CRYPTO NEWS

How to stop buying other than my own

I want to stop non owner purchases while I’m airdropping.

function _transfer(address from, address to, uint256 amount) private {     ・     ・     ・     if(to != uniswapV2Pair){         require(from == owner(), "Not available");     } 

"Add Liquidity" is OK, but when I, the owner, try to buy from pancake, I get an error. It’s also an error with another address. The owner() is my address, it’s correct. What is wrong?

Is a static IV really less secure than an IV generated from a master key?

As an example, let’s take a simple situation where AES-256-CBC with IV + MAC is used to encrypt a given plainText and offer authentication. iv.mac1.cipherText(plainText) The keys are derived using HMAC for simplicity (alternatively could be HKDF) masterkey = [32 random bytes]; encryptionKey = hmac_sha256(masterkey,’encryption_key’); mac = hmac_sha256(masterkey,’mac_key’); iv = hmac_sha256(masterkey,’iv_key’); Alternatively in a second::Listen

As an example, let’s take a simple situation where AES-256-CBC with IV + MAC is used to encrypt a given plainText and offer authentication.

iv.mac1.cipherText(plainText)

The keys are derived using HMAC for simplicity (alternatively could be HKDF)

masterkey = [32 random bytes];
encryptionKey = hmac_sha256(masterkey,'encryption_key');
mac = hmac_sha256(masterkey,'mac_key');
iv = hmac_sha256(masterkey,'iv_key');

Alternatively in a second solution the IV is defined in the codebase:

masterkey = [32 random bytes];
encryptionKey = hmac_sha256(masterkey,'encryption_key');
mac = hmac_sha256(masterkey,'mac_key');
iv = [32 hard coded bytes];

In both scenario’s the IV itself is not stored or transmitted, and the masterkey is used to decrypt messages.

Is the static IV really less secure, given that deriving a key for the IV with the same masterkey also produces the same output?

How to stop buying other than my own

Shopping cart
There are no products in the cart!
Continue shopping
0