of qubits it’s going to take a major revolution/breakthrough to get anywhere close to endangering anyone’s security. It’s hard to say that won’t happen tomorrow, but there’s also no guarantee it’s even possible. We definitely have nothing to worry about if we keep adding qubits at the current pace or even realistic multiples of it
> Quantum computing is seen as the crypto killer Seen as such by whom? Naive investors? Bitcoin (and other major chains) have had quantum-resistant updates proposed and specced out for years. The network can update to a quantum resistant algorithm when the time comes. Quantum can't break our current modes of encryption, and crypto won't be the first target when it does. If quantum is attacking Bitcoin, TLS/SSL (aka the foundation of the modern internet) would already be cooked and the current banking/payment networks would have already been compromised. Crypto is safer from quantum than the current HTTPS infrastructure, because crypto can pivot to a new algorithm in a matter of hours whilst the international banking system has no such mechanism.
Me with TLS. Fuck that pig. I hope it drills to zero.
I miss the z10 and the passport. I rocked the passport all the way up till things like TLS and radio updates were no longer being updated. Shame that it got treated dirty like that.
DAYUUUM TLS, what happened? anyone know?
DAYUUUM TLS, what happened? anyone know?
> Do you even realize what you quoted? Like just read the first line "An Extended Validation (EV) certificate is a type of TLS/SSL certificate". You are quoting what a web certificate is. Do you think you use a web certificate for signing kernel mode drivers? lmao Yeah, sorry. I completely fucked up and pulled the EV cert definition. The process requires two certificates, an SPC and an Embedded Signature from the Microsoft Hardware Dev Center. The SPC process is mostly the same as an EV SSL certificate. It does not require any interaction with Microsoft, nor is it Cross-Signed anymore. Instead, the Embedded Signature now comes solely from the Microsoft Cert Authority. > Okay and a usermode application cannot access kernel mode APIs. To access them you need a signed kernel driver. No where does that document state it is only for User Mode applications. That document is for all software that competes with Microsoft built software, including Microsoft Defender, which uses Kernel Mode APIs, thus Kernel Mode APIs fall under that document. > "crowdstrike used their software license to publish unlicensed product" Never once did I call the product Unlicensed. I stated that Microsoft is not allowed to control access to kernel mode API's. There is a verification process for signing kernel-mode drivers, but if a company - IE: CloudStrike, writes a Kernel Mode Driver, then their software causes said driver to crash - That is no fault of the MS certification process. MS is only responsible for passing the Kernel Mode Driver thru the HLK Validation process. They do not control, test, or validate any software written ontop of those drivers. So the issue is: * Kernel Mode Driver (CrowdStrike Falcon) has full Kernel Mode API access * CrowdStrike builds driver to run Definition Files at runtime * Definition files ARE NOT validated thru WHQL * Driver passes WHQL tests * CrowdStrike builds bad definition file that tells Kernel Mode API to run bad code Dave Plummer (previous Windows developer) does a really good job of breaking down how this problem likely occurred. This problem solely exists on the CrowdStrike side - [CrowdStrike IT Outage Explained by a Windows Developer (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAzEJxOo1ts)
> Getting an EV certificate has nothing to do with Microsoft. The process is completely out of their hands. First of all I did not say anything about Microsoft to begin with, second every single valid EV certificate is cross signed by microsoft, and as of 2021 microsoft is the sole provider of kernel mode signatures. > That document outlines the way in which Microsoft must conduct business in the EU, including their Interoperability Commitment to allow third-party software to access the same API's that Microsoft uses to build competing software. Okay and a usermode application cannot access kernel mode APIs. To access them you need a signed kernel driver. > This is why Kernel Level APIs are available on Windows. Kernel level APIs are available for kernel level drivers. To access them you need a signed kernel driver. Do I have to remind what your claim was? "crowdstrike used their software license to publish unlicensed product" and "This was only possible because of EU regulation", which is vehemently false. You cannot publish an unsigned driver. > When the company applies for an EV certificate through any of the certificate authorities, the difference is the validation that they are a legitimate business with legitimate needs for an EV certificate. Do you even realize what you quoted? Like just read the first line "An Extended Validation (EV) certificate is a type of TLS/SSL certificate". You are quoting what a web certificate is. Do you think you use a web certificate for signing kernel mode drivers? lmao
