DoubleX
Member
Content Count
995 
Joined

Last visited

Days Won
9
DoubleX last won the day on September 26 2020
DoubleX had the most liked content!
About DoubleX

Rank
Just a nameless weakling
 Birthday 06/14/1991
Profile Information

Gender
Male
Recent Profile Visitors

Updates * v1.01b(GMT 0400 1322021): * 1. Fixed the bug of being able to select unusable hotkey skills in the * skill window in battles

DoubleX RMMZ Skill Item Cooldown
DoubleX replied to DoubleX's topic in Completed Scripts/Plugins/etc.
Updates * { codebase: "1.1.1", plugin: "v1.02a" }(2021 Feb 7 GMT 1300): * 1. Added skillItemCooldownGaugeColor1 and skillItemCooldownGaugeColor2 * to let you show the TPB battler cooldown bar inside battles with * configurable colors * 2. Added cancelBattlerCooldownHotkeys and * cancelSkillItemCooldownHotkeys to let you set some hotkeys to * cancel the battler/skill item cooldown of the corresponding actors * respectively * 3. Added the following parameters: *  canCancelBattlerCooldown *  canCancelSkillItemCooldown *  cancelBattlerCooldownFail *  cancelSkillItemCooldownFail *  cancelBattlerCooldownSuc *  cancelSkillItemCooldownSuc *  canCancelBattlerCooldownNotetagDataTypePriorities *  canCancelSkillItemCooldownNotetagDataTypePriorities *  cancelBattlerCooldownFailNotetagDataTypePriorities *  cancelSkillItemCooldownFailNotetagDataTypePriorities *  cancelBattlerCooldownSucNotetagDataTypePriorities *  cancelSkillItemCooldownSucNotetagDataTypePriorities * 4. Added the following plugin commands: *  canCancelBattlerCooldown *  canCancelSkillItemCooldown *  cancelBattlerCooldown *  cancelSkillItemCooldown * 5. Added the following notetags: *  canCancelBattler *  canCancelSkillItem *  cancelBattlerFail *  cancelSkillItemFail *  cancelBattlerSuc *  cancelSkillItemSuc Video 
DoubleX reacted to a post in a topic: Beware of scams like this...(pretending to be Paypal)

PhoenixSoul reacted to a post in a topic: Beware of scams like this...(pretending to be Paypal)

PhoenixSoul reacted to a status update: Finally! https://store.steampowered.com/bundle/18730/Yakuza_Remastered_Collection/

That One NPC reacted to a post in a topic: Beware of scams like this...(pretending to be Paypal)

DoubleX started following Beware of scams like this...(pretending to be Paypal)

I just received an email like this: Title: Notification Case #(Some random numbers) Sender: (NonPaypal logo)service@paypal.com.(My PayPal account location) <(NonPayPal email used by the real scammers)> Recipients: (My email), (The email of an innocent straw man used by the real scammers) Contents(With UI styles copying those in real PayPal emails) : Someone has logged into your account We noticed a new login with your PayPal account associated with (The email of an innocent straw man used by the real scammers) from a device we don't recognize. Because of that we've temporarily limited your account until you renew and verify your identity. Please click the button below to login into your account for verify your account. (Login button copying that in real Paypal emails) If this was you, please disregard this email. (Footers copying those in real PayPal emails) I admit that I'm incredibly stupid, because I almost believed that it's a real PayPal email, and I only realized that it's a scam right after I've clicked the login button, because it links to a URL that's completely different from the login page of the real PayPal(so fortunately I didn't input anything there). While I've faced many oldschooled phishing emails and can figure them all out right from the start, I've never seen phishing emails like this, and what makes me feel even more dumb is that I already have 2FA applied to my PayPal account before receiving this scam email, meaning that my phone would've a PayPal verification SMS out of nowhere if there was really an unauthorized login to my account. Of course, that straw man email owner is completely innocent, and I believe that owner already received the same scam email with me being the straw man, so that owner might think that I really performed unauthorized login into his/her PayPal account, if he/she didn't realize that the whole email's just a scam. Before I realized that it's just a scam, I thought he/she really done what the email claims as well, so I just focused on logging into my PayPal accounts to assess the damages done and evaluate countermeasures to be taken, and if I didn't realize that it's just a scam, I'd already have given the password of my PayPal account to the scammers in their fake PayPal login page. I suspect that many more PayPal users might have already received/are going to receive such scam emails, and I think this way of phishing can work for many other online payment gateways as well, so I think I can do some good by sharing my case, to hope that only I'll be this dumb(even though I didn't give the scammers my Paypal password at the end).

