An adventure 'nugget'?
Phil Pugliese
(17 Jan 2023 18:46 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Evyn MacDude
(17 Jan 2023 22:07 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Timothy Collinson
(17 Jan 2023 22:12 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Alex Goodwin
(17 Jan 2023 22:25 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Greg Nokes
(17 Jan 2023 23:59 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Ethan McKinney
(18 Jan 2023 01:37 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Greg nokes
(18 Jan 2023 01:40 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Alex Goodwin
(18 Jan 2023 02:07 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Greg Nokes
(18 Jan 2023 03:24 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Rupert Boleyn
(18 Jan 2023 07:53 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Greg Nokes
(18 Jan 2023 17:33 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Evyn MacDude
(21 Jan 2023 01:49 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'? Alex Goodwin (18 Jan 2023 20:59 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Timothy Collinson
(22 Jan 2023 13:00 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Alex Goodwin
(22 Jan 2023 14:09 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Timothy Collinson
(22 Jan 2023 17:39 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Alex Goodwin
(22 Jan 2023 18:08 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Timothy Collinson
(22 Jan 2023 18:14 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Greg Nokes
(22 Jan 2023 20:14 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Phil Pugliese
(23 Jan 2023 00:28 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Rupert Boleyn
(23 Jan 2023 04:16 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Richard Aiken
(13 Apr 2023 02:14 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
David Johnson
(22 Jan 2023 15:34 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Timothy Collinson
(22 Jan 2023 17:39 UTC)
|
Re: [EXT]Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Johnson, Bruce E - (bjohnson)
(20 Jan 2023 23:47 UTC)
|
Re: [EXT]Re: [TML] An adventure 'nugget'?
Tom Rux
(21 Jan 2023 01:13 UTC)
|
Greg, My mistake - I didn't intend to ask about the safety-of-flight kit, but the mass-market commercial kit such as used dirtside. Alex On 18/1/23 13:24, Greg Nokes - greg at nokes.name (via tml list) wrote: > Yeah, it was a little flippant, but here is more fleshed out reasoning: > > With systems designed to be operated for weeks, months, or even years with out updates there must be much different underlying architectural considerations. Could you imagine how valuable a remote zero day would be if discovered by an aggressor state? Could you imagine a starship’s computer blue screening just as it jumped? Oof. > > Quite honestly, IMHO that’s what lead to Virus - a fully AI, self modifying (program? Being? Something else?) crushed the Imperium. It had to be a dooozy to overcome the design and safely protocols, and IMHO may not even be physically possible. > > I would expect systems to operate in far different modes than we are accustomed to. Given that the smartest folks in the Terran, 2I and 3I have had a long time to think about this, I cannot really imagine what those safeguards would look like. Given what we know now, I would expect things like > > * Air gaps between sensor, commo, and control systems > * Physically controlled one way data gates > * triplicate unconnected consensus based systems ( because everything on a ship is triplicate, right?) > * Hardware systems with read only underlying OS’s > * Some pretty intense crypto (and the real crypto, not NFT’s 🤣) > * Using that intense crypto to sign everything to insure that there is no tampering > * Only allowing sanitized messages between systems. > * Neural Network based firewalls. > > Since we are borderline TL8, and have had networks for what, 50 years-ish, I really feel that what we are seeing now is a combination of stuff that was not build to be hyperconnected and an immature industry. Up and coming languages like Rust hinting at what a truly secure environment could be like. > > The 3I has has space flight longer than we have had fire. I have a feeling they will have figured stuff out. --