5900xt 128 or 256 bits??????

sup guys
as MSI site does not give the specifications clearly, i need to know from u if the 5900xt got the tru 256 or jus the 128bits cuz i cant find it in the site
as u all know som board manufacturers like to put slower memories than the chipset manufacturer design for their chip models.. i hope MSI isnt 1 of em cuz the 5900xt gotta b 256bits!
thx in advance

just download the manual and see it's a 256bit

Similar Messages

How to tell if 128 or 256 bit encryption

I have an encrypted disk image. I can access it fine. How do I tell if it was encrypted with a 128 or 256 bit key? All the info says is "encrypted".

Found it!
hdiutil imageinfo <path>

Going from 128-bit to 256-bit encryption

Hello all,
This is my first post here so please be gentle.
I'm a tech manager who inherited an undocumented environment and have a question regarding upgrading the encryption on our 6.1 iPlanet instances from 128-bit to 256-bit.
I've searched through the documentation and I can't seem to get a clear answer.
1. To upgrade to 256-bit do I just need to update the following line in my obj.conf file:
PathCheck fn="ssl-check" secret-keysize="128"
to
PathCheck fn="ssl-check" secret-keysize="256"
2. Are there any dependencies for making this change such as generating a new SSL cert?
Thanks in advance - Bill

Here is some documentation about ssl-check :
http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/820-2203/abujv?l=en&a=view&q=ssl-check
The ssl-check function is used along with a Client tag to limit
access of certain directories to non-exportable browsers. If a
restriction is selected that is not consistent with the current cipher
settings, this function displays a warning that ciphers with larger
secretkeysizes must be enabled.
secret-keysize (Optional) Minimum number of bits required in the secret key.
Which version of 6.1 Server are you using?
$cd <web-server-install-dir>/<web-server-instance-dir>/
$start -versionCan you send your server.xml settings?
Assuming your machine is foo.bar.test.com
$cd alias
$../bin/https/admin/bin/certutil -L -d . -p https-foo.bar.test.com-foo-displays the server's certificate nickname lets say it is Server-Cert
Then try to get the certificate details in ascii format
$../bin/https/admin/bin/certutil -n Server-Cert -p https-foo.bar.test.com-foo-It will show something like :
Certificate:
    Data:
        Version: 3 (0x2)
        Serial Number: .... (0x...)
        Signature Algorithm: PKCS #1 SHA-1 With RSA Encryption
        Issuer: "CN=..."
        Validity:
            Not Before: .... 2008
            Not After : .... 2018
        Subject: "CN=..."
        Subject Public Key Info:
            Public Key Algorithm: PKCS #1 RSA Encryption
            RSA Public Key:
                Modulus:
                    bd:10:c2:e0:bc:ad:fd:e6:75:ce:86:82:51:de:bf:37:
                    51:05:06:89:db:c2:6d:0c:31:f4:19:32:90:59:77:c1:
                    a0:6c:ef:88:54:ed:f8:d3:d2:6a:f7:22:f4:c6:95:60:
                    06:3a:64:f3:e4:0c:09:f4:37:c6:44:e7:d4:37:5a:4d
                Exponent: 65537 (0x10001)
...Each line in Modulus section corresponds to 128 bits. In my case I have 4 lines, so my certificates key size is 4*128 = 512 bits.
Can you send your modulus info i.e key size with which your certificates were created?
Edited by: mv on Feb 8, 2008 9:28 AM

ITunes replacing 256 bit songs with 128 bit songs

When I downloaded new applications from the App Store today, I noticed that my downloads in iTunes also downloaded six songs. Upon further inspection, it replaced three Peter Gabriel Songs from the Album "So" with 128 bit versions, and moved my 256 bit versions to the trash. I purchsed six songs, total, off of that album, but only three were replaced and deleted.
In addition to moving the above songs to the trash, it also sidelined a handful of songs by copying new versions, including:
I've been Everywhere, Johnny Cash, Unchained
Baby Baby, Amy Grant, (no record of previous purchase from this same album)
New York, New York, Tony Bennett, Fifty Years (previously had a 128 bit version, and it downloaded a second 128 bit version)
Anyone else experience this? You can easily check after the fact by sorting on recently modified songs, and see if you have any 128 bit versions, or if you don't empty your trash often, by looking for the "Original iTunes Purchases" in your trash. This will show any files that have been deleted, but not sidelined.

