Any hackers in here? Hack a Google Home?...

On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 14:20:57 +0100, David Brooks <BDB@not.on.your.life> wrote:

On 20/10/2022 09:02, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:42:42 +0100, David Brooks <BDB@not.on.your.life
wrote:

On 20/10/2022 08:33, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:23:56 +0100, David Brooks <BDB@not.on.your.life
wrote:

On 20/10/2022 08:06, boB wrote:
with YouTube premium
at least, it is very difficult to find a song that Google does not
have.

Do you consider YouTube Premium to be worth the fee?

What are the main advantages?

Well I just changed my Google Home from Spotify free to Youtube free,
and it failed to play anything at all! I get the reply \"I looked for x
on Youtube, but it either isn\'t available or can\'t be played right
now\". Not very impressive.

You need to put in more effort! ;-)

I know what the problem is. Youtube/Google are now the same. The
accounts are the same. But my Youtube account was banned for something
a hacker did, and they insist it was me, despite having just told me I
was hacked into, and want me to provide evidence, apparently their own
evidence is not enough! Anyway, I have my phone with one account (which
I don\'t want to change since it has 100s of contacts and is set up
linked to many apps) and Youtube on a fresh one created to bypass their
stupidity. But my Google Home wants to use the same Google/Youtube
account as itself, which is why it\'s refusing to play. If I try doing
that on the computer, I get the message it\'s a locked account.

I\'ve complained to Youtube (again) to tell them to get their act
together, and to Google to see if I can link the two accounts when
playing music.

Now trying out free Deezer to see if it\'s any better.

You can re-invent yourself with a new persona on Google + YouTube.

I *KNOW* that to be a fact!
Click to expand...

That\'s my problem. I use the reinvented account on Youtube, but my original on my phone/google home. They have to be the same so they talk to each other. I can\'t change my phone\'s account because so many things are linked to that account it would take an eternity to do so.
 
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 14:24:31 +0100, David Brooks <BDB@not.on.your.life> wrote:

On 20/10/2022 09:08, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:40:34 +0100, David Brooks <BDB@not.on.your.life
wrote:

On 20/10/2022 08:29, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:23:56 +0100, David Brooks <BDB@not.on.your.life
wrote:

On 20/10/2022 08:06, boB wrote:
with YouTube premium
at least, it is very difficult to find a song that Google does not
have.

Do you consider YouTube Premium to be worth the fee?

What are the main advantages?

AFAIK they\'re (Spotify, Google, Amazon, Youtube) all £10 a month and you
can listen to any song you like and download it. If you don\'t pay, you
can only listen to genres or artists. For example, I have the free
Spotify on my Google Home and can say \"Hey Google, play The Beatles\". I
will then get Beatles music, but I can\'t choose the track, and sometimes
I get music similar to The Beatles. I can skip tracks I don\'t want
though. But the er.... adjusted Spotify app on my phone bypasses that
:) Both the phone and the Google Home play through the stereo for
proper quality of music.

Sounds like a brilliant set-up you have! ❤️

I have a degree in electronics :p No sound output jack my arse.

My ordinary YT plays original artists too. Here\'s one of the first \'pop\'
songs I can remember:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvxagNIBVLU

If you link google music to your google mini, can you ask for an
particular song? As in \"Hey Google, play Let It Be by The Beatles\"?

One has to have a paid subscription to achieve that.
Click to expand...

So they\'re all the same, free = vague choices, £10 a month = anything you like. Except some like Apple Music (spit!) don\'t have the free choice, stupid as you can\'t try it out first.

> I don\'t pay for music on-line.

You surprise me, you pay for things I pirate....
 
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:23:56 +0100, David Brooks
<BDB@not.on.your.life> wrote:

On 20/10/2022 08:06, boB wrote:
with YouTube premium
at least, it is very difficult to find a song that Google does not
have.

Do you consider YouTube Premium to be worth the fee?

What are the main advantages?
Click to expand...

Yes, for me it is way worth it. I think that YouTube Premium is now
what they used to call YouTube Red which is what I signed up for as
soon as it was available.

