Slashdot Mirror

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added "layered"/"defense-in-depth" security + SPEED:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Adblock blocks ads (not anymore apparently, lol:

Adblock Plus To Offer 'Acceptable Ads' Option

http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/12/12/2213233/adblock-plus-to-offer-acceptable-ads-option )

in only browsers & their subprogram families (ala email), but not all, or, all independent email clients, like Outlook!

(Disclaimer: Opera now has an AdBlock addon (now that Opera has addons above widgets), but I am not certain the same people make it as they do for FF or Chrome etc.).

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 5-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions via NSLOOKUP, PINGS, &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

* NOW - Some folks MAY think that putting an IP address alone into your browser's address bar will be enough, so why bother with HOSTS, right? WRONG - Putting IP address in your browser won't always work IS WHY. Some IP adresses host several domains & need the site name to give you the right page you're after is why. So for some sites only the HOSTS file option will work!

6.) Hosts files don't eat up CPU cycles like AdBlock does while it parses a webpages' content, nor as much as a DNS server does while it runs. HOSTS file are merely a FILTER for the kernel mode/PnP TCP/IP subsystem, which runs FAR FASTER & MORE EFFICIENTLY than any ring 3/rpl3/usermode app can.

7.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server & back to you).

8.) AdBlock doesn't let you block out known bad sites or servers that are known to be maliciously scripted, hosts can and many reputable lists for this exist:

GOOD INFORMATION ON MALWARE BEHAVIOR LISTING BOTNET C&C SERVERS + MORE (AS WELL AS REMOVAL LISTS FOR HOSTS):

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm
http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/
http://hostsfile.org/hosts.html
http://hostsfile.mine.nu/downloads/
http://hosts-file.net/?s=Download
https://zeustracker.abuse.ch/monitor.php?filter=online
https://spyeyetracker.abuse.ch/monitor.php
http://ddanc

Skeptics find flaws in Carrier IQ application analysis

As I posted in another forum, the court of public opinion isn't in complete agreement.

Entirely plausible. Conficker's phone-home mechanism was an algorithm that hashed the current date/time to generate a nonsense domain name, which it would then try to look up and grab a payload from. All the Bad Guys had to do was register one a few hours in advance, put up the payload, and wait. The groups who were fighting the thing managed to decompile the algorithm and play it forward, generating a list of hundreds of thousands of domain names that they then took to the various registries to get blocked. Paul Vixie was a big part of this, and here's a pretty good article on the group.

It would not surprise me at all if CIA/Mossad/etc managed to get one of those domains un-blocked and used to deliver the Stuxnet payload.

in shareholder equity to a direct competitor. What are you going to do next, Gil Amelio (Apple CEO 1996-97) and AT&T's board of directors?

"Let's give our boy another 27 million USD annual package for losing a third of our shareholder's market cap since he took over in 2007!"

Given that the FBI's security is shit, if they're shocked at how bad yours is, you know you're fucked.

And I'm serious. While not as versatile towards own-hosted solutions as the old Windows Mobiles, it's still light years beyond Android and iOS. You can easily use your own Exchange server to sync and share your contacts, calendar and other stuff, which gives you true privacy.

Is it really that easy to set up your own Exchange server? Does everyone around here keep a Windows server in a coloc somewhere so they can run Exchange?

The reason for this is simple too. Microsoft may be many things, but they have always respected privacy.

Really? Always?

http://grep.law.harvard.edu/articles/02/08/08/0923231.shtml
http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/users-outraged-over-windows-live-privacy-violations
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/02/microsft-investigates-hotmail-privacy-breach.ars

And that's just what I found in a quick google search.

This seems like a really foolish thing for a convicted monopoly to do.

Microsoft started it's Android patent protection program in full, and their judicial oversight just ended Both events are April 2011... clearly coincidence and happenstance.

TL;DR-friendly list of patents:

https://www.networkworld.com/community/files/imce/img_blogs/microsoft_patents.jpg

I don't know what to say.

I haven't had any issues running banshee in the Ubuntu chroot on my ARMv7 touchpad. What's the supposed problem?
For fuck's sake, some lunatic even ported MonoDevelop to the Nokia N900.

I'd bet dollars to doughnuts the real issue behind dropping Banshee has something to do with this.

Is anyone outside m$ really considering letting them define what a freaking file is from now on after this?. But let's not get ahead of ourselves here. Surely once Microsoft has bullied their shit into everything once again, we can all trust them and no one will end up having to pay any kind of extortion racket like this, and this, this, this and this.

Microsoft's patents are on the devices, not the Android OS.

Wrong.
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/070611-microsoft-android.html

Basil, take it from me, it's always best to wait and think before hitting Submit.

Funnily enough that would be my advice to you Ratzo. Do you feel stupid now?

If companies that use it have to pay for licences it's not free in either sense.