I saw ginbear's post and looked again. I had two more replaced files. Appears they were replaced on 1/22 and 1/24 of this year. I have a couple thousand iTunes tracks, and it only seems to replace a couple ever few months. Luckily, I was able to retrieve the files. One from a recent backup, and the other from a one-off copy I made just in case, the last time it happened.
Here's the response I received from Apple after pursuing it for a couple weeks the last time it happened. They looked at specific tracks iTunes had downloaded.
I'm not sure what the representative is trying to say, but I was glad they looked into the issue.
10/13/2011
Name, this issue is one that does not occur often (I myself have only encountered one other instance of this happening). This may have been caused by a technical error in the iTune Store itself resulting in the pre-upgraded file to download automatically to your account which has been only been known to happen on very rare occasion.
The other explanation may have been an error in iTunes, or with your iTunes library file that caused the 128-bit DRM files to replace your 256-bit DRM free files. For example, if your iTunes library was restored from an iTunes library file before the upgrade was made.
In any case, it is not the iTunes Store's intent to replace your music with pre-upgraded files so I am very glad to hear that you were able to recover your iTunes Plus music, and do not appear to have any files missing.
I want to make sure that you are able to enjoy your iTunes Plus music, so please feel fee to let me know if there is anything further I can assist you with in regards to your files. Thank you for your continued patience name. I hope you have an excellent day!

Windows 8.1 Pro Bitlocker AES 256-bit cypher question

Hi, all
Have an odd situation I cannot make any sense of. I have a desktop PC running Windows 8.1 Pro. I launched gpedit.msc and changed Bitlocker’s cypher strength from the default AES 128-bit to AES 256-bit.
I then connected a brand new Western Digital 4TB external drive (model WDBFJK0040HBK-04) to the PC via USB 3.0, and Bitlocker-encrypted the drive. Opened a command prompt window as administrator, ran “manage-bde –status” for the drive in question,
which indicated the drive was encrypted with the 128 bit cypher strength, instead of 256 bits, as I had selected. Have unencrypted, rebooted and re-encrypted the drive time and again, always with the same results.
When connecting the same external 4TB drive to a Windows Server 2012 R2 Essentials in which I had made the exact same changes via gpedit.msc,
I can encrypt it with the 256-bit cypher strength, with no problems.
No TPM is used in either scenario, just a passphrase.
Anyone has any idea why my 256-bit setting is being ignored in the Windows 8.1 Pro machine?
Thanks
Arsene
ArseneL

Well, running rsop.msc in my Server 2012 R2 machine does show my 256-bit bitlocker setting took, however, running rsop.msc in my Win 8.1 Pro machine shows it did not, which explains the problem I am having.
Now all I have to do is find out why my request is not taking, even though I am logged in as an admin.
Thanks!!
ArseneL

File Vault 256-Bit FINALLY???

So is file-vault always 256 bit in leopard or is it an option that must be turned on? Also has anyone notice a decrease in performance since increasing from 128-bit to 256-bit?
Thanks
-intelpro20

First let me ask, does File-Vault use 256 bit encryption or 128?

Can a 256 bit encrypted disk image be read by Tiger?

I have computers running Leopard, Tiger and Panther.
If I create a 256 bit encrypted disk image in Leopard, will the image be able to mount and used for reading and writing in Tiger and or Panther?
Or should I use 128 bit encryption in a mixed OS X environment?
TIA,
Bill

Hello Bill,
A 256 bit encrypted disk image created in Leopard can be opened in Panther, and presumably Tiger, though I don't have Tiger.
It cannot however, be written to, only read.
So if you want to add to the disk image on Panther, and possibly Tiger, use 128 bit. But if you only want *read only* on the other machines you could use 256 bit.

256 bit encryption with Distiller?

I have Acrobat X and am using a watched folder and Distiller to generate encrypted .pdf documents.
Distiller is set to 128 bit encryption and I don't see any way to change that.
The help button on the Distiller security settings dialog links to a help page about Acrobat security instead of Distiller ( I filed a bug about that already).
Thanks in advance for any help.

The user will probably have to open each file and set the security in Acrobat after Distiller has made them.
Beware of 256 bit encryption, it puts severe limits on the software people can use to read the files.