Getting an EV certificate has nothing to do with Microsoft. The process is completely out of their hands. The document I linked is the agreement that Microsoft built with the EU. That document outlines the way in which Microsoft must conduct business in the EU, including their Interoperability Commitment to allow third-party software to access the same API's that Microsoft uses to build competing software. This is why Kernel Level APIs are available on Windows. EV certificate authentication does not include any sort of software validation thru Microsoft, vetting of said software, testing process, or anything beyond validation that when the company applies for an EV certificate, that they are a legitimate business with legitimate needs for an EV certificate. > An Extended Validation (EV) certificate is a type of TLS/SSL certificate that verifies that the certificate holder has undergone the most extensive level of vetting and identity background checks to certify that their website is authentic and legitimate. EV certificates are often required for high-profile brands, banks and other Fortune 500 companies. Extended validation means the certificate recipient and their website have completed a 16-point check to verify details such as: website domain, website owner, and the applicant’s legal, physical, and operational existence and identity.
Imo caused by „DigiCert mass-revoking TLS certificates due to domain validation bug“ Azure was malfunctioning for some time.
$TLS looking to break $4.25. If it does, can it challenge the June high of $5? $ELEV hit the support at around $2.55 and is looking to make a higher high. If it does it can make a run into the $3.50 - $4.00 range.
I am open minded person and I like the challenge of working with new stuff, as long as they give us enough resources to get started with and they don’t start asking to purchase annual license, I am in. 3 things I look forward, Ethernet, WiFi and cryptography for TLS support and we 💪. They should have kept Atmel Studio alive tho imo
The entire API is documented pretty well. If you dig into the code, some of the header file have no documentation at all, especially on the lwip and netif API. But they do have tons of example projects in GitHub to work with. I got started with ESP32 tree years ago, and they came a long way. I can’t find any other company that offer what they do with competitive pricing. If I can suggest something, if Microchip could release a SoC similar to an ESP32, with either Linux or FreeRTOS with full lwip and TLS support, I would love to switch in a heartbeat. Ethernet and WiFi options are important.
Yea, I believe the acquisition happened like 6 years ago. I have been programming and designing PCB around Atmel MCU for 15 years now, it’s my favorite brand. I do love their ATXMega series, it provides DMA for asynchronous IO and their complexity is far less than a ATSam ARM versions. I am a AVR junky. Recently I had to switch to EsspressIf because sadly Atmel have nothing comparable with WiFi and Ethernet. I was using ATSam4E16xx for a main controller board that was powered via PoE, but they have no WiFi options. Also lwip library overhead started give problems with missed frames on busy network where port isolation wasn’t available. I believe the CPU can’t jump fast enough to the ISR and free the DMA channels for the EMAC peripheral. We had similar problems with a STM, and the ESP32 seems to handle the lwip and embedTLS very well. I bought the ATSamA5D3, as it can run Linux and should handle TCP stock and TLS, but haven’t had time to try it. Downside is this is significantly more complex hardware design then drop an ESP32 module on a PCB, and way more expensive BOM. I really wish Atmel do make an ESP32 equivalent option. https://preview.redd.it/n81eb5euatyc1.png?width=3024&format=png&auto=webp&s=1585bff43ed44cf07dc902d74477086bc9179d59
toothless laugh spammer (TLS), neat, I like the acronym.
Interesting. I did not: https://imgur.com/a/zhD6TLS
I used to think the same, but quantum computing has taken so long to come about that encryption is getting ahead of the curve just slightly. https://security.apple.com/blog/imessage-pq3/ Ideally more algorithms, like TLS, are upgraded before any major quantum breakthroughs happen.
