## Is Deluge safe to use still when it’s not been updated since the first part of 2017?

https://ftp.osuosl.org/pub/deluge/windows/?C=M;O=D

The latest version of Deluge for Windows that can actually be downloaded and installed is deluge-1.3.15-win32-py2.7.exe from 2017-05-12.

That’s well over three years ago now!

They have been discussing the problems of releasing the new version for years, but nothing comes from it. Like so many slowly dying (but never quite gone) projects I’ve painfully witnessed in the last many years.

Doesn’t this more than likely make it extremely unsafe for me to be running this software on my machine? I feel as if it’s an open door to my machine, almost certainly containing unpatched exploits.

Yet the sad reality is that there are no alternatives. uTorrent is an ad-infested spyware nightmare since many years, and others… well, just like with browsers, I’ve given up on searching because there’s just nothing out there. Nobody seems to care one bit about the entirely desktop computer anymore.

Can I still use this ancient software? If so, how much longer?

## Finding the most frequent element, given that it’s Theta(n)-frequent?

We know [Ben-Or 1983] that deciding whether all elements in an array are distinct requires $$\Theta(n \log(n))$$ time; and this problem reduces to finding the most frequent element, so it takes $$\Theta(n \log(n))$$ time to find the most frequent element (assuming the domain of the array elements is not small).

But what happens when you know that there’s an element with frequency at least $$\alpha \cdot n$$? Can you then decide the problem, or determine what the element is, in linear time (in $$n$$, not necessarily in $$1/\alpha$$) and deterministically?

## Does attacking difficulty of a block cipher depend on it’s block length?

Does attacking difficulty of a block cipher depend on it’s block length compared to a substitution cipher?

## Does the spell erupting earth disrupt the surface it’s cast on?

The spell Erupting Earth says:

A fountain of churned earth and stone erupts in a 20-foot cube centered on that point.

Does this mean about 20 cubic feet of material from the ground is churned up and disrupted? Or is the fountain comprised of newly created or summoned material?

RAW the spell only deals damage to creatures and makes the terrain difficult. My player is wanting to use the spell to damage stone and dislodge a deposit of ore, arguing the ‘erupting‘ wording means it should deal damage to the terrain as well.

If it churns up material from the ground I can see this working, however, if the material is created by the spell, then that would explain why it doesn’t explicitly damage objects/terrain.

What is the correct or intended interpretation?

## I need to decrypt a text but i don’t know it’s algorithm and key

All i know is that it might be related to the quadratic equation and bhaskara. The text:

nio8[8xe oj likkmp39347665mnsbcbhjsmnvkfkdioohhoqwex d xalzkzkncznc,zx zx,mm z,nllASAdja;sMCSKCNzmx;SLMXMCMMCC;;MLM VMM//;L,,’,;;,assa65748393029447hfhcnmcm nHBCTENFKKSBCMVLLV =

## How could I make the results of a yes/no vote inaccessible unless it’s unanimous in the affirmative, without a trusted third party?

A family of N people (where N >= 3) are members of a cult. A suggestion is floated anonymously among them to leave the cult. If, in fact, every single person secretly harbors the desire to leave, it would be best if the family knew about that so that they could be open with each other and plan their exit. However, if this isn’t the case, then the family would not want to know the actual results, in order to prevent infighting and witch hunting.

Therefore, is there some scheme by which, if everyone in the family votes yes, the family knows, but all other results (all no, any combination of yes and no) are indistinguishable from each other for all family members?

Some notes:

• N does have to be at least 3 – N=1 is trivial, and N=2 is impossible, since a yes voter can know the other person’s vote depending on the result.
• The anonymous suggestor is not important – it could well be someone outside the family, such as a someone distributing propoganda.
• It is important that all no is indistinguishable from mixed yes and no – we do not want the family to discover that there is some kind of schism. However, if that result is impossible, I’m OK with a result where any unanimous result is discoverable, but any mixed vote is indistinguishable.

• Of course, this can be done with a trusted third party – they all tell one person their votes, and the third party announces whether all the votes are yes. However, this isn’t quite satisfying of an answer to me, since the third party could get compromised by a zealous no voter (or other cult member) to figure out who the yes votes are. Plus, this person knows the votes, and may, in a mixed vote situation, meet with the yes voters in private to help them escape, which the no voters won’t take kindly to.
• One can use a second third party to anonymize the votes – one party (which could really just be a shaken hat) collects the votes and sends them anonymized to the second party, who reads them and announces the result. This is the best solution I could think of, however I still think I want to do better than this – after all, in a live-in settlement cult, there probably isn’t any trustworthy third party you could find. I’d like to find a solution that uses a third party that isn’t necessarily trusted.
• However, I do recognize that you need at least something to hold secret information, because if you’re working with an entirely public ledger, then participants could make secret copies of the information and simulate what effect their votes would have, before submitting their actual vote. In particular, if all participants vote yes but the last one has yet to vote, they can simulate a yes vote and find out that everyone else has voted yes, but then themselves vote no – they are now alone in knowing everyone else’s yes votes, which is power that you would not want the remaining no voter to have.

## Connect Cables in pc and it’s affect

Is there anyway I can know if the cable I use to charge my phone in it was connect to my pc before or not? Is there something in pc can let me see that because my pc contain some malware and spy files that comes to it through another phone because I used to use all cables and connect them to pc so I decided to format my other iphone in charger while charging it in the wall during deleting your data and setting the phone turned off so I connect it to the charger and it start to format and delete all data and settings while connect to charger so I format it again and I am afraid that the malware will be inside the iPhone system and even formatting it will no help

## Postman is logging my browser requests and initiating it’s own POST Requests

Postman is logging all my browser requests and is initiating it’s own requests by itself. I’m using a Mac 2017. Os is macOS Mojave version 10.14.6. My question is whether that’s okay behavior or what exactly could be happening ?

## Certificate validation details. How it’s done? [closed]

I’ve read this post where it says:

"…an attacker can still take the whole signed content and present it to you but won’t be able to change any details or the signature won’t match."

1. How does the browser validate the details of a certificate and see its content like domain name, etc.?
2. If a MITM wants to change anything, he would need to decrypt the cert, which is impossible, or simply change what he wants but then fail at the browser because, as mentioned above, the signature won’t match?

## What mechanic would be used for taking an opponents weapon from it’s sheath on his belt in combat?

Here is the scenario.

I am attacking a fighter with a crossbow. I run out of bolts and am unnamed as he charges at me with a spear. My opponent has a short sword on his belt. He misses with his initial spear attack and its my turn.

I want to take his sword from it’s sheath and if possible attack him with it. What process or series of checks need to be made for this to work?