Generating AES 256 bit key using seed

Hi
As part of encryption requirements for encrypting the body of the SOAP Message while calling an external Web Service, it is requried to encrypt using a shared symmetric key.
First step is to create a password digest
Base64(sha1(nonce + createdTimestamp + password)) - This step is working completely fine and produces a 160 bit Hash
The next step is to generate an AES 256 bit key using the above hash as the Seed. This should generate a 256 bit encrytpion key which can then be used to encrypt the message body.
Would appreciate if anyone who knows how to generate AES 256 bit key using a hash seed in Java (v1.4.2) can provide some guidance.
P:S. I am using WSS4J API to use WS-Security

I have to generate 256-bit AES key with a 128-bit IV using the above password digest and the IV used for in the creation of the AES key prefixes the cipher text.
The external WebService is .net webservice.
Edited by: GUPTAG on Nov 25, 2008 3:05 AM

CF9 Encrypt with AES 256-bit, example anyone?

Hi there. I'm looking for a working example of the Encrypt method using the AES 256 bit key. I think that I have the Unlimited Strength Jurisdiction Policy Files enabled. And I'm still getting the CFError,
The key specified is not a valid key for this encryption: Illegal key size.
Now i hit the wall, can't get it. What wrong am i doing? How can I verify that the policy files are installed and accessible to my cf file? Any help is greatly appreciated.
<cfset thePlainText = "Is this working for me?" />
Generate Secret Key (128):  <cfset AES128 = "#generatesecretkey('AES',128)#" /> <cfdump var="#AES128#"><BR>
Generate Secret Key (192):  <cfset AES192 = "#generatesecretkey('AES',192)#" /> <cfdump var="#AES192#"><BR>
Generate Secret Key (256):  <cfset AES256 = "#generatesecretkey('AES',256)#" /> <cfdump var="#AES256#"><BR><BR>
<cfset theKey    = AES256 />
<cfset theAlgorithm = "AES/CBC/PKCS5Padding" />
<cfset theEncoding = "base64" />
<cfset theIV    = BinaryDecode("6d795465737449566f7253616c7431323538704c6173745f", "hex") />
<cfset encryptedString = encrypt(thePlainText, theKey, theAlgorithm, theEncoding, theIV) />

<cfset keyLengthInBits = arrayLen(BinaryDecode(theKey, "base64")) * 8 />
<cfset ivLengthInBits = arrayLen(theIV) * 8 />
<cfdump var="#variables#" label="AES/CBC/PKCS5Padding Results" />
<cfabort>

Verison 10 is different from 9 because they run on different servlet containers. CF 10 uses Tomcat, CF 9 uses JRun, so things are in different places.
\\ColdFusion10\jre\lib\security seems like the correct locaiton for the policy files to me. I actually gave you the wrong locations in my original post (sorry about that). According to the installation instructions they belong in <java-home>\lib\security, which is looks like you've found.
So something else is wrong. Here are some things to look at, in no particular order:
1. Are you using a JVM other than the Java 1.6 that comes with CF10?
2. Did you restart Tomcat after coping the files in?
3. Note that I keep saying FILES, did you copy BOTH of th .jar files from the JCE folder you unzipped into the security directory. It should have prompted you to overwrite existing files.
4. Did you try unzipping the files and copying them in again, on the chance that they did not overwrite the originals?
Sorry, I don't have CF10 installed to give this a try. But I have no reason to believe that it would not work in 10. It's all just JCA/JCE on the underlying JAVA, and I have heard no reports from anyone else that it doesn't work.
Jason

"At least" 4 DIMMs for 256-bit operation

Apple and other memory vendors have indicated that to make use of the 256-bit max memory architecture in the Mac Pro, you need to add "at least 4 FB-DIMM modules."
At least, hm? To me that means 4 DIMMs or 8 DIMMs. Clearly using 6 DIMMs will, in the best case, result in a portion of your main memory operating at 256-bits and a portion at less (what, 128-bits?).
Do you agree?
blakespot