And it's not about hardware, it's about software. It's about Android.
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/070611-microsoft-android.html

Apple #1? I don't think so.

I own an iPhone, and yes I know Apple gets way more press than Android... but Apple has 28% market share. Andriod has 56% and is growing:

Android Market Share Reaches 56 Percent; RIM's, Microsoft's Cut in Half

And this slightly older article:
Android market share nears 50% worldwide

Portico, nee Serengeti, from General Magic (founded by Andy Hertzfeld and Bill Atkinson of Macintosh fame) could do nearly everything that Siri could except those queries that Siri palms off to Wolfram Alpha... and did it with any phone you wanted to use in 1998.

http://www.networkworld.com/news/0506serengeti.html

A waaaaaaay stripped down version of Portico was used to build OnStar, but one wonders if Jobs' memories of old conversations with Atkinson and Hertzfeld gave him the idea to re-create it as Siri.

I live in a very crowded part of town with 9+ wifi hotspots in my area. I'd really like a firmware I could hack in and flash on all the local routers that would provide bandwidth sharing for everybody. I could go around and knock and ask politely before doing this, but I'd much rather just bust in robin hood style, crack the WEP using my little Linux Mint netbook, and change the firmware so that all the routers shared internet bandwidth without the end user really noticing. Except of course when their internet doubles or triples in speed!

Is there a firm ware project or suite out there with this capability, or do I need to start one on Google Code?

This:

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2006/042706-sharing-wi-fi.html

Is what I had in mind, but doing it hacker style without the neighbors knowledge or consent.

I'd love to get it all in place on my whole block, then casually stroll by and say, "Have you noticed your internet is quite a bit faster?".

How can anyone take "cloud computing" seriously? It's really just a much less efficient version of the age old distributed computing paradigm. All it does is enable people who cannot wrap their heads around complex clustering topics to write extremely wasteful applications, and give management a new buzz-word dejour.

I take cloud computing pretty fucking seriously...

http://www.cloudcomputingzone.com/2011/04/amazon-builds-top-500-supercomputer-in-the-cloud/

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/040611-linux-supercomputer.html

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2011/09/30000-core-cluster-built-on-amazon-ec2-cloud.ars

That means... you need a 30k core supercomputer for a workday? You don't shell out hundreds of
thousands of dollars... you just pay the tidy sum of $10,232

Know what is the best thing about that?

Let's say you get 2 hrs into your sim and you realize you made a mistake in coding, forgot something,
saw initial results and realized you could trim things up to make it run better or turn out better results...

YOU TURN IT OFF AND SPEND NO MORE MONEY UNTIL YOU TURN IT BACK ON

Maybe all u cloud naysayers don't get it.

Tell ya what... http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/ there is a free tier, 750 hours per month.
IF you're a numbers person you'll recognize that as safely above the 744 hours that are in a month.
However you can slice that 750 however you like... which means... you can run:
750 instances for an hour
1500 instances for a half hour or
3000 instances for 15 minutes
(you're not charged the first 10 minutes of running an instance [unless they've changed that])

try it... spark up a lamp instance, clone it a few hundred times, and hit it with a load tester,
or run something on it, see how fast you can calculate primes or find numbers in pi... I don't
care, but before saying... "I don't see how you can take it seriously... use it"

Maybe the naysayers are such because they cannot conceive of what you would use the cloud for?

-@|

Through this submission, I found this Network World article about a new boot process for Windows 8 that locks out bootloaders that haven't been signed by a machine's manufacturer.

I think there's little hardware that doesn't work with Linux.

The PLAYSTATION 3 video game console is no longer compatible with Linux without the threat of a lawsuit.

I think I know what you had in mind: by "hardware" you meant PC hardware. But even if you restrict it to PCs, this becomes more complicated in the alleged coming post-PC era (1 2) when it may become difficult to find a new working PC.

Yes, good point about the people taking voluntary early retirement. From that article:

...non-commission-incentive employees will receive one year's regular base pay plus their annual incentive target amount. Commission-incentive employees will receive 80% of one year's regular base pay, plus 80% of their annual target commissions...

Health benefits will include a lump-sum payment equivalent to 24 months of current medical, dental, and vision coverage...

Cisco will also provide 401(k) and stock payments to eligible employees. For 401(k) plans, the company will provide a one-time payment equal to approximately two years of company matching contributions, paid as a lump sum outside of the 401(k) plan. Payment will be calculated as 4.5% multiplied by total 2011 target compensation, up to a $245,000 limit, regardless of participants' actual 401(k) participation level.

And it wasn't about getting mid-career people out and cutting 20 years off their expected jobs.

The program is aimed at a segment of U.S. and Canadian employees at least 50 years old who have a combined age plus years of service with Cisco totaling at least 60

>>Considering that the handset market is owned by Android
>Welcome to slashdot. You'll fit right in!