The main advantage for me and what I ordered it for was to not have
commercials or have to hit \"skip\" when that comes up.

I use YT so much that it is worth it for me. BUT, I think another
advantage is that I get their music library and some other YT content
that I would not get like some movies for free. That I did not order
but I don\'t mind it at all.

boB
 
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 14:58:06 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
<CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 14:20:57 +0100, David Brooks <BDB@not.on.your.life> wrote:

On 20/10/2022 09:02, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:42:42 +0100, David Brooks <BDB@not.on.your.life
wrote:

On 20/10/2022 08:33, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:23:56 +0100, David Brooks <BDB@not.on.your.life
wrote:

On 20/10/2022 08:06, boB wrote:
with YouTube premium
at least, it is very difficult to find a song that Google does not
have.

Do you consider YouTube Premium to be worth the fee?

What are the main advantages?

Well I just changed my Google Home from Spotify free to Youtube free,
and it failed to play anything at all! I get the reply \"I looked for x
on Youtube, but it either isn\'t available or can\'t be played right
now\". Not very impressive.

You need to put in more effort! ;-)

I know what the problem is. Youtube/Google are now the same. The
accounts are the same. But my Youtube account was banned for something
a hacker did, and they insist it was me, despite having just told me I
was hacked into, and want me to provide evidence, apparently their own
evidence is not enough! Anyway, I have my phone with one account (which
I don\'t want to change since it has 100s of contacts and is set up
linked to many apps) and Youtube on a fresh one created to bypass their
stupidity. But my Google Home wants to use the same Google/Youtube
account as itself, which is why it\'s refusing to play. If I try doing
that on the computer, I get the message it\'s a locked account.

I\'ve complained to Youtube (again) to tell them to get their act
together, and to Google to see if I can link the two accounts when
playing music.

Now trying out free Deezer to see if it\'s any better.

You can re-invent yourself with a new persona on Google + YouTube.

I *KNOW* that to be a fact!

That\'s my problem. I use the reinvented account on Youtube, but my original on my phone/google home. They have to be the same so they talk to each other. I can\'t change my phone\'s account because so many things are linked to that account it would take an eternity to do so.
Click to expand...

Interesting but unfortunate situation !

boB
 
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 13:02:44 +1100, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid>
wrote:

On 20-Oct-22 10:54 am, Joe Gwinn wrote:
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 11:56:53 +1100, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid
wrote:

On 17-Oct-22 7:12 am, Joe Gwinn wrote:
On Sun, 16 Oct 2022 18:17:18 +1100, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid
wrote:

On 16-Oct-22 4:38 pm, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 16 Oct 2022 06:26:49 +0100, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid
wrote:

On 16-Oct-22 4:15 pm, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Just wondering if I can change the main program in a Google Home, or is
it hard coded?  It must allow updates to the software, so can I fool it
this way and give it an altered version?

I\'d be very surprised if the updates did not have to be
cryptographically signed by Google. Since you would have no way to sign
a substitute program, it is unlikely that you\'ll be able to replace the
software via the usual update process.

Depriving people of control of things they own is perhaps the most
egregious use of cryptographic signing that exists, but until
legislators get involved (don\'t hold your breath), that\'s where we stand.

This is not to say it\'s impossible to do, but will probably require
considerable technical knowledge, and time, if it can be done at all.

I have virtually no knowledge of hacking, but isn\'t the program in there
kinda like an OS?  Or the only program running under the OS?  No matter
what Microsoft put in Windows, they cannot stop me deleting it and
inserting Linux onto my desktop.  Why can\'t I do the same with the
Google Home?

It really comes down to what code the system runs when it starts,
whether that\'s called a BIOS, a boot loader, or whatever (hereinafter
boot loader). If the boot loader is not willing to load and run code
that\'s not been signed with a signature that it will accept, then that\'s
a significant obstacle. You\'d have to replace the boot loader, which
could involve physically removing a ROM and supplying a different one
(whose code you got from....?), or re-flashing it (ditto), if it allows
itself to be re-flashed, and again you have the issue of whether the
replacement needs to be signed.

Your Google Home may well not even have a separate boot ROM - everything
could be on a single chip.