DoubleX started following Using AbelRuffini theorem on encryptions

encrypt Using AbelRuffini theorem on encryptions
DoubleX posted a blog entry in My pointless thoughts
The complete microsoft word file can be downloaded here(as a raw file) Summary The whole password setup/change process is as follows: 1. The client inputs the user ID and its password in plaintext 2. A salt for hashing the password in plaintexts will be randomly generated 3. The password will be combined with a fixed pepper in the client software source code and the aforementioned salt, to be hashed in the client terminal by SHA3512 afterwards 4. The hashed password as a hexadecimal number with 128 digits will be converted to a base 256 number with 64 digits, which will be repeated 8 times in a special manner, and then broken down into a list of 512 literals, each being either numeric literals 1 to 100 or any of the 156 named constants 5. Each of those 512 numeric literals or named constants will be attached with existing numeric literals and named constants via different ways and combinations of additions, subtractions, multiplications and divisions, and the whole attachment process is determined by the fixed pepper in the client software source code 6. The same attachment process will be repeated, except that this time it’s determined by a randomly generated salt in the client terminal 7. That list of 512 distinct roots, with the ordering among all roots and all their literal expressions preserved, will produce the resultant polynomial equation of degree 512 8. The resultant polynomial equation will be encoded into numbers and number separators in the client terminal 9. The encoded version will be encrypted by RSA4096 on the client terminal with a public key there before being sent to the server, which has the private key 10. The server decrypts the encrypted polynomial equation from the client with its RSA4096 private key, then decode the decrypted version in the server to recover the original polynomial equation, which will finally be stored there 11. The 2 aforementioned different salts will be encrypted by 2 different AES256 keys in the client software source code, and their encrypted versions will be sent to the server to be stored there 12. The time complexity of the whole process, except the SHA3512, RSA4096 and AES256, should be controlled to quadratic time The whole login process is as follows: 1. The client inputs the user ID and its password in plaintext 2. The client terminal will send the user ID to the server, which will send its corresponding salts for hashing the password in plaintexts and forming distinct roots respectively, already encrypted in AES256 back to the client terminal, assuming that the user ID from the client does exist in the server(otherwise the login fails and nothing will be sent back from the server) 3. The password will be combined with a fixed pepper in the client software source code, and the aforementioned salt that is decrypted in the client terminal using the AES256 key in the client software source code, to be hashed in the client terminal by SHA3512 afterwards 4. The hashed password as a hexadecimal number with 128 digits will be converted to a base 256 number with 64 digits, which will be repeated 8 times in a special manner, and then broken down into a list of 512 literals, each being either numeric literals 1 to 100 or any of the 156 named constants 5. Each of those 512 numeric literals or named constants will be attached with existing numeric literals and named constants via different ways and combinations of additions, subtractions, multiplications and divisions, and the whole attachment process is determined by the fixed pepper in the client software source code 6. The same attachment process will be repeated, except that this time it’s determined by the corresponding salt sent from the server that is decrypted in the client terminal using a different AES256 key in the client software source code 7. That list of 512 distinct roots, with the ordering among all roots and all their literal expressions preserved, will produce the resultant polynomial equation of degree 512 8. The resultant polynomial equation will be encoded into numbers and number separators in the client terminal 9. The encoded version will be encrypted by RSA4096 on the client terminal with a public key there before being sent to the server, which has the private key 10. The server decrypts the encrypted polynomial equation from the client with its RSA4096 private key, then decode the decrypted version in the server to recover the original polynomial equation 11. Whether the login will succeed depends on if the literal expression of the polynomial equation from the client exactly matches the expected counterpart already stored in the server 12. The time complexity of the whole process, except the SHA3512, RSA4096 and AES256, should be controlled to quadratic time For an attacker trying to get the raw password in plaintext: 1. If the attacker can only sniff the transmission from the client to the server to get the encoded then encrypted version(which is then encrypted by RSA4096) of the polynomial equation, the salt of its roots, and the counterpart for the password in plaintext, the attacker first have to break RSA4096, then the attacker has to figure out the highly secret and obfuscated algorithm to decode those numbers and number separators into the resultant polynomial equation and the way its roots are attached by existing numeric literals and named constants 2. If the attacker has the resultant polynomial equation of degree 512, its roots must be