Are you suggesting the mobile handset market isn't ruled by Android devices?
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/080111-canalys.html begs to differ.

Simply because "I can't get burned IF I never go into the 'malware-in-general kitchen'" period (& yes, even sandboxing's been KNOWN to have been broken thru in the past by malwares (think chroot JAILS as an example thereof)):

So, what's better here (& even better if added in with sandboxie + other "layered-security"/"defense-in-depth" methods in my p.s.s. section below)? THIS IS:

My custom HOSTS file currently protects me vs. 1,571,476+++ (& growing every 15 minutes) KNOWN bad sites/servers/hosts-domains that are KNOWN to be either maliciously scripted, or serving up malware-in-general, plus spamming/phishing sources as well as botnet C&C servers.

HOW/WHY/WHEN/WHERE? Read on!

(Do use 0.0.0.0 on most OS, but Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 can use a smaller one, in plain 0 as a blocking "IP Address" even (thus, smaller HOSTS files result, & their entries are parsed FASTER that way, line by line, w/ no "loopback operation" occurring @ all, due to "blackhole routing", & NO "ABE warning" problems, noted here -> http://hackademix.net/2009/07/01/abe-warnings-everywhere-omg/ either))

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added "layered"/"defense-in-depth" security:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Adblock blocks ads in only 1-2 browser family, but not all (Disclaimer: Opera now has an AdBlock addon (now that Opera has addons above widgets), but I am not certain the same people make it as they do for FF or Chrome etc.).

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 5-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions via NSLOOKUP, PINGS, &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

* NOW - Some folks MAY think that putting an IP address alone into your browser's address bar will be enough, so why bother with HOSTS, right? WRONG - Putting IP address in your browser won't always work IS WHY. Some IP adresses host several domains & need the site name to give you the right page you're after is why. So for some sites only the HOSTS file option will work!

6.) Hosts files don't eat up CPU cycles like AdBlock does while it parses a webpages' content, nor as much as a DNS server does while it runs. HOSTS file are merely a FILTER for the kernel mode/PnP TCP/IP subsystem, which runs FAR FASTER & MORE EFFICIENTLY than any ring 3/rpl3/usermode app can.

7.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server & back to you).

8.) AdBlock doesn't let you block out known bad sites or servers that are known to be maliciously scripted, hosts can and many reputable lists for this exist:

GOOD INFORMATIO

Funny. I've heard that there will be a facial recognition logon option. http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/042211-windows8-facial-recognition.html

All these silly things are keeping Android from being a serious competitor to the iPhone

What world do you live in?

Techcrunch

Wired

Tested

NetworkWorld

(In Mad Max voice from the film, "The Road Warrior") So, how can I show you THAT, and guarantee it on the web, also? Easy: It's called a custom HOSTS file (which will not only give you more of your monthly bandwidth back, but also speed online while surfing webpages, AND MORE SECURITY (if done right adding in known sources of infestation, & yes, sources for that exist online - I list some below)):

My custom HOSTS file currently protects me vs. 1,554,666++ (& growing every 15 minutes) KNOWN bad sites/servers/hosts-domains that are KNOWN to be either maliciously scripted, or serving up malware-in-general, plus spamming/phishing sources as well as botnet C&C servers.

How/Why? Simply by blocking out adbanners mainly (and using "hardcodes" to your fav. sites in the HOSTS file also).

Read on!

( & do use 0.0.0.0 on most OS, but Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 can use a smaller one, in plain 0 as a blocking "IP Address" even (thus, smaller HOSTS files result, & their entries are parsed FASTER that way, line by line, w/ no "loopback operation" occurring @ all, due to "blackhole routing", & NO "ABE warning" problems, noted here -> http://hackademix.net/2009/07/01/abe-warnings-everywhere-omg/ either))!

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added "layered"/"defense-in-depth" security:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Adblock blocks ads in only 1-2 browser family, but not all (Disclaimer: Opera now has an AdBlock addon (now that Opera has addons above widgets), but I am not certain the same people make it as they do for FF or Chrome etc.).

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 5-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions via NSLOOKUP, PINGS, &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)). Some folks MAY think that putting an IP address alone into your browser's address bar will be enough, so why bother with HOSTS, right? WRONG - Putting IP address in your browser wonâ(TM)t always work IS WHY. Some IP adresses host several domains & need the site name to give you the right page you're after is why. So for some sites only the HOSTS file option will work.

6.) Hosts files don't eat up CPU cycles like AdBlock does while it parses a webpages' content, nor as much as a DNS server does while it runs. HOSTS file are merely a FILTER for the kernel mode/PnP TCP/IP subsystem, which runs FAR FASTER & MORE EFFICIENTLY than any ring 3/rpl3/usermode app can.

7.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server & back to you).