This is the TLS strategy in action
You may want to look more into how TLS and IKE works and build a POC. You have to use data.
Uhhh you know VOIP can use TLS which is encryption already right? You're literally proposing to design nothing new, radical, or different.
>What, you think your bank is going to be safe when SHA-256 gets broken? If that’s the only algorithm that’s broken then yes. TLS and password storage don’t strictly depend on SHA-256. I would be far more concerned if asymmetric algorithms were broken.
SOUN, TLS Both great tech but shit management.
An issue becoming more common is that your TLS CA certificates expires, so unless you find a way to import new certificates lot of things will stop working.
the market cap for ASX: TLS is $49.68 billion Aussie dollars.
Well you see the problem is you used the TLS strategy
TLS up 22% today. Been a low volume shit show for 6 months. Did they learn to say "AI" or something? I aint complaining, my bags is heavy.
Even my TLS bags I been carrying forever is up 7% this morning. They must have whispered AI somewhere.
I was gonna ask you to prove your assertion, but as someone who's been an individual contributor in the industry for 30 years and has several startup successes bringing teams of people who you would say "add no value whatsoever" to strong successful ends by leveraging their strengths with high multiple acquisitions, you don't really know anything about the industry or the people in it. And even if you did, you certainly wouldn't have the position to say that a huge amount of tech workers add no value whatsoever. So I initially assumed you were just a troll account... but then I read your posts and comments and I realize you're just a fucking moron. Seriously, your posts are stupid fucking questions and nonsensical bullshit that you repeat from shit other people told you. As far as I can tell, you don't even have an individual personality aside from something that appears to be scum at the bottom of an old coffee cup. BUT I think you still have value, even though I couldn't trust you to do something like change a TLS cert or reboot a tomcat or install a new model in an undocumented neural net data intake feed with poor log output written by a dev team that didn't do any work towards making their product usable in favor of expanded feature creep. That last thing you'd be completely incapable of doing. In fact I'm 100% certain looking at your posts that you have no fucking idea what I just said. I would still hire you, though... because beyond that facade of absolute fucking stupidity, there' s a clear drive in you to try to improve. And see, here's the thing... even for total lost causes, as long as they demonstrate motivation and some degree of baseline intelligence, there's a job for them. I wouldn't trust you with anything technical, but you can lick my feet while I rest my fucking cock on your head (seriously, this shit gets tired through the day...) while I use your back for a table for my coffee. Extra hot. Some people in IT are underutilized. Some people have limits that others don't... what we do is we have them do lower end work. That's not useless, that take mundane workload off of more talented engineers. Which someone would know if they were in the industry and not a self-promoting dildo. I'd say "get back in your fuckin' lane" but based on your comment history your only obsession is shitbox cars and the fact that you don't know how to fucking tune a guitar... so asking you to be in a lane at all is probably a bit much.
Eh, Kyber is already one of NIST's choices for post-quantum cryptography. If you're using Cloudflare, [you get traffic routed through TLS 1.3 secured with Kyber for free](https://blog.cloudflare.com/post-quantum-for-all/).
Yes! Apr 25 @ 12:00 PM to be exact. The day I decided to stop TLS. Life changing. Eye opening. Penis size enhancing. IQ levels elevating. Muscular structure defining. I feel like I just evolved.
the 無為 way of investing or as I call it TLS, trading like shit
So many to choose from. Let' see... GOEV -90% MVST -78% MQ -72% TLS -71% DNA -69%
True. Looks like whoever runs that site let their TLS certificate expire. Pretty embarrassing for the CBOE, since that site is an affiliate of the CBOE.
I got stuck bag holding $TLS. I'm hoping today's news will help this up a little... "Telos Corporation Receives $32.5 Million U.S. Air Force Contract for Defensive Cyber Operations Support"
Merry Christmas, now stop Trading Like Shit (TLS).