found, but there’s no direct formula to do so analytically due to AbelRuffini theorem, and factoring such a polynomial with 156 different named constants efficiently is very, very complicated and convoluted 3. If the attacker has direct access to the server, the expected polynomial equation can be retrieved, but the attacker still has to solve that polynomial equation of degree 512 to find all its roots with the right ordering among them and all their correct literal expressions 4. If the attacker has direct access to the client software source codes, the pepper for hashing the password in plaintext, the pepper used on the polynomial equation roots, and the highly secret and obfuscated algorithm for using them with the salt counterparts can be retrieved, but it’s still far from being able to find all the roots of the expected polynomial equation of degree 512 5. If the attacker has all those roots, the right ordering among them and all their correct literal expressions still have to be figured out, and the salts and peppers for those roots has to be properly removed as well 6. If the attacker has all those roots with the right ordering among them, all their correct literal expressions, and salts and peppers on them removed, the attacker has effectively recovered the hashed password, which is mixed with salts and peppers in plaintext 7. The attacker then has to figure out the password in plaintext even with the hashing function, salt, pepper, and the highly secret and obfuscated algorithm that combines them known 8. Unless there are really efficient algorithms for every step involved, the time complexity of the whole process can be as high as factorial time 9. As users are still inputting passwords in plaintexts, dictionary attacks still work to some extent, but if the users are careless with their password strengths, then no amount of cryptography will be safe enough 10. Using numerical methods to find all the roots won’t work in most cases, because such methods are unlikely to find those roots analytically, let alone with the right ordering among them and all their right literal expressions, which are needed to produce the resultant polynomial equation with literal expressions exactly matching the expected one 11. Using rainbow tables won’t work well either, because such table would be way too large to be used in practice, due to the number of polynomial equations with degree 512 being unlimited in theory 12. Strictly speaking, the whole password encryption scheme isn’t a oneway function, but the time complexity needed for encryption compared to that for decryption is so trivial that this scheme can act like such a function Areas demanding further researches: 1. The time complexity for factoring a polynomial of degree n with named constants into n factors analytically 2. Possibilities of collisions from the ordering among all roots and all their different literal expressions 3. Existence of efficient algorithms on finding the right ordering among all roots and all their right literal expressions 4. Strategies on setting up the fixed peppers and generating random salts to form roots with maximum encryption strength Essentially, the whole approach on using polynomial equations for encryptions is to exploit equations that are easily formed by their analytical solution sets but very hard to solve analytically, especially when exact literal matches, rather than just mathematical identity, are needed to match the expected equations. So it’s not strictly restricted to polynomial equations with a very high degree, but maybe very high order partial differential equations with many variables, complex coefficients and functions accepting complex numbers can also work, because there are no known analytical algorithm on solving such equations yet, but analytical solutions are demanded to reproduce the same partial differential equations with exact literal matches, as long as performing partial differentiations analytically can be efficient enough. 
DoubleX RMMZ Skill Item Triggers
DoubleX replied to DoubleX's topic in Completed Scripts/Plugins/etc.
Updates * { codebase: "1.1.1", plugin: "v1.01a" }(2020 Dec 26 GMT 1300): * 1. Added the following notetag types: * subjectMiss * subjectEva * subjectCnt * subjectMrf * subjectCri * subjectNorm * subjectSubstitute * 2. Added the following parameters: * subjectMissNotetagDataTypePriorities * subjectEvaNotetagDataTypePriorities * subjectCntNotetagDataTypePriorities * subjectMrfNotetagDataTypePriorities * subjectCriNotetagDataTypePriorities * subjectNormNotetagDataTypePriorities * subjectSubstituteNotetagDataTypePriorities * 3. Fixed the eventEntry of all notetags not correctly accepting all * intended suffixes and rejecting the unintended ones Video The latest version of DoubleX RMMZ Enhanced Codebase is needed as well :) 
DoubleX RMMZ TPBS Configurations Edit
DoubleX replied to DoubleX's topic in Completed Scripts/Plugins/etc.
Updates * { codebase: "1.1.1", plugin: "v1.01a" }(2020 Dec 25 GMT 1100): * 1. Added tpbChargeGaugeColor1 and tpbChargeGaugeColor2 to let you * configure the TPB charging bar colors inside battles * 2. Added tpbIdleGaugeColor1 and tpbIdleGaugeColor2 to let you show the * TPB idling bar inside battles with configurable colors * 3. Added tpbCastGaugeColor1 and tpbCastGaugeColor2 to let you show the * TPB casting bar inside battles with configurable colors * 4. Added tpbReadyGaugeColor1 and tpbCastGaugeColor2 to let you show * the TPB cast ready bar inside battles with configurable colors * 5. Added isTpbTimeActive to let you set the TPBS wait conditions more * precisely Video 3 replies

