Slashdot Mirror

The article mentions an upcoming patch twice, but is silent on what it does.

Apparently, though not listed explicitly, they will display the unicode version (Ex: www.xn--80ak6aa92e.com instead of www..com) for these edge cases - though I'm not sure how they're detecting them.

IMO, it's all stupid mistakes and fixes because it's only an issue because they're trying to make it so "easy to use" and transparent for the dumbest of folks, while making it more and more complex to actually find the real info. For example, you used to be able to click the padlock icon next to the URL if it was an SSL domain, and that'd pop up security and cert info on Chrome. Now, you can't do that... you have to go into developer tools, then expand the tabs (security tab is often outside the window, because they moved the developer console to split the screen vertically instead of horizontally) to find security tab, then get the cert info there.

All domains should have a very very easy way to see both versions (the unicode/punycode version, and the localized version). Some options:
* right click on the domain, include both in that menu
* mouse over the domain, show alt version in the status bar (bring back the status bar!)
* mouse over the domain, include alt version in mousever text
* include both on the location bar (one in parenthesis). Eg. [lock icon] Secure | [www.xn--80ak6aa92e.com] https://www./.com/
* ... or vice-versa: Eg. [lock icon] Secure | [www..com] https://www.xn--80ak6aa92e.com...
* add a little colored (red?) icon next to the name if punycode is in use. Mouseover on it would display info saying what that did. Clicking it would remove/add the decoding. IE: display the decoded localized characters by default; click the red dot to display the punycode; click again to go back to localized; set a preference from the right click menu on the red dot.

This isn't something that can be definitively solved programmaticly. It's still a case of tricking users. Just give the users the info they need so they can make a fair decision. The real DNS name is the fully encoded one (ex. xn--80ak6aa92e.com), not the one decoded from that, so please make that readily available to the user. IMO, displaying the localized text should be an added feature, not the primary display.

If you consider http://www./ a.com/ politically correct... just some legacy code that rewrites unknown urls to some of the more common TLDs (.com, .org, etc) in an attempt to find a valid URL that matches. Actually a really crappy thing to do as you can use domains of common base folder names like images.com to pickup traffic from incorrect links so //images/whatever.jpg becomes images.com/whatever.jpg... anyone who clicks that link will end up on the wrong site. It has some great potential for some casual phishing.

Unless it's 2002 again and we're suddenly writing out "www." for everything?

There are many people who do that. Even companies and IT people. Where I work our website www.example.com is available to see through our firewall, but not the IDENTICAL example.com one. Many sites still forward example.com to www.example.com for some reason.

Many people when I spell out a website like here.example.com will start typing http://www./ not only in their browser, but on google.

People tell me that their email has no spaces and is all lowercase.

I do not live in the US and I own a number of .coms --- none of which have any relationship to business: which goes for most .coms.

Ideally there would be no tlds; since they are not a physical requirement for urls which mask numbers: http:/// or http://www./ or ftp:// etc are more than enough to indicate an address.

OOCalc does the same. I hate this, especially because URL detection is so broken. often you get only http://www./ and the rest is just normal. I still try to turn it off because the MOST annoying part is, that you CAN NOT edit this anymore. It is like a fixed block. So horrible. So really really horrible.

Paste a link at least, n00b. Here: www.???.????

How about you RTFA?
And registrars are not even allowed to disallow certain characters.

DNS isn't allowed to disallow certain characters.
Registrars most certainly can, and do.

TFA doesn't give an example of a domain with a soft hyphen in the name.
Again, give me just ONE example. That's all it takes to prove me wrong.

This is about using soft hyphens to hide the real domain name in e-mails, not about using a real domain name that actually contains a soft hyphen. It'd be rather useless for this purpose, because the RFC for URIs doesn't allow for unicode characters in URLs, and the RFC for SMTP doesn't allow them in e-mail addresses. Which is why we have the IDNA translation system for web URLs in the first place, which translates e.g. http://www./åbo.fi/ to the real name of http://www.xn--bo-xia.fi/
(see RFC3454, RFC3491 and RFC3492 for more details)

Also, see http://mct.verisign-grs.com/ and try using a soft hyphen (character code 173 or 00AD in UTF-16).
Watch the error message you get.

Your keyboard should have a http://www./ key.

That's exactly what I did for a site I work on. We had lots of long query strings (some of which contain redirection URLs), so we tried deflating the whole of them, then using a modified base64-like encoding on the result. Turns out these compressed + base64'd URLs (remember: they still need to be passed somehow, so base64 or long hex-based url encoding are your options) have only been "shorter" about half the time or less. We got better "compression" by putting a character on the end to say "does this param contain an http://www./ prefix?" than we did trying to deflate things.