As for PCs so far, the likes of Microsoft have not been able to
persuade/cajole/threaten/bribe the manufacturers of CPUs, laptops and
motherboards to allow only programs signed by said likes to run, and
this is why you can install other software.

It is tried from time to time. Usually the US Justice Department
brings an anti-trust case, which stops this train. But this only
happens if the then President allows the Justice Dept to bring such a
case.

A big fight in the US is John Deere not allowing farmers to repair
their million-dollar harvesters and combines. Multiple states have
enacted right-to-repair laws (often by referendum) to prevent this
kind of abuse.

I voted for just such in Massachusetts. Not that I am a farmer, but
we do need competition to maintain discipline in the vendor ranks.

Joe Gwinn

As long as Apple can get away with locking things down so that even
swapping parts from identical new iPhones doesn\'t work[*], we have a
long way to go on right to repair.

Sylvia.

[*] So that downstream, we can\'t even use broken iPhones as a source of
parts.

I\'m pretty sure that right to repair applies to Apple as well. It has
been loosening. We\'ll see,

Joe Gwinn

I live in Australia, where there have long been provisions in the
consumer law relating to the availability of spare parts and repair
facilities on reasonable terms.

In all that time, you\'d think someone would have baulked at Apple\'s
excessive repair costs, and sought a remedy before a consumer tribunal.
The costs of doing so are not high, and a lawyer is generally not required.

Yet I can find nothing. I can\'t help suspecting that Apple always folds
as soon as someone goes down this path in Australia, so as to avoid
having a published judgement that would set some kind of precedent.
Click to expand...

Certainly possible.

Joe Gwinn
 
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 18:39:29 +0100, boB <boB@k7iq.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:23:56 +0100, David Brooks
BDB@not.on.your.life> wrote:

On 20/10/2022 08:06, boB wrote:
with YouTube premium
at least, it is very difficult to find a song that Google does not
have.

Do you consider YouTube Premium to be worth the fee?

What are the main advantages?


Yes, for me it is way worth it. I think that YouTube Premium is now
what they used to call YouTube Red which is what I signed up for as
soon as it was available.

The main advantage for me and what I ordered it for was to not have
commercials or have to hit \"skip\" when that comes up.

I use YT so much that it is worth it for me. BUT, I think another
advantage is that I get their music library and some other YT content
that I would not get like some movies for free. That I did not order
but I don\'t mind it at all.
Click to expand...

I\'m just using the free Spotify (now trying the free Deezer). I only use it to hear new songs that I might like, then I can ask Google what the track is and download that artist\'s discography from Piratebay.
 
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 18:41:20 +0100, boB <boB@k7iq.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 14:58:06 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 14:20:57 +0100, David Brooks <BDB@not.on.your.life> wrote:

On 20/10/2022 09:02, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:42:42 +0100, David Brooks <BDB@not.on.your.life
wrote:

On 20/10/2022 08:33, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:23:56 +0100, David Brooks <BDB@not.on.your.life
wrote:

On 20/10/2022 08:06, boB wrote:
with YouTube premium
at least, it is very difficult to find a song that Google does not
have.

Do you consider YouTube Premium to be worth the fee?

What are the main advantages?

Well I just changed my Google Home from Spotify free to Youtube free,
and it failed to play anything at all! I get the reply \"I looked for x
on Youtube, but it either isn\'t available or can\'t be played right
now\". Not very impressive.

You need to put in more effort! ;-)

I know what the problem is. Youtube/Google are now the same. The
accounts are the same. But my Youtube account was banned for something
a hacker did, and they insist it was me, despite having just told me I
was hacked into, and want me to provide evidence, apparently their own
evidence is not enough! Anyway, I have my phone with one account (which
I don\'t want to change since it has 100s of contacts and is set up
linked to many apps) and Youtube on a fresh one created to bypass their
stupidity. But my Google Home wants to use the same Google/Youtube
account as itself, which is why it\'s refusing to play. If I try doing
that on the computer, I get the message it\'s a locked account.

I\'ve complained to Youtube (again) to tell them to get their act
together, and to Google to see if I can link the two accounts when
playing music.