8.) AdBlock doesn't let you block out known bad sites or servers that are know

Mark Russinovich says UAC is not a security feature:

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2007/021407-microsoft-uac-not-a-security.html

The whitelist trick is just one of many mostly unfixable holes in Windows that make win7 UAC in default mode trivial to bypass. As you say, pushing the slider to maximum gets you Vista-level security: better but still not secure. You need a separate admin account to get something close to sudo.

As vendors make their software more UAC friendly, MS will eventually be able to have a non-admin default account without it being too annoying. But we're still a few years from that, sadly.

What:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/61650044/WTF-Happened-to-the-Constitution-The-Right-to-Privacy-in-the-Digital-Age

http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/digital-age-what-heck-happened-constitution

Who:
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/investment_manager.html

Google turned this up: http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/30731

A return to the "old" to combat the problems of "the new" & why, in combination with filtering DNS servers (vs. malware-in-general in most ALL forms) that use DNSBL's vs. them! I have done so for YEARS now (since 2002 in my older Delphi model, which used "brute force" dedup methods which was FINE on HOSTS files in those days that only MAYBE hit 16k lines - lately, they're a LOT larger than that, so I switched to a Python system my nephew & I co-wrote that processes MILLIONS @ a time & faster dedup algorithms in place is why because of Python's built in routines).

It does the following things:

---

1.) Data gather from reputable sources for HOSTS data (some listed below, not all though), DNSBL's too!

2.) Alphabetize the data

3.) Removes duplicates/normalizes the data

4.) Changes from the larger & slower 127.0.0.1 "loopback adapter address" to the just as compatible & faster 0.0.0.0 "blackhole routing" address instead

5.) Filtering vs. "problematic" sites that MAY 'disturb' some sites IF their adbanner servers are disrupted (YAHOO, AOL, MSN & quite a few others)

6.) Commits back (from a "temp/scratch" file) to the ORIGINAL HOSTS file for use by the system &/or apps (@ RPL 0/Ring 0/kernelmode level, FAR faster & more efficient than Ring 3/RPL 3/Usermode filtering solutions are mind you) by OVERWRITE, assuring CLEAN COPY & a pristine unaltered (by malware) HOSTS file!

---

As well as a recommendation for this, in combination with it (using the excellent CIS Tool as a guide) -> http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE

My custom HOSTS file currently protects me vs. 1,554,666++ (& growing every 15 minutes) KNOWN bad sites/servers/hosts-domains that are KNOWN to be either maliciously scripted, or serving up malware-in-general, plus spamming/phishing sources as well as botnet C&C servers.

How/Why? Ok, read on:

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added layered security:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Adblock blocks ads in only 1-2 browser family, but not all (Disclaimer: Opera now has an AdBlock addon (now that Opera has addons above widgets), but I am not certain the same people make it as they do for FF or Chrome etc.).

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 5-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions via NSLOOKUP, PINGS, &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

6.) Hosts files don't eat up CPU cycles like AdBlock does while it parses a webpages' content, nor as much as a DNS server does while it runs. HOSTS file are merely a FILTER for the kernel mode/PnP TCP/IP subsystem, which runs FAR FASTER & MORE EFFICIENTLY th

Because of this single statement from the article here today, in regards to HOSTS files (which has been covered here by myself in points #4-#7 mainly below, & more, many times here @ /.):

"The methods are: using a VPN service, using your HOSTs file, using TOR, using freely available DNS lookup tools, changing your DNS server to a non-US server, using command prompt, using Foxy Proxy, and using MAFIAAFire." - Dangerous_Minds/Drew Wilson of ZeroPaid http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/08/07/2221245/8-Ways-To-Circumvent-the-PROTECT-IP-Act

HOWEVER, a HOSTS file offers you a LOT MORE THAN JUST THAT, for FREE (better online SPEED, bandwidth, & YES, security + anonymity (vs. DNSBLs)):

My custom HOSTS file currently protects me vs. 1,554,666++ (& growing every 15 minutes) KNOWN bad sites/servers/hosts-domains that are KNOWN to be either maliciously scripted, or serving up malware-in-general, plus spamming/phishing sources as well as botnet C&C servers.

How/Why? Ok, read on:

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added layered security:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Adblock blocks ads in only 1-2 browser family, but not all (Disclaimer: Opera now has an AdBlock addon (now that Opera has addons above widgets), but I am not certain the same people make it as they do for FF or Chrome etc.).

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 5-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions via NSLOOKUP, PINGS, &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

6.) Hosts files don't eat up CPU cycles like AdBlock does while it parses a webpages' content, nor as much as a DNS server does while it runs. HOSTS file are merely a FILTER for the kernel mode/PnP TCP/IP subsystem, which runs FAR FASTER & MORE EFFICIENTLY than any ring 3/rpl3/usermode app can.

7.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server & back to you).