 tpb
 time progress battle

(and 1 more)
Tagged with:

Updates *  v0.15c(GMT 0700 11Dec2020): * 1. Fixed the following wrong documentations: * Battler manipulations  * i. setDelaySecCounter should be setSATBDelaySecCounter * ii. addDelaySecCounter should be addSATBDelaySecCounter * iii. multiplyDelaySecCounter should be * multiplySATBDelaySecCounter * iv. delaySecCounter should be satbDelaySecCounter * 2. Added the action sequence for the Delay Module in * Yanfly Engine Plugins  Battle Engine Core * 3. Lets players cancels actor cooldown by clicking the actor sprite * 4. Lets players cancels actor charge by clicking the actor sprite
 2 replies

 active time battle
 rmmv

(and 2 more)
Tagged with:

DoubleX_RMMZ_TPBS_Countdown_States
DoubleX replied to DoubleX's topic in Completed Scripts/Plugins/etc.
Updates * { codebase: "1.1.0", plugin: "v1.00b" }(2020 Dec 11 GMT 0400): * 1. Adding the plugin command and query counterpart of the * isTPBSCountdownState battler manipulation * 2. Documented the isTPBSCountdownState battler manipulation * 3. Fixed the bug of not removing countdown states nor triggering * effects from plugin DoubleX RMMZ State Triggers 
Updates *  v0.15b(GMT 0400 7Dec2020): * 1. You no longer have to edit the value of * DoubleX_RMMZ.Superlative_ATB_Parameters_File when changing the * parameter plugin file name * 2. Fixed the wrong this of the following Array prototype methods: * i. fastFilter * ii. fastMap * iii. filterMap * iv. mapFilter * v. mapReduce * vi. mapSome * 3. Fixed the x and y positions and opacity update bugs for discrete * order battler sprites * 4. Fixed wrong unit test check conditions for the x and y positions * and opacity for discrete order battler sprites
 2 replies

 active time battle
 rmmv

(and 2 more)
Tagged with:

Why deciding when to refactor can be complicated and convoluted
DoubleX commented on DoubleX's blog entry in My pointless thoughts
In a solo project, when to refactor usually has an easy, simple and small answer  When you start feeling the significant pain for a while of not doing the refactor. Actually, it's like when to clean your room when you're the only one using it  When you start feeling quite uncomfortable on your messy room for a while. But in a team project, that will be very different, at least because: 1. Different team members have different pain threshold 2. Different team members have different pain tolerance 3. Most importantly, different team members have different pain points So in this case, some kind of a previously agreed upon protocols on refactoring in the team has to be made, even though the protocol can be very vague and ambiguous. Also, on the management level, the reasons to refactor will be very different from those of the team members, because the former usually cares about effectiveness and efficiencies on the end results as a team, and rarely cares the pains that impede productivity of the latter in the process 
DoubleX reacted to a comment on a blog entry: Why deciding when to refactor can be complicated and convoluted