Now trying out free Deezer to see if it\'s any better.

You can re-invent yourself with a new persona on Google + YouTube.

I *KNOW* that to be a fact!

That\'s my problem. I use the reinvented account on Youtube, but my original on my phone/google home. They have to be the same so they talk to each other. I can\'t change my phone\'s account because so many things are linked to that account it would take an eternity to do so.


Interesting but unfortunate situation !
Click to expand...

I tried to complain and they said I have to fill in a form. The form requires you to fill in your Youtube ID (a 20 digit hex code, only visible when you\'re logged in). Catch 22. I can\'t log in can I! That\'s why I\'m filling in the form!
 
On 21/10/2022 03:24, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 18:41:20 +0100, boB <boB@k7iq.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 14:58:06 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 14:20:57 +0100, David Brooks
BDB@not.on.your.life> wrote:

On 20/10/2022 09:02, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:42:42 +0100, David Brooks
BDB@not.on.your.life
wrote:

On 20/10/2022 08:33, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:23:56 +0100, David Brooks
BDB@not.on.your.life
wrote:

On 20/10/2022 08:06, boB wrote:
with YouTube premium
at least, it is very difficult to find a song that Google does not
have.

Do you consider YouTube Premium to be worth the fee?

What are the main advantages?

Well I just changed my Google Home from Spotify free to Youtube
free,
and it failed to play anything at all!  I get the reply \"I looked
for x
on Youtube, but it either isn\'t available or can\'t be played right
now\".  Not very impressive.

You need to put in more effort! ;-)

I know what the problem is.  Youtube/Google are now the same.  The
accounts are the same.  But my Youtube account was banned for
something
a hacker did, and they insist it was me, despite having just told me I
was hacked into, and want me to provide evidence, apparently their own
evidence is not enough!  Anyway, I have my phone with one account
(which
I don\'t want to change since it has 100s of contacts and is set up
linked to many apps) and Youtube on a fresh one created to bypass
their
stupidity.  But my Google Home wants to use the same Google/Youtube
account as itself, which is why it\'s refusing to play.  If I try doing
that on the computer, I get the message it\'s a locked account.

I\'ve complained to Youtube (again) to tell them to get their act
together, and to Google to see if I can link the two accounts when
playing music.

Now trying out free Deezer to see if it\'s any better.

You can re-invent yourself with a new persona on Google + YouTube.

I *KNOW* that to be a fact!

That\'s my problem.  I use the reinvented account on Youtube, but my
original on my phone/google home.  They have to be the same so they
talk to each other.  I can\'t change my phone\'s account because so
many things are linked to that account it would take an eternity to
do so.


Interesting but unfortunate situation !

I tried to complain and they said I have to fill in a form.  The form
requires you to fill in your Youtube ID (a 20 digit hex code, only
visible when you\'re logged in).  Catch 22.  I can\'t log in can I!
That\'s why I\'m filling in the form!
Click to expand...

Google Home has a very helpful phone number you can call.
Worth a try!
 
On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 15:24:47 +0100, David Brooks <BDB@not.on.your.life> wrote:

On 21/10/2022 03:24, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 18:41:20 +0100, boB <boB@k7iq.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 14:58:06 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 14:20:57 +0100, David Brooks
BDB@not.on.your.life> wrote:

On 20/10/2022 09:02, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:42:42 +0100, David Brooks
BDB@not.on.your.life
wrote:

On 20/10/2022 08:33, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 08:23:56 +0100, David Brooks
BDB@not.on.your.life
wrote:

On 20/10/2022 08:06, boB wrote:
with YouTube premium
at least, it is very difficult to find a song that Google does not
have.

Do you consider YouTube Premium to be worth the fee?

What are the main advantages?

Well I just changed my Google Home from Spotify free to Youtube
free,
and it failed to play anything at all! I get the reply \"I looked
for x
on Youtube, but it either isn\'t available or can\'t be played right
now\". Not very impressive.

