>>51869223
because math is the key to physics and mastering physics lets you hack the universe

>>51869223

MOMMY HOW DO I HACK MYSPACE.COM

That's you. That's what you sound like.

>>51869223
Your school has a cyber security club, I guarantee you. Join it, and learn to hack

>>51869223
So that you can understand why some things are difficult to hack.

>>51869223
Because computers are built on mathematical models which you need to understand if you're ever going to create something original.

I can't tell if you're trolling, but no serious course will teach you how to hack. It involves a lot of background at different areas and it even depends on the way you use the word "hack". It might mean hacking a protocol like your AC's IR remote or actually defacing some web page.

Both require completely different skills and both are attached to the same word.

>>51869922
>I can't tell if you're trolling
you are even more retarded than OP....

What is it about mathematics that causes people to become so scared? It's always the math courses that people dread more than anything and I just can't understand it. I'm not some sort of math whiz and I'm honestly bad at math and yet I did my years of calc, linear algebra and differential just to start getting into the meat of EE by buckling down and studying it. I really don't understand what else people expect

hack isnot science

>>51871749
American anti-intellectualism. It's "cool" to be bad at math.

>>51871749

It's because math doesn't have answers that range from completely wrong all the way to absolutely correct like problems in economics, psychology, politics and history might.

In math, you're either wrong or you're right and no amount of mental gymnastics can change that.

>>51872558
Basically this. People don't want to sit the fuck down and study math focused.

I used to think the same thing, math is hard etc not for everyone. I soon realized that it's 95% about sitting the fuck down and focusing. I can't take those same retards seriously anymore.

Computer Science encompasses a number of topics, not all of which are software security. One of the most important of these is runtime complexity, because in an ideal world, we would like our programs to not run like total dogshit. It is also, however, of vital use to those who do study software security, and in particular, cryptography. Why? Because one of the qualifying traits for an ideal cryptosystem is that it can be reduced to a hard problem. You want to ensure that no matter how much resources your opponent has, it will not be impossible for them to crack your cryptosystem in a reasonable amount of time (most cryptographers, I think, would leave "until the sun explodes" as a minimum amount of time to take to crack a good cryptosystem, but "until the heat death of the universe" is fine too). For this to be achieved, one needs an exponential time problem.

Now, there are plenty EXPTIME problems, but not all of them are suitable for cryptography, because many of them don't have the quality of being fast to verify. Chess, for example, is going to take a very long time to verify a winning move, just as it's going to take a long time to find one. If you had a cryptosystem that reduced to finding an ideal chess move, it would take an assload of time to decrypt your ciphertext, just as it would take an assload of time to try and break it. This is again no good, because we would like our programs to not run like dogshit. I want this post to be sent to 4chan's server in preferably way under 10 seconds, with the majority of time being spent sending shit over the wire, not decrypting SSL (and like hell am I going to not use SSL). Thus, we are left with a conundrum.

Continued...

...Continued

Enter NP-Complete problems. They're in NP, which means verifying them takes polynomial time or less. Solving them is another problem all together. Think Sudoku, how fast can you verify that a solution to a sudoku problem? Fairly easy. How fast can you brute force all the answers? Yeah, that'll take a while, especially if you scale the board up in size, and use more than just the digits 1-9. All of the NP-Complete problems are like that. So far, we haven't found a single NP-Complete problem that we can solve in polynomial time (that is, N^K time for some constant K, as opposed to K^N for some constant K, which is exponential). If we did, well, we'd end up having all of them, because as it turns out, this class of problems we call NP-Complete, are all reducible in polynomial time to every other NP-Complete problem. This opens up a lot of good, and a reasonable amount of bad. On one hand, most public key cryptography would get pretty fucking rekt (and it'll probably get pretty fucking rekt if anyone makes a working quantum computer, but that's another discussion). On the other hand though, we'd basically be able to cure all of the diseases. Why? Because protein folding is also NP-Complete. Ideally, we'll be able to find P = NP, rather than P != NP, since we do have cryptosystems that don't rely on P = NP, but we don't have a better way of dealing with protein folding, other than of course "let's just use everyone's PS3s for more compute power."

So yeah, NP-Completeness is fucking important. As for the rest of the math shit, you can get away with slightly less math depending upon what you're focusing on within computer science, but anything remotely interesting is going to have you learning probability theory, linear optimization, number theory, and/or calculus and maybe some linear algebra. And that's just off the top of my head.

>>51872661
Teach me please, im doing a math comp sci double and i have trouble fpcusing on the math. I know its not hard but i just cant "do" it

>>51869254
defcon video explains that

>>51871749
You can't jump into a section of mathematics that appears on a CS course and understand it by only looking at that particular problem. There are layers upon layers of things you need to understand beforehand, making the investment not worth the time, so I dodge modules with heavy mathematics. Compare this to computing topics, for example if you don't know anything about networking and take a course on advanced networks, you can easily be up to scratch with normal effort in a couple of weeks.

A few typos...

>>51872807

>not be impossible
"not be possible", or "be impossible." Tried to say both at once, said the opposite.

>>51872827

>how fast can you verify that a solution to a sudoku problem?
Forgot to add, "is correct."

You stupid fuck OP, you stupid, stupid, fuck.

If you want to learn to hack you need to understand P = NP vs. P /neq NP.
If P = NP then all of our encryption methods and security measures are completely useless. I want to punch your mom's vagina for birthing you.

>>51869922
>no serious course will teach you how to hack
Confirmed for never attending a real school.

>>51869943
>implying that guy wasn't also trolling
The only retard here is you friend