How can I store videos in cookies or local storage? [on hold]

I am building a website where a user can upload videos for getting transcript of the video at some price. The problem is that, suppose a user uploaded a video and decided to make payment later. I can store all the details in local storage or cookies, but where can I store the video. Should I store in database, but that user is not logged in, maybe after uploading the video, he deleted it from his hard disk, then how could I get this without request him to re upload. I am not getting idea, is there any better way to implement it.

Mount / unmount storage device what happens to files

I have problems understanding the following.

In /etc/fstab I’ve mounted an external storage volume with:

//xyz.backup.com/backup /home/me/external_backup_volume cifs user=xyz,password=xyz,users 0 0 

Daily I’m syncing files from a local folder to the mount point:

rsync --progress -arnz /backup /home/me/external_backup_volume 

When I unmount /home/me/external_backup_volume I still see subdirectory and folders. Are the files still available even when the backup storage is unmounted? From ls -al it looks like but If I check df with the drive mounted and not the local disc usage of /dev/md2 does not change:

me@Ubuntu-1804-bionic-64-minimal:~$   df -h Filesystem                       Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on udev                              16G     0   16G   0% /dev tmpfs                            3.2G  1.1M  3.2G   1% /run /dev/md2                         436G  105G  310G  26% / tmpfs                             16G  8.0K   16G   1% /dev/shm tmpfs                            5.0M     0  5.0M   0% /run/lock tmpfs                             16G     0   16G   0% /sys/fs/cgroup /dev/md1                         488M  204M  259M  45% /boot tmpfs                            3.2G     0  3.2G   0% /run/user/1000 //xyz.backup.com/backup          100G   46G   55G  46% /home/me/external_backup_volume  me@Ubuntu-1804-bionic-64-minimal:~$   umount /home/me/external_backup_volume me@Ubuntu-1804-bionic-64-minimal:~$   df -h Filesystem      Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on udev             16G     0   16G   0% /dev tmpfs           3.2G  1.1M  3.2G   1% /run /dev/md2        436G  105G  310G  26% / tmpfs            16G  8.0K   16G   1% /dev/shm tmpfs           5.0M     0  5.0M   0% /run/lock tmpfs            16G     0   16G   0% /sys/fs/cgroup /dev/md1        488M  204M  259M  45% /boot tmpfs           3.2G     0  3.2G   0% /run/user/1000 

So why do I still see the files when the drive is unmounted?

ShineServers.Com – FLAT 70% Discount, SSD Storage, CLOUDLINUX, MariaDB, cPanel, Unlimited BW

Started In 2010 With An Aim To Provide A Comprehensive Range Of Secure Web Hosting Services; Shine Servers Proudly Serves Thousands Of Satisfied Customers At Present And Still Counting. Registered By Name Of "Shine Servers LLP" In New Delhi, India And Serving The Worldwide, We Have An Overall Experience Of 10 Years In The Web Hosting Industry. Quality And Customer Service Is Our Stronghold…

ShineServers.Com – FLAT 70% Discount, SSD Storage, CLOUDLINUX, MariaDB, cPanel, Unlimited BW

Como pasarle parametros de encabazado de los archivos a la hora de su almacenamiento en Google Cloud Storage

deseo pasar parametros de (no-chache, max-age=0) entre otros a el cloud-storage al momento de subir un archivo de manera que dicho archivo se almacene con ese encabezado, la configuración de la librería (Superbalist/laravel-google-cloud-storage) para esta acción es la siguiente:

‘gcs’ => [

        'driver' => 'gcs',         'project_id' => env('GOOGLE_CLOUD_PROJECT_ID', 'id-project-cloud'),         'key_file' => env('GOOGLE_CLOUD_KEY_FILE', 'key'), // optional: /path/to/service-account.json         'bucket' => env('GOOGLE_CLOUD_STORAGE_BUCKET', 'name-bucket'),         'path_prefix' => env('GOOGLE_CLOUD_STORAGE_PATH_PREFIX', null), // optional: /default/path/to/apply/in/bucket         'storage_api_uri' => env('GOOGLE_CLOUD_STORAGE_API_URI', null), // see: Public URLs below         'visibility' => 'public',      ], 

mas solo me permite pasarle parametros de visualisacion public/private

privado me evita la visualización en el sistema por lo que no es lo que deseo,

ayudaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Does the use of a Hardware Security Module improve the security of a password storage?


Basic Assumptions

Let us assume I work for a company, which aims to authenticate users using traditional usernames and passwords. The company currently uses a slow key-derivation function to hash passwords, such as Argon2, scrypt or PBKDF2.

It is further assumed that a network HSM can calculate the HMAC of a string with a stored key, but cannot calculate a KDF on its own.

The Idea

One of the developers now had an idea of using a Hardware Security Module to further secure the credentials. He had the idea to use the HMAC of the password as the input for the key derivation function. Since the actual key for the HMAC function is stored inside the HSM and can’t be extracted. So here in pseudo-code is once the old login code, and the new login code:

// Old Login Code function Authenticate(input) {     user = DB.getUser(input.username);     if (user == null) return false; //User does not exist      kdf = Argon2id;     return kdf.verify(user.password, input.password); } 

And here is the new login code:

// New Login Code function Authenticate(input) {     user = DB.getUser(input.username);     if (user == null) return false; //User does not exist      kdf = Argon2id;      keyedHash = HSM.getHMAC(input.password, useInternalKey=true);     return kdf.verify(user.password, keyedHash); } 

My Reasoning

This seems to overall improve the security, because an attacker who is able to steal the database, would also need access to the HSM to attempt to crack the keys. Even if an attacker knows their own password, the key stored inside the HSM is sufficiently long that attempting to brute-force the key would not be feasible.

While an attacker with control over the database might be able to send password candidates to the HSM to get the keyed hashes in return, it will:

  • severely limit the amount of candidates the attacker can attempt per second
  • likely cause the network administrators to see unusual network traffic and detect the breach

Possible Downsides

I am aware of “Never Roll Your Own!”, and I believe that this is not “my own algorithm”.

Furthermore, I understand that, should the HSM ever lose the key, users would now not be able to log in anymore. This problem could be solved with using a backup HSM and storing the key there as well.

My question

Does this scheme make any sense? Does it actually prevent an attacker from being able to recover passwords? Or is it just an excuse for the IT team to spend lots of money to get a shiny new thing?

Mount image of encrypted internal storage data partition from android P

When trying to upgrade to a newer rom, my system got a little messed up and I had to format my /data partition. I had made TitaniumBackup and twrp backups but they were on the encrypted data partition. When I flashed the new rom, this partition became all hashed folders and TWRP stopped asking me for the password. I took the time to do an adb pull of the /dev/block/sda21 (which is the device that is mounted on sdcard/. How would I go about decrypting this on a linux device?

android os storage usage

I have two fresh galaxy device on android 9 , the difference is in storage , one is 512GB and another is 128GB , system usage in both is different , 128GB version use 27GB on fresh but the 512GB version use up to 47GB , there is no installed app and both device is just out of box , my question is why the android use more storage on 512GB version? and how can I decrease the amount. if it’s dynamic why is the reason and should it decrease if the device is out of storage ? thanks in advance.