I am a bot. You submitted a picture of a banned ticker, TLS. The market cap of TLS is **232523200** This check will fire if you included unnecessary pictures that have bad keywords/phrases. Repost with the useless pictures omitted if you did that.
$TLS continues to drill. What a shit company.
> Quantum computing will be able to simply solve those problems sometime in the next 6-7 years Ethereum (and most blockchains) all use very standard cryptographic primitives. SHA2 / SHA3 for hashing, ECC (elliptic curve cryptography) for asymetric encryption. Know what else uses those primitives? ***EVERYTHING.*** SSH tunnels, VPN traffic, HTTP over TLS/SSL, version control software, x509 certificates, pretty much all government communications, you name it. If a quantum computer rolls out that can crack those primitives, Ethereum failing will be one tiny ember on the burning log that is the finance industry, all within a huge raging forest fire that is pretty much all of the public internet. Even if SHA3 or ECC is cracked, and crypto is 10x it's current size, I think there will still be much more viable targets. Because the last thing you'll want to do is something that makes people aware you can break those algorithms. Regardless, Ethereum has already thought of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDxpGMGSGDE > Crypto has uses but it cannot be a replacement for government backed currencies. That's just one [potential] use case among 100s (1000s even). Ethereum has DeFi, DAOs, NFTs, etc... > We can keep muddling along with the current mostly safe algorithms for fast transactions but crypto is not a currency. It is a con game covered in a techno babble bubble. that statement literally means nothing. > The way cons work best is to get the sucker emotionally attached to the con so they can’t think clearly about what they are buying. Anytime someone tells you to trust the magic box that you don’t understand they are running a con. See Bernie Madoff for details on how to start your own successful con. That doesn't explain one single aspect of how you think crypto (Ethereum being one of the leading ones) is a con. You literally haven't explained a single reason to back up your "con" claim. Good try though. Thanks for playing.
Calls/shares on LMT, TLS, and RTX.
SSL/TLS is end to end and not going to see the traffic.
With SSL (now TLS), you can still see what IP address the request is coming from, intermediary actors just can not see the contents of the traffic unless you’re on server. That’s what VPNs are for. Don’t get me started on the new AI fingerprinting technology.
I'll type this slow so you can keep up. Everyone else already knows from what you typed that you full of shit. Your stark falsehoods include; MLFB doesn't have a system in place - Again, its been published since 2015 TLS had a league - TSL didn't have a league (besides the name) it had a camp that charged its players to play NFL supported TSL?lol If you call poaching the only good TSL had as support NFL and Frank Murtha have done business for more than 20 years and continue to work with MLFB. As of this spring are still having meetings with them on partnerships. MLFB has a clause in their contract that allows players to go to the NFL without restriction. MLFB is a developmental league, not the XFL and not the USFL. It is designed to give player with potential to have one more shot of making it to the NFL. Currently has 6 previously NFL players signed with the hopes of making it back. Has pulled players from the XFL and USFL. Thank you for pointing out the previous CEO and his direct staff are no longer with MLFB and haven't been for years. Exactly why this is a league on the field right now as you read this. 7 times the charm? I'm going to type this as slow as possible... XFL, USFL and TSL have all failed, two of them completely bankrupt. And you are calling them your pony. MLFB with everything they have been through, have not failed, have not gone bankrupt and have fulfilled their promises to investors finally making it to the field. We currently have our demo season RIGHT NOW. That is charming isn't it...
Likely the software companies with large portions of their revenue from the government, like AXON and TLS.
Dingleberry. Yeah what part of my post did you not understand? First off, Fox owned part of TLS which is now USFL. It didn’t start as USFL being televised. And to counter your other point, MLFB announced last night we are getting our cities schedule and ticket information on June 6th. You might want to catch up on your reading if you’re giving out investment advice. My suggestion is don’t listen to anyone, do your own research.