You need to put in more effort! ;-)

I know what the problem is. Youtube/Google are now the same. The
accounts are the same. But my Youtube account was banned for
something
a hacker did, and they insist it was me, despite having just told me I
was hacked into, and want me to provide evidence, apparently their own
evidence is not enough! Anyway, I have my phone with one account
(which
I don\'t want to change since it has 100s of contacts and is set up
linked to many apps) and Youtube on a fresh one created to bypass
their
stupidity. But my Google Home wants to use the same Google/Youtube
account as itself, which is why it\'s refusing to play. If I try doing
that on the computer, I get the message it\'s a locked account.

I\'ve complained to Youtube (again) to tell them to get their act
together, and to Google to see if I can link the two accounts when
playing music.

Now trying out free Deezer to see if it\'s any better.

You can re-invent yourself with a new persona on Google + YouTube.

I *KNOW* that to be a fact!

That\'s my problem. I use the reinvented account on Youtube, but my
original on my phone/google home. They have to be the same so they
talk to each other. I can\'t change my phone\'s account because so
many things are linked to that account it would take an eternity to
do so.


Interesting but unfortunate situation !

I tried to complain and they said I have to fill in a form. The form
requires you to fill in your Youtube ID (a 20 digit hex code, only
visible when you\'re logged in). Catch 22. I can\'t log in can I!
That\'s why I\'m filling in the form!

Google Home has a very helpful phone number you can call.
Worth a try!
Click to expand...

It\'s Youtube I need to sort out though. Different department.
 
On Sunday, 16 October 2022 at 08:17:26 UTC+1, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 16-Oct-22 4:38 pm, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 16 Oct 2022 06:26:49 +0100, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid
wrote:

On 16-Oct-22 4:15 pm, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Just wondering if I can change the main program in a Google Home, or is
it hard coded? It must allow updates to the software, so can I fool it
this way and give it an altered version?

I\'d be very surprised if the updates did not have to be
cryptographically signed by Google. Since you would have no way to sign
a substitute program, it is unlikely that you\'ll be able to replace the
software via the usual update process.

Depriving people of control of things they own is perhaps the most
egregious use of cryptographic signing that exists, but until
legislators get involved (don\'t hold your breath), that\'s where we stand.

This is not to say it\'s impossible to do, but will probably require
considerable technical knowledge, and time, if it can be done at all.

I have virtually no knowledge of hacking, but isn\'t the program in there
kinda like an OS? Or the only program running under the OS? No matter
what Microsoft put in Windows, they cannot stop me deleting it and
inserting Linux onto my desktop. Why can\'t I do the same with the
Google Home?
It really comes down to what code the system runs when it starts,
whether that\'s called a BIOS, a boot loader, or whatever (hereinafter
boot loader). If the boot loader is not willing to load and run code
that\'s not been signed with a signature that it will accept, then that\'s
a significant obstacle. You\'d have to replace the boot loader, which
could involve physically removing a ROM and supplying a different one
(whose code you got from....?), or re-flashing it (ditto), if it allows
itself to be re-flashed, and again you have the issue of whether the
replacement needs to be signed.

Your Google Home may well not even have a separate boot ROM - everything
could be on a single chip.

As for PCs so far, the likes of Microsoft have not been able to
persuade/cajole/threaten/bribe the manufacturers of CPUs, laptops and
motherboards to allow only programs signed by said likes to run, and
this is why you can install other software.

Sylvia.
Click to expand...
You could try to glitch the bootloader. A common process is: After downloading the update and verifying the signature, a flag is set in the bootloader to copy the new software from the download to the working memory and the system is rebooted. When the new software is running correctly, the flag is reset. The flag-checking code could be glitched. This ensures that the copy is restarted when not completed, e.g. due to a power fail or reset. Erasing the update after a failed signature check is a bad idea, as it opens the door to flash wear-out attacks.
Wim
 
Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2022 09:51:59 +0100, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
wrote:

On 10/17/2022 1:17 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

Your Google Home may well not even have a separate boot ROM -
everything
could be on a single chip.

It is probably easier to go after IoT devices - plenty of them have
appalling
security weaknesses designed in by clueless halfwits.

And, of course, there\'s no time to do this properly as Manglement
sees a product that APPEARS to work and wants to \"sell it\"!