It has helped me improve my exquisitely nerdy recorder skills for renfair. Even better, it is free. http://www.???????.com

Beware! I haven't clicked that URL but nothing comes up on the googles and whois shows it was set up five days ago. He didn't mention the program's name and he posted anonymously. Not a good sign.

What I have found funny is that I work at a tech company, for the sake of this post let's go with "foobar", and I was over at a sales persons desk when I asked him to go to our homepage. "Just go to foobar.com", I told him. He goes and types "foobar.com" in the search box at the top of the Firefox chrome. "Wait wait wait, what are you doing?", I asked, "Why don't you just type it in the address bar and go straight there?". "What are you talking about, I am typing it in the address bar!", he replies. I grab the keyboard and show him how to type a URL into Firefox. "Oh, I didn't know you could do that with foobar.com", he said.

Apparently unless some people see something with http://www./ on the front, they have no idea they can stick it in the address bar. Google has become the gateway to the internet, even when you could get there directly..

Why not just type yahoo in the address bar, and hit Ctrl+Enter? IE and Firefox both append http://www./ and .com to the beginning and end when you do a Ctrl+Enter on any word in the address bar. With Firefox, Ctrl+Shift+Enter will add .org instead of .com.

In some environments that U3 popup every time you insert the drive isn't appropriate. See http://www./ u3.com/uninstall - I like mine much more now it's gone.

No, for a few reasons, the most obvious being NAT. One external IP address for ??? users behind the firewall. If your site is one of the main financial services providers, you can probably expect large numbers of users to be coming from one organization like a bank.

Lazy customers. My mom, not realizing its an ad that will charge amazon to get money, always clicks on the amazon banner when she searches for it on google (which is how she and many people find it... many people are too lazy to be bothered w/ the http://www./ thing- they just set their homepage to google and type the site into the search box.

Obviously there are clear cases where this can be avoided. If you see you are getting 100 hits a day from an IP traced back to skaterdudezRus.com and you sell skateboard accessories, well then thats obvious fraud. But if your competitor was just looking to make your day a little miserable, and just took the opportunity whenever he could to get his friends to click on your ads here and there, that is much more difficult to detect.

some free streeming of this..

http://www./ progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_CD.a sp?cd_id=1828#mp3

have not verified that it's really this song, but that's Macromedias fault for not fixing that 64-bit flash-plugin..

1. BLOG - POLITICAL

              WEBBY AWARD WINNER
        AGENCY/CREDITED ORGANIZATION
                    The Huffington Post HuffingtonPost.com
                    http://www./ huffingtonpost.com

2. http:/// ariannaonline.huffingtonpost.com/

3. http://www.webbyawards.com/about/index.php:

The Academy is an intellectually diverse organization that includes members such as musicians Beck and David Bowie, Internet inventor Vint Cerf, political columnist Arianna Huffington...

It looks like 500 members of the Academy is a huge pool to pick the ~50 (?) winners from...

The entire web searchable on 80GB of HD space....

Does it come with weekly downloadable updates to deal with sites, pages, text, owners, administrators ,sites purposes, changing?

And what insane alien compression technology are they using? I wasnt part of the whole roswell thing, so I don't know about them, but I know there isnt much around today that can fit that much info on 80GB... The entire Web? Even if just the info that google lists to people about sites, in just 80GB? Thats ridiculious....

Or maybe I just don't understand how little space it takes up...
All the text google shows me for one entry is, on aerage 250-500 bytes.

Every 2-4 results is 1 KB, when i type in plastic, I get 288,000,000 results.
144,000,000KB->144,000MB, 144GB, Or if every entry was only 250 bytes It would then Just be under their 80GB, and thats just sites containing plastic..
Now I do a search for sites without plastic. 18,490,000,000 results.

That implies, google, in total has entries for around 18,778,000,000 sites.
The information on each site would have to be 4.5 Bytes, to fit on 80GB of space. Thats not even enough for the URL.

Now, im sure they have special compression methods, like of course compression, and replacing commonalities like http://www./ with 2-3 sequential uncommon ascii chars that can be converetd when displayed... But using any trick in the book, The entire web on 80gb? Even the descriptions and URLs of sites?

They would make more with this magically compression techonlogy they must plan to use to do it....

Not to mention, everyday hundreds of thousands of new sites come into exsistance, and old sites go out of exsistance, domains get taken over, companies do, webpage content changes drastically including what a search lists relating to the page.

With all of the above, They are going to have an impossible time to even provide search listings. And theres mention of actually being able to access the sites? 80GB? Accurate?

