If you allow wallets to sync via a wallet it is very slow and may take days or weeks so download the data base from the link i have provided unzip them and copy them to your folder normally this will be something like this

C:\users\USERNAME\AppData\Roaming\Bitcoin\blocks\

unless you have installed it some ware else this is the default folder

this is win 7

All the wallets will be in the above address so where i have username well put your username and where i have Bitcoin you can put Viacoin , Litecoin , Huntercoin blah blah blah

---

If you do not mind, I did not start this thread.

But I just happen to visit my Skype account using the web.

By means of selecting "Change Password" from inside the client when logged in, I am redirected to a secure web-page at Skype.

The interesting thing to notice is the fact that although https, this web-page is stated as having a poor security configuration (in fact a SHA-1 signature), which makes the connection possibly not totally secure.

But when checking the signature by means of the certificate being enclosed with the signature, it is still RSA-2048 being used as the public key.

What is going on here. Can anyone perhaps give me an explanation for this?

Otherwise, I will need to look up SHA-1 in the Wikipedia in order to be able to know more about its possible limitations.

If you do not mind, I did not start this thread.

But I just happen to visit my Skype account using the web.

By means of selecting "Change Password" from inside the client when logged in, I am redirected to a secure web-page at Skype.

The interesting thing to notice is the fact that although https, this web-page is stated as having a poor security configuration (in fact a SHA-1 signature), which makes the connection possibly not totally secure.

But when checking the signature by means of the certificate being enclosed with the signature, it is still RSA-2048 being used as the public key.

What is going on here. Can anyone perhaps give me an explanation for this?

Otherwise, I will need to look up SHA-1 in the Wikipedia in order to be able to know more about its possible limitations.

Off the top of my head, I remember something about a cross site scripting attack that uses a low grade encryption to intercept traffic. This works because some browsers will still connect without too much complaining when low grade security or no security is offered when they have requested high grade and it isn't returned. Smarter browsers simply refuse to connect.

You might want to contact Skype's security department and ask them point blank if they are aware of the issue.

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base64

Came across this link today which is a new one.

I am not an expert on cryptography and codes because this subject, or really the intention or intended meaning behind its use is being hidden by means of garbled contents that is being included with or part of such messages.

Of course cryptography is supposed to be a tool for encrypting information in order to become not readable by people who are not supposed to be allowed to read such contents.

Therefore cryptography typically becomes something which is related to text rather than numbers. What could possibly be interpreted as "the lazy dog..." but instead reads "dGhlIG1pbmQsIHRoYXQgYnkgYSBwZXJzZXZlcmFuY2Ugb2YgZGVs" because the sentence has been encrypted, is because of both this fact as well as the fact that even more disinformation likely is being introduced in order to hide the original contents of the message.

Supposedly RSA-2048 is now better than some cryptographic keys being used for the same, because the shifting of letters in an encrypted message may be more easy to decipher than the corresponding number being used for the transmission of data across the web, which in this case is RSA-2048.