The better approach is to think about how you are going to design
security in from the beginning.  And, keep thinking about how
that security can be subverted by attacks on your design.

Programmers have enough difficulty getting things to work, nevermind be
secure.  Check this out, I have a fan spinning at 10 million revs per
minute!:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7t3y9ykfecvdz09/programming.jpg?dl=0
Click to expand...

It\'s under-performing then, doing only 58 revs per sec.
How high can you tease it? Try a CPU-hogging program, perhaps video
conversion.

Ed


 
On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 11:25:47 -0000, Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2022 09:51:59 +0100, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid
wrote:

On 10/17/2022 1:17 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

Your Google Home may well not even have a separate boot ROM -
everything
could be on a single chip.

It is probably easier to go after IoT devices - plenty of them have
appalling
security weaknesses designed in by clueless halfwits.

And, of course, there\'s no time to do this properly as Manglement
sees a product that APPEARS to work and wants to \"sell it\"!

The better approach is to think about how you are going to design
security in from the beginning. And, keep thinking about how
that security can be subverted by attacks on your design.

Programmers have enough difficulty getting things to work, nevermind be
secure. Check this out, I have a fan spinning at 10 million revs per
minute!:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7t3y9ykfecvdz09/programming.jpg?dl=0

It\'s under-performing then, doing only 58 revs per sec.
How high can you tease it? Try a CPU-hogging program, perhaps video
conversion.
Click to expand...

I\'m already running dark matter searches.
 
Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 11:25:47 -0000, Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk>
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2022 09:51:59 +0100, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
wrote:

On 10/17/2022 1:17 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

Your Google Home may well not even have a separate boot ROM -
everything
could be on a single chip.

It is probably easier to go after IoT devices - plenty of them have
appalling
security weaknesses designed in by clueless halfwits.

And, of course, there\'s no time to do this properly as Manglement
sees a product that APPEARS to work and wants to \"sell it\"!

The better approach is to think about how you are going to design
security in from the beginning.  And, keep thinking about how
that security can be subverted by attacks on your design.

Programmers have enough difficulty getting things to work, nevermind be
secure.  Check this out, I have a fan spinning at 10 million revs per
minute!:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7t3y9ykfecvdz09/programming.jpg?dl=0

It\'s under-performing then, doing only 58 revs per sec.
How high can you tease it? Try a CPU-hogging program, perhaps video
conversion.

I\'m already running dark matter searches.
Click to expand...

What you need is for the rest of the hardware to come into line with
that CPU fan. There it sits, bored to death by the small-fry all around
it; just waiting for stuff to turn up with which it can feel at home.
How about one of these little babies?
https://youtu.be/zcchDu7KoYs

Ed


 
On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 18:44:28 -0000, Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 11:25:47 -0000, Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2022 09:51:59 +0100, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid
wrote:

On 10/17/2022 1:17 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

Your Google Home may well not even have a separate boot ROM -
everything
could be on a single chip.

It is probably easier to go after IoT devices - plenty of them have
appalling
security weaknesses designed in by clueless halfwits.

And, of course, there\'s no time to do this properly as Manglement
sees a product that APPEARS to work and wants to \"sell it\"!

The better approach is to think about how you are going to design
security in from the beginning. And, keep thinking about how
that security can be subverted by attacks on your design.

Programmers have enough difficulty getting things to work, nevermind be
secure. Check this out, I have a fan spinning at 10 million revs per
minute!:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7t3y9ykfecvdz09/programming.jpg?dl=0

It\'s under-performing then, doing only 58 revs per sec.
How high can you tease it? Try a CPU-hogging program, perhaps video
conversion.

I\'m already running dark matter searches.

What you need is for the rest of the hardware to come into line with
that CPU fan. There it sits, bored to death by the small-fry all around
it; just waiting for stuff to turn up with which it can feel at home.
How about one of these little babies?
https://youtu.be/zcchDu7KoYs
Click to expand...

Lend me a fiver then.

I have managed to get a graphics card running with 50% more electricity than it wanted to. The VRM is happy but the power connectors were not. I think the plastic is not supposed to go liquid.
 