I am a bot. You submitted a picture of a banned ticker, TLS. The market cap of TLS is **538867900** This check will fire if you included unnecessary pictures that have bad phrases or a bad crop with news about cryptocoins, for example. Repost with the useless pictures omitted if you did that. Yell at /u/zjz if it's above 1 billion-ish market cap and not related to crypto/pennies/OTC.
Nah. Unless you signed a user agreement that explicitly states they have the right to do so, they can't. And monitoring network traffic is entirely different than watching somebody's desktop without notification. Your connection to Discord is over HTTPS so, unless they are doing a TLS/SSL man-in-the-middle thing, they can't actually read the contents of the traffic. If they can, then they've got all your passwords to everything you've ever logged in to.
This week I am going all-in on the TLS strategy.
If we're going to war then why isn't LMT, SAIC, TLS, etc mooning?
If you follow TLS strategy then yeah. I stick to my LEAPS, PMCCs, and wheel strategy over buying FDs.
This is what I've been saying forever. Have you ever heard anyone come on air and argue that a 1% increase in the discount rate impacts valuations based on DCFs? 1% isn't going to knock these guys down 50% on their valuation lol. Nobody tells you that the other 50+PEs are overvalued, just can't buy anything with a growth multiple. Hope there's a rotation, but seems like they keep selling even more growth. I'm long ABCL, ARRY, CHGG, TLS, UBER, Z. It's where in in "value-growth, low p/s multiples"
Only if they follow TLS (trading like shit) method.
Thats not an entirely accurate description of (a) veeder-Root. As mentioned above Veeder-Root is a Vontier company. while their products are petroleum storage tank related, underground is not a pre-requisite nor are they a storage tank company. They make one of the most popular ATG's - Automatic Tank Gauging systems in the fuel storage market (Omntec is another). They also make turbine pumps for fuel storage tanks. Again widely used. A turbine pump is mounted on the tank - above ground (AST) or underground (UST) doesnt matter. The turbine is remotely controlled from the dispenser and pumps the fuel to said dispenser(s). This eliminates suction pumps at each dispenser. The Veeder Root TLS ATG is again used for both AST and UST systems. Veeder-Root makes a couple of other things for the industry namely meters and fuel conditioners. I believe to invest in Veeder-Root one must invest in the parent Vontier.
This has to do with how transactions are journalized under margin. Did you notice when you switched your account over to margin, all your transactions in your activity and orders section switched from looking like this >You bought 3 shares of TSLA : Filled at $998.67 To something like this >Journaled TLS a/c types (Margin) For the sake of accounting, all transactions are journalized and covered through your LOC. The underlying position is repaid in cash after the trade is confirmed. This is how MBP has worked on every other brokerage I’ve ever used, but I will agree with you Fidelity’s UI doesn’t clearly differentiate between cash and margin positions. Just stop trading for a week and covert your account back to cash if this makes you uncomfortable. Just remember that you can have no pending transactions, open orders, or funds waiting to settle at the time of account conversion
Wow man. These are worse that what I imagined you would show me. Two companies each over 1bn market cap (not small cap) that aren’t making money, high beta and no liquidity. Let me guess, you started your journey of bagholding Zeta in early November? TLS basically anytime this year. How are you fighting for the worth of small caps when you can’t identify what a small cap is or what value means? Your guy ZETA took a 7% haircut on Friday, TLS 2.6%. By comparison MSFT got crushed and it was only down 2%. So at the end of the day, what does being in those two stocks you mentioned get you?
Sure, here's 2 small caps that I follow: \-Zeta Global Holdings (NYSE: ZETA) \-Telos Corporation (NASDAQ: TLS) I consider these companies to be small caps.
#Ban Bet Lost /u/Makmoo (0/1) made a bet that TLS would go to 30.0 when it was 24.26 and it did not, so they were banned for a week.
DM and TLS are doing me pretty good right now