8.) AdBlock doesn't let you block out known bad sites or servers that are known to be maliciously scripted, hosts can and many reputable lists for this exist:

GOOD INFORMATION ON MALWARE BEHAVIOR LISTING BOTNET C&C SERVERS + MORE (AS WELL AS REMOVAL LISTS FOR HOSTS):

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm
http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/
http://hostsfile.org/hosts.html
http://hostsfile.mine.nu/down

A return to the "old" to combat the problems of "the new" & why, in combination with filtering DNS servers (vs. malware-in-general in most ALL forms) that use DNSBL's vs. them! I have done so for YEARS now (since 2002 in my older Delphi model, which used "brute force" dedup methods which was FINE on HOSTS files in those days that only MAYBE hit 16k lines - lately, they're a LOT larger than that, so I switched to a Python system my nephew & I co-wrote that processes MILLIONS @ a time & faster dedup algorithms in place is why because of Python's built in routines).

It does the following things:

---

1.) Data gather from reputable sources for HOSTS data (some listed below, not all though), DNSBL's too!

2.) Alphabetize the data

3.) Removes duplicates/normalizes the data

4.) Changes from the larger & slower 127.0.0.1 "loopback adapter address" to the just as compatible & faster 0.0.0.0 "blackhole routing" address instead

5.) Filtering vs. "problematic" sites that MAY 'disturb' some sites IF their adbanner servers are disrupted (YAHOO, AOL, MSN & quite a few others)

6.) Commits back (from a "temp/scratch" file) to the ORIGINAL HOSTS file for use by the system &/or apps (@ RPL 0/Ring 0/kernelmode level, FAR faster & more efficient than Ring 3/RPL 3/Usermode filtering solutions are mind you) by OVERWRITE, assuring CLEAN COPY & a pristine unaltered (by malware) HOSTS file!

---

My HOSTS file currently protects me vs.

Why? Ok, read on:

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added layered security:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Adblock blocks ads in only 1-2 browser family, but not all (Disclaimer: Opera now has an AdBlock addon (now that Opera has addons above widgets), but I am not certain the same people make it as they do for FF or Chrome etc.).

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 5-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions via NSLOOKUP, PINGS, &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

6.) Hosts files don't eat up CPU cycles like AdBlock does while it parses a webpages' content, nor as much as a DNS server does while it runs. HOSTS file are merely a FILTER for the kernel mode/PnP TCP/IP subsystem, which runs FAR FASTER & MORE EFFICIENTLY than any ring 3/rpl3/usermode app can.

7.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server & back to you).

8.) AdBlock doesn't let you block out known bad sites or servers that are known to be maliciously scripted, hosts can and many reputable lists for this exist:

GOOD INFORMATION ON MALWARE BEHAVIOR LISTING BOTNET C&C SERVERS + MORE (AS WELL AS REMOVAL LIS

Except you already have wireless gear that's hooked straight to your ECU. Things like TPMS (anyone remember this little gem from last year?), vehicle remotes (start/doors/windows/trunk/etc), OnStar-style services, and the like are all things we know can communicate directly with the ECU. And automakers aren't likely to start trying to secure or separate these systems further because it will affect their bottom line. No, we're stuck waiting for the day that someones Pontiac becomes a Pwntiac and slams them into a cement barrier at 80mph. Queue mass hysteria, gov't investigation committees, and one gigantic recall. THEN we might see change. Might.

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added layered security:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Adblock blocks ads in only 1-2 browser family, but not all (Disclaimer: Opera now has an AdBlock addon (now that Opera has addons above widgets), but I am not certain the same people make it as they do for FF or Chrome etc.).

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 5-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions via NSLOOKUP, PINGS, &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

6.) HOSTS files protect you vs. DNS-poisoning &/or the Kaminsky flaw in DNS servers, and allow you to get to sites reliably vs. things like the Chinese are doing to DNS -> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/29/1755230/Chinese-DNS-Tampering-a-Real-Threat-To-Outsiders

7.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server & back to you).

8.) AdBlock doesn't let you block out known bad sites or servers that are known to be maliciously scripted, hosts can and many reputable lists for this exist:

GOOD INFORMATION ON MALWARE BEHAVIOR LISTING BOTNET C&C SERVERS + MORE (AS WELL AS REMOVAL LISTS FOR HOSTS):

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm
http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/
http://hostsfile.org/hosts.html
http://hostsfile.mine.nu/downloads/
http://hosts-file.net/?s=Download
https://zeustracker.abuse.ch/monitor.php?filter=online
https://spyeyetracker.abuse.ch/monitor.php
http://ddanchev.blogspot.com/
http://www.malware.com.br/lists.shtml
http://www.stopbadware.org/
Spybot "Search & Destroy" IMMUNIZE feature (fortifies HOSTS files with KNOWN bad servers blocked)

And yes: Even SLASHDOT &/or The Register help!