On Mon, 17 Oct 2022 09:51:59 +0100, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

On 10/17/2022 1:17 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

Your Google Home may well not even have a separate boot ROM - everything
could be on a single chip.

It is probably easier to go after IoT devices - plenty of them have appalling
security weaknesses designed in by clueless halfwits.

And, of course, there\'s no time to do this properly as Manglement
sees a product that APPEARS to work and wants to \"sell it\"!

The better approach is to think about how you are going to design
security in from the beginning. And, keep thinking about how
that security can be subverted by attacks on your design.
Click to expand...

Programmers have enough difficulty getting things to work, nevermind be secure. Check this out, I have a fan spinning at 10 million revs per minute!:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7t3y9ykfecvdz09/programming.jpg?dl=0
 
On 11/16/2022 9:12 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 18:44:28 -0000, Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 11:25:47 -0000, Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2022 09:51:59 +0100, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid
wrote:

On 10/17/2022 1:17 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

Your Google Home may well not even have a separate boot ROM -
everything
could be on a single chip.

It is probably easier to go after IoT devices - plenty of them have
appalling
security weaknesses designed in by clueless halfwits.

And, of course, there\'s no time to do this properly as Manglement
sees a product that APPEARS to work and wants to \"sell it\"!

The better approach is to think about how you are going to design
security in from the beginning.  And, keep thinking about how
that security can be subverted by attacks on your design.

Programmers have enough difficulty getting things to work, nevermind be
secure.  Check this out, I have a fan spinning at 10 million revs per
minute!:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7t3y9ykfecvdz09/programming.jpg?dl=0

It\'s under-performing then, doing only 58 revs per sec.
How high can you tease it? Try a CPU-hogging program, perhaps video
conversion.

I\'m already running dark matter searches.

What you need is for the rest of the hardware to come into line with
that CPU fan. There it sits, bored to death by the small-fry all around
it; just waiting for stuff to turn up with which it can feel at home.
How about one of these little babies?
https://youtu.be/zcchDu7KoYs

Lend me a fiver then.

I have managed to get a graphics card running with 50% more electricity than it wanted to.
The VRM is happy but the power connectors were not.  I think the plastic is not supposed to go liquid.
Click to expand...

I take it your home is electrically heated.

When will your 4090 show up ? Maybe you can demo
how to burn the connector on a Founders Edition ?

Paul
 
On Wed, 16 Nov 2022 21:46:07 -0000, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:

On 11/16/2022 9:12 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 18:44:28 -0000, Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 11:25:47 -0000, Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2022 09:51:59 +0100, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid
wrote:

On 10/17/2022 1:17 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

Your Google Home may well not even have a separate boot ROM -
everything
could be on a single chip.

It is probably easier to go after IoT devices - plenty of them have
appalling
security weaknesses designed in by clueless halfwits.

And, of course, there\'s no time to do this properly as Manglement
sees a product that APPEARS to work and wants to \"sell it\"!

The better approach is to think about how you are going to design
security in from the beginning. And, keep thinking about how
that security can be subverted by attacks on your design.

Programmers have enough difficulty getting things to work, nevermind be
secure. Check this out, I have a fan spinning at 10 million revs per
minute!:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7t3y9ykfecvdz09/programming.jpg?dl=0

It\'s under-performing then, doing only 58 revs per sec.
How high can you tease it? Try a CPU-hogging program, perhaps video
conversion.

I\'m already running dark matter searches.

What you need is for the rest of the hardware to come into line with
that CPU fan. There it sits, bored to death by the small-fry all around
it; just waiting for stuff to turn up with which it can feel at home..
How about one of these little babies?
https://youtu.be/zcchDu7KoYs

Lend me a fiver then.

I have managed to get a graphics card running with 50% more electricity than it wanted to.
The VRM is happy but the power connectors were not. I think the plastic is not supposed to go liquid.

I take it your home is electrically heated.
Click to expand...

Indirectly.

When will your 4090 show up ? Maybe you can demo
how to burn the connector on a Founders Edition ?
Click to expand...

The 4090 is only 30% faster than my Tahiti at dark matter calculations. Since it\'s £1800 instead of £80, I think I\'ll stay clear of that shit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top