Obviously a company founded and funded by people with minor awareness of the web and surrounding technologies, trying to catch onto another non exsistant bubble, and of course the people they are paying to develop that might actually know the situation arn't going to ruin their job position by telling them it won't work.

I feel bad for being so cynical, I mean, maybe they Do have a method for providing people constant updates to ensure accurace (even though they wont need the internet????), and they have a way to make Several TB(and if whole sites too, PB) worth of data fit on 80GB... But in my opinion, this isn't even a pipe dream....

Wow... I have been using the domain http://www.xn--x00a.net/ for almost two years... how is this news? That they are finally implementing punycode also in China?

The domain I have translates to http://www./#32911;.net/ which in Chinese would mean www.fuck.net. Not sure I could get a corresponding .cn address for this one ;-)

Dear Rob

I'm sorry to have to tell you but you've been scammed by a well-known internet kook called Louis Savain into slashdotting his junk

If you google for "nothing moves in spacetime" and "rebelscience.org" you'll find lots of references to this particular paranoid schizophrenic (no, I'm not kidding)

He likes to spam sci.physics and sci.physics.relativity with his junk. One of his recent postings is fairly typical:

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 16:59:17 +0000 (UTC),
glhan ...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
>In article ,
>Traveler wrote:
>>On 22 Jan 2006 07:55:33 -0800, glhan ...@indiana.edu wrote:

>>Repeat after me: NOTHING MOVES IN SPACETIME.

>World lines don't move in spacetime. When people talk about the motion of
>a particle they refer to a succession of points on the worldline, not the
>worldline in its entirety.

Repeat after me: ABSOLUTELY NOTHING MOVES IN SPACETIME!
NOTTHIINGGG!!!!

What this means is that there is NO CHANGE in spacetime (that's why it
was called Einstein's block universe by Karl Popper) and spacetime is
a fictitious math construct with no counterpart in reality. Now, isn't
it a tad weird that your idol Einstein agreed with his friend Kurt
"lunatic" Godel when he announced in 1949 that the spacetime of GR
allows time travel to the past via time-like loops?

Now hold on a southern cotton picking second! Aren't Kurt Godel and
Albert Einstein revered by physicists as two of the smartest men that
ever lived? Yep. ahahaha... One then wonders how they can be so stupid
as to believe in motion in spacetime. ahahaha...

http://www./ rebelscience.org/Crackpots/notorious.htm#Einstein

ahahaha...
>>> Or that your alien-induced lattice that exists nowhere is
>>>also an abstract model of your invention?

>>Nope. My lattice is not made of abstract crap but of real particles.
>>You crackpots call them virtual photons. ahahaha...

>You have a model that describes a lattice that is not made of abstract
>crap. You're like the screen writer who writes a line like "This isn't a
>movie, you know."

Maybe in your imagination but I know one thing: I am not an ass
kisser. I do my own thinking, than you very much. ahahaha... And
that's the way I like it. ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...

Physics is so much phucking phun! ahahaha...

Louis Savain
Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix It:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Cosas/Reliability.htm

I would suggest you remove the story

You know what they say, "Fool me once, shame on you - Fool me twice, shame on me"...

I put Snort sigs in place for the Sony traffic http://www.bleedingsnort.org/ and got hits from the following company

I have loaded the Sony DRM sigs but have gotten hits from other products. I am wondering if this is a false alert or another company using this root kit for DRM