but whether the 4 DIMMs are the same size or not doesn't really matter.
In actual fact it does. The reason is that once the RAM is slots 1 and 2 become saturated memory request are then schduled to RAM in slots 3 and 4. When the RAM is unbalanced your system then has to decide whether it wants to schedule more requests to to the larger DIMMs, resulting in a throttling of total throughput as it become unbalanced. Else, it then has to have the small bank schedule requests through to slots 3 and 4. By having matched RAM between slots 1 and 2, subsequently in 3 and 4, everything is then done evenly across the board with the maximum of efficiency.
As far as placing the larger DIMMs in the lower numbered slots, the 3 or 4 nanoseconds (billionths of a second) of potential increase in latency when accessing memory in further slots is unlikely to make enough of a difference to worry about.
True, the vast majority won't notice the difference barring a direct comparison on benchmarks. The thing is though, as soon as scheduling to slot 3 and 4 occur the DIMMs on slots 1 and 2 need to handle far more processing to mange that scheduling. This results in more heat.
Given the superstitious nature of Mac users and our penchant for voodoo talismans and incantations (zapping PRAM, rebuilding desktops, fixing permissions, daily re-booting, etc.), I think we should be careful about making sure that the advice we give is correct lest we start a new round of voodoo spells.
Good point… although you might also want to read the FB-DIMM specs or a RAM manufacturer's desciption of it. They make very interesting read in the way they work. N.B. - They did give me quite the headache!

5700 Ultra with GDDR3 : 256-bit mem-interface???

Hey guys,
this question is for the techno-geeks (like myself ) in the hardware stuff, specifficaly about Vid Cards.
Well the question is the following:
The new Nvidia GeforceFX 5700 Utra cards with GDDR3 memory, that will start shipping in mid-march, will have 256-bit memory interface like the big guys (high-end cards) or will remain with the poor guys (low/mid-end cards) 128-bit interface??.
This is an important question that i need answered cause it will help me decide if i go for that card or an ATI one in the near future.
So plz guys, i would appreciate some replies here.
Cheers.

As far as I know, the width of the memory interface for the GPU depends on the GPU design itself (i.e, with either a 128-bit or 256-bit data bus). So since they will be using the same GPU (NV36 I think), the card will continue to have a 128-bit width memory interface.

Need 256 Bit AES Full Disk Encryption for a Mac. The other discussions regarding this issue are very old. Does anyone have any current advice regarding encryption software?

Does anyone have any advice regarding 256 bit full disk encryption software for Macs? The other discussions on the topic are years old, so I would like some current input. Thanks for your help in advance.

Depending on your Mac, you might not want to upgrade to OS X 10.7 or 10.8 as it will not run the PowerPC based software your currently using costing a bundle to replace it all, also they will slow down your machine if it's not a more recent issue. You don't want to upgrade OS X without AppleCare defending your possibly bricked logicboard that's for sure.
Filevault encrypts the boot drive, however in doing so makes it near impossible to fix if you have a software issue and need to recover files directly or by using specialty software. Also it robs the machine of performance even more than the Lions do. So you will really need a SSD to work best with 10.7/10.8 and Filevault, then it has to be freshly installed. Filevault needs 50% free space on the boot drive, then it's going to write to the slower 50% half of the hard drive where performance is terrible compared to the first 50%.
Also Filevault is cracked under certain conditions, and if someone gets their hands on the machine (like the law) and knows what they are doing.
If you take your Filevaulted machine to Apple to fix, they are going to require the password to fix the machine obviously.
Software based encryption is vulnerable, you might want to instead place your sensitive data on external self-encrypting hardware that doesn't rely upon software or computer hacks/bypasses (ike freezing the RAM) to get to it.
http://www.datalocker.com/products/datalocker-dl3.html
Iron Keys for portable USB self encryption, both work with any computer, so your not locked into one platform.
With the senstive data off the computer and on a external device, there is the option of removing, hiding and securing the device. If used with a computer that's never connected to the Internet, it's safe from snoopers, except from a survelliance van parked outside your door.

How can I find out if an installation of Unified Development Server is 128 or 40 bit encryption

I have UDS installed, I would like to know whether its 128 or 40 bit encryption

UDS 3.5 and above include cryptography support. This comes as direct access to cryptography primitives as well as indirect access when using the builtin SSLExternalConnection class that supports SSL 3.0. The early versions shipped two different cryptography strengths are required by export controls. The latest versions of UDS are now allowed to ship the higher strength encryption to all customers. My previous post gave a way to determine which cryptography support was installed in your installation.