Why deciding when to refactor can be complicated and convoluted
DoubleX commented on DoubleX's blog entry in My pointless thoughts
Yes, that's why I've written this: And personally, I use another model when it comes to considering refactoring on the architectural design level  building mansions, but this analogy is much, much more complicated and convoluted that, probably only those having several years of professional software engineering experiences will really fathom it. The number of stories is like the scale of the codebase, and clearly, different codebase scales demand different architectural designs. It's because, a single storey building might not need a foundation at all, while the foundations of a 10 storey building and that of a 100 storey building can be vastly different. Also, usually, the taller the building, the stricter the safety requirements and contingency plannings(like code quality requirements and exception handling standards in the codebase) will apply to it, because the risk(probability and severity of consequences) of collapse will increase as the building gets taller if nothing else changes. As the codebase scales, it's like increasing the number of stories of the building, eventually you'll have to stop and reinforce or even rebuild the entire foundations first before resuming, otherwise the building will eventually collapse. Also, it means that with the restrictions of the current technology, any codebase will always have an absolute maximum limit on its scale and the number of features it can provide, because having a 10B LoC scale codebase is as unimaginable as having a 10km tall building in the foreseeable future, even though they might eventually be the realities. So, even when the architectural designs are ideal on the current state of the codebase, one can't simply add more and more features without considering whether those architectural designs still work well with the increased codebase scale, and eventually some major refactoring involving architectural design changes have to be done. On the other hand, if each storey is modular enough(thanks to the ideal architectural design), as long as the pillar of strengths in that storey isn't damaged or even destroyed(maybe it's like the interface and the underlying core implicit assumptions of a module), reworking on a storey shouldn't affect too much on the adjacent, let alone other, stories, even though there are something like water pipes, electrical wires, air vents, etc, that are across multiple stories and even the whole building, which is like crosscutting concerns in the codebase, that can get in the way of refactoring. However, I do think that my harvester analogy can serve the point by bringing at least the following across: 1. Not considering the importance of refactoring can lead to long term disasters, and fatal ones in some cases 2. Always refactoring when the codebase has lessthanideal code qualities is usually suboptimal on the effectiveness and efficiency of pumping out features 3. Deciding when to refactor should be calculated on a casebycase basis, and all the relevant factors should be considered 4. Sometimes one has to sacrifice the long term for a short time to ensure the short term crisis will be solved well enough And perhaps, the most important point is that, the productivity of adding new features in the codebase will rarely be linear across the development lifecycles :) 
DoubleX reacted to a comment on a blog entry: Why deciding when to refactor can be complicated and convoluted

DoubleX reacted to a comment on a blog entry: Even if numbers don't lie, they can still be easily misinterpreted

Updates * { codebase: "1.1.0", plugin: "v1.00b" }(2020 Dec 2 GMT 1000): * 1. You no longer have to edit the value of * DoubleX_RMMZ.TPBS_CTB.PLUGIN_NAME when changing this plugin file * name
 1 reply

 rmmz
 charge turn battle

(and 2 more)
Tagged with:

Updates * { codebase: "1.1.0", plugin: "v1.00b" }(2020 Dec 2 GMT 1000): * 1. You no longer have to edit the value of * DoubleX_RMMZ.TPBS_Battle_Turns.PLUGIN_NAME when changing this * plugin file name

DoubleX_RMMZ_TPBS_Actor_Hotkeys
DoubleX replied to DoubleX's topic in Completed Scripts/Plugins/etc.
Updates * { codebase: "1.1.0", plugin: "v1.00b" }(2020 Dec 2 GMT 1000): * 1. You no longer have to edit the value of * DoubleX_RMMZ.TPBS_Actor_Hotkeys.PLUGIN_NAME when changing this * plugin file name