(Via articles on security (when the source articles they use are "detailed" that is, & list the servers/sites involved in attempting to bushwhack others online that is... not ALL do!)).

2 examples thereof in the past I have used, & noted it there, are/were:

http://it.slashdot.org/com

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added layered security:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Bad news: ADBLOCK CAN BE DETECTED FOR: See here on that note -> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

HOSTS files are NOT BLOCKABLE by websites, as was tried on users by ARSTECHNICA (and it worked, proving HOSTS files are a better solution for this because they cannot be blocked & detected for, in that manner), to that websites' users' dismay:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT FROM ARSTECHNICA THEMSELVES:

----

An experiment gone wrong - By Ken Fisher | Last updated March 6, 2010 11:11 AM

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

"Starting late Friday afternoon we conducted a 12 hour experiment to see if it would be possible to simply make content disappear for visitors who were using a very popular ad blocking tool. Technologically, it was a success in that it worked. Ad blockers, and only ad blockers, couldn't see our content."

and

"Our experiment is over, and we're glad we did it because it led to us learning that we needed to communicate our point of view every once in a while. Sure, some people told us we deserved to die in a fire. But that's the Internet!"

Thus, as you can see? Well - THAT all "went over like a lead balloon" with their users in other words, because Arstechnica was forced to change it back to the old way where ADBLOCK still could work to do its job (REDDIT however, has not, for example). However/Again - this is proof that HOSTS files can still do the job, blocking potentially malscripted ads (or ads in general because they slow you down) vs. adblockers like ADBLOCK!

----

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 4-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions via NSLOOKUP, PINGS, &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

6.) HOSTS files protect you vs. DNS-poisoning &/or the Kaminsky flaw in DNS servers, and allow you to get to sites reliably vs. things like the Chinese are doing to DNS -> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/29/1755230/Chinese-DNS-Tampering-a-Real-Threat-To-Outsiders

7.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server & back to you).

8.) AdBlock does

"Ever since I've installed a host file (http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm) to redirect advertisers to my loopback, I haven't had any malware, spyware, or adware issues. I first started using the host file 5 years ago." - by TestedDoughnut (1324447) on Monday December 13, @12:18AM (#34532122)

FROM http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1907528&cid=34532122

Now?

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added layered security:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Bad news: ADBLOCK CAN BE DETECTED FOR: See here on that note -> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

HOSTS files are NOT BLOCKABLE by websites, as was tried on users by ARSTECHNICA (and it worked, proving HOSTS files are a better solution for this because they cannot be blocked & detected for, in that manner), to that websites' users' dismay:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT FROM ARSTECHNICA THEMSELVES:

----

An experiment gone wrong - By Ken Fisher | Last updated March 6, 2010 11:11 AM

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

"Starting late Friday afternoon we conducted a 12 hour experiment to see if it would be possible to simply make content disappear for visitors who were using a very popular ad blocking tool. Technologically, it was a success in that it worked. Ad blockers, and only ad blockers, couldn't see our content."

and

"Our experiment is over, and we're glad we did it because it led to us learning that we needed to communicate our point of view every once in a while. Sure, some people told us we deserved to die in a fire. But that's the Internet!"

Thus, as you can see? Well - THAT all "went over like a lead balloon" with their users in other words, because Arstechnica was forced to change it back to the old way where ADBLOCK still could work to do its job (REDDIT however, has not, for example). However/Again - this is proof that HOSTS files can still do the job, blocking potentially malscripted ads (or ads in general because they slow you down) vs. adblockers like ADBLOCK!

----

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 4-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions via NSLOOKUP, PINGS, &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

6.) HOSTS files protect you vs. DNS-poisoning &/or the Kaminsky flaw in DNS servers, and allow you to get to sites reliably vs

http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/napkins-where-ethernet-compaq-and-facebook

http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/napkins-where-ethernet-compaq-and-facebookâ(TM)s- (apostrophe seems to have broken the URL/link) shows "Page not found" error. :(

Sounds great. Maybe by the time iOS 6 gets here it'll actually be doable. http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/020711-ipad-security-how-a-hospital.html

The Marines are a really small contingent of the US Military forces though. The Airforce already has a small, but sizable force. The Army started one a few years back and they are currently heavily recruiting people that have a high enough ASVAB and a background in some sort of technical MOS for what is currently called ANWB (Army Network Warfare Battalion). They have plans on going to a brigade size element in the near future, at the very least. There isn't much about it, but check this out....
http://publicintelligence.net/u-s-army-network-warfare-battalion-recruitment-brief/
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/070708-us-army-challenges-usaf-on.html

