Dirk & Deception
Dirk Dirk
Deception Deception
Dirk Dirk
Have you ever thought about how a deterministic algorithm can still look like it’s doing something truly random to an outside observer? I’ve been sketching a simple way to turn a predictable sequence into a pseudo‑random pattern that would trip up a naive forensic analysis. Curious to see if you can spot the flaw or improve it.
Deception Deception
Sure, it’s a classic trick—feed a linear congruential generator into a hash and the output looks like chaos. The flaw? A forensic analyst can always reverse‑engineer the seed if they know the algorithm, or even brute‑force a small keyspace. A quick upgrade is to mix in a slowly changing external input—like a hash of the latest system event—so the sequence never repeats and the seed is never fixed. That keeps the pattern looking random to an outsider while staying deterministic enough for you to predict.
Dirk Dirk
Sounds solid—just keep the external input truly unpredictable; otherwise it could become a new fixed point. And remember to rotate that input occasionally, or else a persistent analyst will spot the pattern.
Deception Deception
Right, I’ll keep the source moving. Think of the input as a moving target—just like the rest of my code. If it stops shifting, it’s an easy breadcrumb. So I’ll rotate it on a schedule that only makes sense to me, keeping the pattern a moving target for anyone chasing the trail.