Are you mixing different memory modules on the same machine? If that's
the case, extract one and try the computer with one module at a time,
just to discard RAM problems.
Regards and good luck,
Dani
El 01/07/2010 12:15, Claudiu Pruna escribiC3:
On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 10:32 +0300, Thanasis wro
On 2010-07-01, Claudiu Pruna wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-06-30 at 16:21 -0600, Alexander Hall wrote:
>> On 06/30/10 14:58, Claudiu Pruna wrote:
>> >Hi there,
>> >
>> >I have a question if I have one box running OpenBSD 4.7 and everytime I
>> > do md5 on one file I get different results, who is
On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 14:14 +0300, Ozgur Kazancci wrote:
> Sounds like a bad ram module to me.
>
> A mem test would be good;
>
> http://www.memtest.org/
> or
> http://www.memtest86.com/
>
> Get the pre-compiled bootable ISO from there and test your RAM modules.
>
> If errors are found, replace
On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 10:32 +0300, Thanasis wrote:
> I had such a problem with under-volted RAM. The RAM (DDR2) needed to be
> manually set to 2.0 or 2.1 Volts (in BIOS).
>
> on 06/30/2010 11:58 PM Claudiu Pruna wrote the following:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > I have a question if I have one box
On Wed, 2010-06-30 at 16:21 -0600, Alexander Hall wrote:
> On 06/30/10 14:58, Claudiu Pruna wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > I have a question if I have one box running OpenBSD 4.7 and everytime I
> > do md5 on one file I get different results, who is more succeptible to
> > be broken ? cpu ?
Check your RAM's specs as to voltage ...
on 06/30/2010 11:58 PM Claudiu Pruna wrote the following:
> Hi there,
>
> I have a question if I have one box running OpenBSD 4.7 and everytime I
> do md5 on one file I get different results, who is more succeptible to
> be broken ? cpu ? ram ?
I had such a problem with under-volted RAM. The RAM (DDR2) needed to be
manually set to 2.0 or 2.1 Volts (in BIOS).
on 06/30/2010 11:58 PM Claudiu Pruna wrote the following:
> Hi there,
>
> I have a question if I have one box running OpenBSD 4.7 and everytime I
> do md5 on one file I
On 06/30/10 14:58, Claudiu Pruna wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I have a question if I have one box running OpenBSD 4.7 and everytime I
> do md5 on one file I get different results, who is more succeptible to
> be broken ? cpu ? ram ? or mb. ?
>
> Thanks for your thoughts.
If your system is
2007/5/8, Alvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Can someone verify the different in MD5 checksum?
No, I get the same files.
Best
Martin
On Mon, 15 Jan 2007, Gregory Edigarov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> It would be greatly appreciated if somebody can make an md5 checksum of the
> generic kernel.
> Need to check that as my OpenBSD 4.0 install hangs while booting at the very
> early stage.
The kernel embeds information that is different e
> Hello,
>
> It would be greatly appreciated if somebody can make an md5 checksum of
> the generic kernel.
MD5 (/bsd) = e8f67a2fd90f98d5b4edee9fe837c2fd
MD5 (/bsd.mp) = 63906960ed483599175af5c21bbcffe7
MD5 (/bsd.rd) = 9b39a3f3d938fb906f2bf59bcface97f
Gregory Edigarov wrote:
It would be greatly appreciated if somebody can make an md5 checksum
of the generic kernel.
Need to check that as my OpenBSD 4.0 install hangs while booting at
the very early stage.
# this is for i386 because you said old PC
MD5 (bsd) = e8f67a2fd90f98d5b4edee9fe837c2fd
Sorry false alarm :/ After third time everything is ok.
--
best regards
q#
On Thu, 6 Jul 2006 14:04:28 +0200 (CEST)
Moritz Kiese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Philip Guenther wrote:
>
> > On 7/4/06, Chet Uber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > ...
> >> The reason I had said anything is
> >> that when I do forensic work I used to just do MD5's of files, bu
On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Philip Guenther wrote:
On 7/4/06, Chet Uber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
The reason I had said anything is
that when I do forensic work I used to just do MD5's of files, but it
has gotten called to task in court so we now use both MD5 and SHA1
hashes as it is NP-complete t
On 7/4/06, Chet Uber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
The reason I had said anything is
that when I do forensic work I used to just do MD5's of files, but it
has gotten called to task in court so we now use both MD5 and SHA1
hashes as it is NP-complete to find a collision in both of them for
the sa
1. No, but you can certainly find the numerous citations on why it
is weak hash.
I know why it is a weak hash, I was not implying it was strong but it
is still useful for many applications that still rely on it, for some
protocols that use mixed hashes [md5/sha, ...]. Not to mention that a
use
On Tue, 4 Jul 2006 06:18:53 -0400
Chet Uber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jul 4, 2006, at 3:00 AM, Gilles Chehade wrote:
>
> > Chet Uber wrote:
> >> Theo,
> >>
> >> Also the last I checked obsd still supports MD5
> >>
> >> CU
> > Can you please explain why it should not ?
> > Can you please
On Jul 4, 2006, at 3:00 AM, Gilles Chehade wrote:
Chet Uber wrote:
Theo,
Also the last I checked obsd still supports MD5
CU
Can you please explain why it should not ?
Can you please find a collision for 3d16b4f76338838044b90ffae5e71cb5 ?
1. No, but you can certainly find the numerous citat
Chet Uber wrote:
Theo,
Also the last I checked obsd still supports MD5
CU
Can you please explain why it should not ?
Can you please find a collision for 3d16b4f76338838044b90ffae5e71cb5 ?
20 matches
Mail list logo