• 5,579,517 and 5,758,352 - Storing short and long file names in a FAT file system. The Linux FAT drivers were modified years ago to work around this patent.
• 6,621,746 - Algorithm for determining when to erase data from flash memory, presumably to reduce write wear. Given that this is a common problem and the patent was issued in 2003, I find it hard to believe no one did something similar before then.
• 6,826,762 - This patent discusses the difficulties of programming software to work on different cellular technologies. The "invention" is coding the software to an interface that is implemented for each different cellular technology. This is Software Engineering 101.
• 6,909,910 - Managing a contact list. If there's no prior art for this, it should be invalidated for being obvious and the person responsible for approving this patent should be repeatedly bludgeoned with a hard copy of the patent.
• 7,644,376 - Patented using the Observer software development pattern for a notification system. It really is that obvious.
• 5,664,133 - Covers context-sensitive menu options to "quickly and easily select/execute the desired computer resource". Thank Jeebus for those geniuses at Microsoft.
• 6,578,054 - Covers data synchronization via incremental changes. This was granted in 2003 and I find it impossible to believe that there was no software that did this before that time period.
• 6,370,566 - Covers scheduling meetings from a mobile device and was granted in 2002. How is this different from generating meetings on non-mobile devices which has been done well before 2002?

Well, there you have it. Most of these patents look like they can be defeated relatively easily. That's not to say it would be cheap given the high cost of lawyers and legal fees, but it can be done should someone have the balls to avoid settling out of court.

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2306598&cid=36701800

That others noted there in that exchange!

Plus, Microsoft's NOT going to get "suckered" by DoS, OR DDoS either as others have by LulzSec &/or Anonymous either:

http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/microsoft-were-not-vulnerable-ddos-attacks

Simply because they "overbuilt their network" just as AMAZON has:

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/12/14/1851240/Why-Anonymous-Cant-Take-Down-Amazoncom

+ monitor it... & then turn it aside, accordingly!

(Thus, MS can see it coming a MILE away & compensate (by blocking the sources of attack @ the perimeter in firewalls, + even a botnet C&C server or bogus DNS server via DNSBL or even possibly HOSTS files))...

There's also a setting in modern MS IP stacks (BSD derived no less, best in the business) of:

SynAttackProtect

That helps mitigate DDoS attacks!

(That setting works in conjunction-combination with others parameters that set the "look aside/reject" amounts as the network admin sees fit too (they don't note that in the article above)).

APK

P.S.=> Like I said in my 1st link above? MS is performing LITERALLY, the BEST TEST there is, better than "pen testing" too!

(& THAT, is challenging hacker/cracker egos, to have THEM point out ANY POSSIBLE HASSLES IN YOUR NETWORK SECURITY (I did the same on IRC, decades ago circa 1994-2001 or thereabouts adminning the "Official Windows Help Channel" endorsed by no other/no less than K. Mardem Bey (creator of MIRC) himself!))...

... apk

I'll paraphase the same things here that I said to Bruce and Bradley Kuhn on the post itself. I agree that any individual developer (i.e. not protected in their participation/contribution to the FOSS licensed project by an employer) needs to consider what they're about to do. But there's a corollary to Tim O'Reilly's version of freedom 0: It is up to any contributor to understand the terms under which they are contributing to a FOSS project.

I understand why some people feel that assignments and contribution licenses can be a barrier. I also know that as VP, R+D at Softway and then a PUM at Microsoft, I happily assigned code to the FSF for our gcc changes, and paid a contracting company with a committer to get the changes back upstream as a more efficient way than attempting to negotiate each change into the set across diverse gcc projects without the depth of reputation.

The Harmony core team have tried to provide a set of agreements that are very simple in what they state and the language used to state it, as well as the supporting guidance and FAQ, so developers that encounter them will hopefully have a better chance of understanding what they're signing regardless of whether they choose to involve counsel or not.

We live in a world where well run FOSS projects are transparent. Organizations that choose to abuse trust in the FOSS world generally get caught out and punished by a lack of participation. I still believe the Harmony documents are a better solution to the narrow problem they attempt to solve than the free-for-all we currently enjoy.

My participation in Harmony was very much as a foundation. Outercurve is a 501(c)(6) and not a (c)(3). Many of the companies and universities I engage with do still care about a legally "stricter" environment. Yes - it's a perception, but I need to work with it regardless. I can't just educate them all past their perceptions any more than we can educate everyone to support the idea of software freedom. If the Harmony agreements are a tool for me to improve the situation as I work with corporate counsel less familiar with the breadth and history of FOSS IP management, then I'm a supporter.

See this, as to why DDoS cannot harm them:

http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/microsoft-were-not-vulnerable-ddos-attacks

The "big sites" like AMAZON being another for instance?

Like MS is, they are SO "overbuilt" to compensate even vs. botnet DDoS that they'll know it's happening, while it's happening, to blockout @ the perimiter firewalls levels (or DNS, or HOSTS files even) any sources of attack... yes, may take time, but, that's HOW it's done!