000 : 50 4F 53 54 20 68 74 74 70 3A 2F 2F 77 77 77 2E POST http://www./
010 : 70 68 6F 74 6F 73 68 6F 77 2E 6E 65 74 2F 4D 50 photoshow.net/MP
020 : 53 4E 41 70 70 53 65 72 76 65 72 2F 73 65 72 76 SNAppServer/serv
030 : 69 63 65 73 2F 6C 6F 67 67 69 6E 67 20 48 54 54 ices/logging HTT
040 : 50 2F 31 2E 30 0D 0A 41 63 63 65 70 74 3A 20 61 P/1.0..Accept: a
050 : 70 70 6C 69 63 61 74 69 6F 6E 2F 2A 2C 20 61 75 pplication/*, au
060 : 64 69 6F 2F 2A 2C 20 69 6D 61 67 65 2F 2A 2C 20 dio/*, image/*,
070 : 6D 65 73 73 61 67 65 2F 2A 2C 20 6D 6F 64 65 6C message/*, model
080 : 2F 2A 2C 20 6D 75 6C 74 69 70 61 72 74 2F 2A 2C /*, multipart/*,
090 : 20 74 65 78 74 2F 2A 2C 20 76 69 64 65 6F 2F 2A text/*, video/*
0a0 : 0D 0A 43 6F 6E 74 65 6E 74 2D 54 79 70 65 3A 20 ..Content-Type:
0b0 : 74 65 78 74 2F 70 6C 61 69 6E 0D 0A 55 73 65 72 text/plain..User
0c0 : 2D 41 67 65 6E 74 3A 20 53 65 63 75 72 65 4E 65 -Agent: SecureNe
0d0 : 74 20 58 74 72 61 0D 0A 48 6F 73 74 3A 20 77 77 t Xtra..Host: ww
0e0 : 77 2E 70 68 6F 74 6F 73 68 6F 77 2E 6E 65 74 0D w.photoshow.net.
0f0 : 0A 43 6F 6E 74 65 6E 74 2D 4C 65 6E 67 74 68 3A .Content-Length:
100 : 20 31 36 33 0D 0A 50 72 6F 78 79 2D 43 6F 6E 6E 163..Proxy-Conn
110 : 65 63 74 69 6F 6E 3A 20 4B 65 65 70 2D 41 6C 69 ection: Keep-Ali
120 : 76 65 0D 0A 50 72 61 67 6D 61 3A 20 6E 6F 2D 63 ve..Pragma: no-c
130 : 61 63 68 65 0D 0A 0D 0A 3C 3F 78 6D 6C 20 76 65 ache..........
190 : 3C 69 6E 73 74 61 6C 6C 49 64 3E 35 66 37 35 30 5f750
1a0 : 34 66 36 33 61 66 38 37 38 35 61 39 32 63 36 33 4f63af8785a92c63
1b0 : 63 62 64 38 30 61 38 66 63 63 66 3C 2F 69 6E 73 cbd80a8fccf
1d0 : 3C 2F 73 65 72 76 69 63 65 3E 0D 0D 0A ...

In 1996, I did a related ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) publication:
Emerging Security Issues Involving the Presence of Microphones and Video Cameras in the Computing Environment

It is located here:
http://iamsam.com/papers/sigsac/sigsac.htm

It cites the actual CERT (Carnegie Mellon University Computer Emergency Response Team) Microphone Advisory:
CERT CERT ADVISORY CA-93:15

There is also a revised version from 2000 here :
http://iamsam.com/papers/emergent_security_issues_ 2000/emergent_security_issues_involving_microphone s_and_cameras_2000.html

For anyone interested, my other papers are available here: http://www./ iamsam . com

Regards-

Sam

This bit pulled from the Norwegian stock exchange, Oslo Børs, should explain why. They are _not_ about to open source it:

Oslo, Norway - September 20, 2005 - Opera Software today
permanently removed the ad banner and licensing fee from
its
desktop Web browser. Acknowledging that the ad-banner and
the option to pay for its removal has limited mass adoption
of the browser, Opera is now offering its ad-free, full-
featured browser completely free of charge in a move to
grow
its user base and penetrate the mass market.

The removal of the advertising banner and licensing fee is
made possible by a gradual increase in revenues from search
and service partners, including a new revised search
agreement with Google. The extended contract with Google
includes a search revenue deal, marketing support and
technical cooperation. Opera expects this contract to
increase the revenue per user.

During the first half of 2005, 30% of Opera`s desktop
revenue was generated by selling advertising displayed in
the integrated ad banner, 25% by licensing sales and 45%
by Google search and other affiliate partners. Users have
had the option of removing the ad banner and receiving
support for a fee of US$39.

By removing 55% of the current revenue stream, Opera
expects
to see a decrease in desktop revenue in the short term.
However, revenue in the long term is expected to increase
as
the ad-free browser is expected to significantly expand
Opera`s market share and the contract with Google provides
more search revenue per user.

The ad-free, full-featured Opera browser is now available
for download, completely free of charge, at http://www./
opera.com.

The main problem lies in cyrillic, namely:
a, b, c, e, h, k, m, o, p, t, x, y are in the standard character set, and
, , , , , , , , , , ,
are in cyrillic.

This is noted in URLs, namely, Paypal (Legit) and Paypal (Fake, using Russian characters

I've mirrored all the pics here. Someone else please take a copy and mirror them too.

It would be quite sad if someone were to uncover some illegal pornography and tip-off the FCC^HPatriot Act^HHOMOLAND SECURITY FORCES and shutdown their service for a bell or two.

Yeah, not like there are any other examples of open source software based on proprietry software.

tlhf

xxx

Also, your linked article talks about a compiler which compiles itself. IE, GCC recognising GCC. Having GCC regocnise BCC, VC++, et al would be insanly difficult. Even more so in this case as Mono is being released after the Microsoft compiler.

And even 10 years ago, people were making fun of me for having Atari 8-bits!

(I even still write software for them sometimes:
http://www.newbreedsoftware.com/atari/)