Help enabling AES 256-bit cipher suites

I can't seem to create an SSLServerSocket with the 2 AES 256-bit cipher suites that are supposed to be available in JDK1.4.2. As you can see in the following code, the SSLServerSocket, ss, is enabled with the 2 AES_256 cipher suites. But, when ss.getEnabledCipherSuites() is invoked, those 2 suites aren't listed. What's up?
Also, what is this SSLv2Hello that I can't seem to get rid of?
    String[] PROTOCOLS = {"SSLv3", "TLSv1"};
    String[] CIPHER_SUITES = {"TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA",
                              "TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA",
                              "SSL_DHE_RSA_WITH_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA",
                              "TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA",
                              "TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA",
                              "SSL_RSA_WITH_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA"};// create an SSLServerSocket ss
        SSLContext context = SSLContext.getInstance("TLS", "SunJSSE");
        context.init(myKeyManagers, myTrustManagers, SecureRandom.getInstance("SHA1PRNG", "SUN"));
        SSLServerSocketFactory ssFactory = context.getServerSocketFactory();
        SSLServerSocket ss = ssFactory.createServerSocket();
        ss.setEnabledProtocols(PROTOCOLS);
        ss.setEnabledCipherSuites(CIPHER_SUITES);// output a bunch of useful debugging information
        System.out.println(System.getProperty("java.version") + "\n");
        Provider[] providers = Security.getProviders();
        for(int i=0; i < providers.length; ++i)
            System.out.println(providers[i] + "\n" + providers.getInfo() + "\n********************");
String[] enabledProtocols = ss.getEnabledProtocols();
for(int i=0; i < enabledProtocols.length; ++i)
System.out.println(enabledProtocols[i]);
String[] enabledCipherSuites = ss.getEnabledCipherSuites();
for(int i=0; i < enabledCipherSuites.length; ++i)
System.out.println(enabledCipherSuites[i]);
OUTPUT
1.4.2
SUN version 1.42
SUN (DSA key/parameter generation; DSA signing; SHA-1, MD5 digests; SecureRandom; X.509 certificates; JKS keystore; PKIX CertPathValidator; PKIX CertPathBuilder; LDAP, Collection CertStores)
SunJSSE version 1.42
Sun JSSE provider(implements RSA Signatures, PKCS12, SunX509 key/trust factories, SSLv3, TLSv1)
SunRsaSign version 1.42
SUN's provider for RSA signatures
SunJCE version 1.42
SunJCE Provider (implements DES, Triple DES, AES, Blowfish, PBE, Diffie-Hellman, HMAC-MD5, HMAC-SHA1)
SunJGSS version 1.0
Sun (Kerberos v5)
SSLv2Hello
SSLv3
TLSv1
TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA
SSL_DHE_RSA_WITH_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA
TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA

Now I get an Exception when I run the same program.
OUTPUT
1.4.2
SUN version 1.42
SUN (DSA key/parameter generation; DSA signing; SHA-1, MD5 digests; SecureRandom; X.509 certificates; JKS keystore; PKIX CertPathValidator; PKIX CertPathBuilder; LDAP, Collection CertStores)
SunJSSE version 1.42
Sun JSSE provider(implements RSA Signatures, PKCS12, SunX509 key/trust factories, SSLv3, TLSv1)
SunRsaSign version 1.42
SUN's provider for RSA signatures
SunJCE version 1.42
SunJCE Provider (implements DES, Triple DES, AES, Blowfish, PBE, Diffie-Hellman, HMAC-MD5, HMAC-SHA1)
SunJGSS version 1.0
Sun (Kerberos v5)
java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Cannot support TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA with currently installed providers
        at com.sun.net.ssl.internal.ssl.CipherSuiteList.<init>(DashoA6275)
        at com.sun.net.ssl.internal.ssl.SSLServerSocketImpl.setEnabledCipherSuites(DashoA6275)
        at test.util.ConcreteSSLServerSocketFactory.initSocket(ConcreteSSLServerSocketFactory.java:111)
        at test.util.ConcreteSSLServerSocketFactory.createServerSocket(ConcreteSSLServerSocketFactory.java:100)
        at test.Test.main(Test.java:111)
Exception in thread "main"

5900xt 128 or 256 bits??????

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for