---

AND, this registry setting for the IP Stack MS has for limiting Dos OR DDoS on ANY SYSTEM also (which they neglected to note):

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\services\Tcpip\Parameters

SynAttackProtect

---

(That, in combination with other parameters for setting "turn aside" limits, works to lessen + protect vs. DoS &/or DDoS)

---

* NOW - To kill this thing, guaranteed & HOW on any system? See my other posts here, starting here & the ones subsequently beneath it (even to a naysayer):

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2306598&cid=36694254

APK

P.S.=> It WORKS... & I've done it professionally, time & again by the 100's vs. rootkits operating in Ring 0/RPL 0/kernel mode, which IS what you have to "take down" first, so usermode tools are not deceived via API call hooking & intercepts (and in the 1,000's on std. Ring 3/RPL 3/Usermode malwares in combination with it, using ProcessExplorer.exe)...

... apk

Let me guess...you didn't bother to read the garbage article and just read the attention grabbing bullshit headline and posted?

You are expecting a "social network firmly rooted in personal privacy" from a company whose leaders have publically stated that you should forget about your privacy?

"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place.". - Eric Schmidt, Google.

"but if you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines including Google do retain this information for some time, and it's important, for example that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act. It is possible that that information could be made available to the authorities." -- Eric Schmidt, Google.

Right, I guess TFA itself is not good enough for you, with its

CityTime was launched in 2003 at a budget of $63 million, but costs swelled dramatically as the project stumbled along for nearly a decade.

?

Plus I've had Microsoft hosted Exchange for almost 2 years now and can't remember a single outage.

I call bullshit. I have had BPOS with my company for almost a year and have experienced several outages (I am keeping track because this was upper managments call against the advice of IT):

22 June 2011
http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/microsoft-confirms-bpos-cloud-outage
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/23/bpos_outage/

10-13 May 2011
http://www.katacinta.net/cinta/microsoft-online-outage-may-10/
http://www.techworld.com.au/article/386384/outage_hits_hosted_exchange_customers/
http://www.infoworld.com/d/cloud-computing/hosted-exchange-customers-hit-service-outages-981
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9216697/Microsoft_explains_recent_hosted_e_mail_outages

6 March 2011:
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/onlineservicesexchange/thread/7017abf4-a9d9-4c08-85ac-f66912124493/
19 October 2010
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/onlineservicesannouncements/thread/e72e8707-7457-4737-b246-2598769e54cf/
3 & 7 September 2010 & 23 Aug 2010
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-bpos-down-for-90-minutes-second-outage-in-a-month/7302
http://mcpmag.com/articles/2010/09/10/microsoft-reports-major-bpos-outages-slas-affected.aspx
http://blogs.technet.com/b/msonline/archive/2010/09/08/meeting-your-and-our-own-expectations.aspx
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-apologizes-for-spate-of-recent-online-services-outages/7337

MS embracing open standards and specs is a good thing.

Microsoft knows fine well that Microsoft always has three Es in embrace. They are not coming over to HTML 5 for the good of the standard of to help save the world. They are doing it in order to have developer tools which work on HTML 5 and so limit their loss of market share. Their long term aim will be to destabilize and misappropriate the standard. There is nothing good about Microsoft getting involved in any standard. Look at the history of OOXML. Look at how they attempted to take over Kerberos.

This is not a sign that Microsoft has become good. It is a sign that they are too weak to force Silverlight on the world and they realise that now, so they will work with the standard for the time being.

As part of the commentary in the ruling, Justice Breyer offered some advice to courts on how they can use facts in court cases about patent infringement. Some patent lawyers think that this may make it easier for juries to overturn a patent. (More in my article here, if you're interested: http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/060911-microsoft-i4i-patent.html) It's not the same as a ruling that would make it easier for companies to defend against patent infringement suits from bad patents, or if the Bilski case had lead to invalidated "business process" patents altogether ... Yes, the Supreme Court is making it clear that this is up to Congress to fix ... which it really is. But gimme a break ... Members of Congress are a little busy right now arguing over gutting Medicare and scandals involving naughty Twitpics.

Julie

It says that RSA isn't really coming clean with the details. Story says, "Coviello defended the company's decision by saying that they didn't want to reveal to the hackers how to mount further attacks." Of course, blackhats already know how to mount the attack ... by not coming clean with the details the ones that don't know how this happened and what they could be doing to protect themselves are the users.

Julie
Open Source Subnet

Flashlight looks cool. I have a friend with a full machine shop in his garage, so if he ever decides to make a flashlight it's nice to know he can just grab the documents and freely make one like this. I can think of reasons why you might want to program a flashlight ... maybe you want a combo flashlight/strobe/disco ball ... Julie Open Source Subnet

and Moscow will order them in bulk for the Kremlin's next attempt to infiltrate the U S of A.