P4 2.2GHz Overclocked to 3.5GHz
GraveD sent linkage to a site
explaining how a homemade nitrogen cooling system
overclocked a P4
from 2.2Ghz to an incredible 3.5ghz. There's plenty of stuff
to poke at over there. Update: 01/17 20:42 GMT by T : boaworm writes: "According to this paper, the Finnish geeks have successfully oveclocked a Pentium 4 to 3675 Mhz. They claim it is a new World Record, and it sure looks like they beaten another O/C'd Pentium 4 submitted earlier today on slashdot. (Summary in English in the end)."
The fact that defense in depth is a good idea does not justify allowing one of the layers to be weak. The defenses at every level should be as strong as possible, and that ideally means a bug-free app server and a bug-free database.
The only thing that this researcher proved is that in certain environments you can break in the system, which basicly holds true for every system.
No matter what, you can be sure that contrary to M$, these holes will be worked on 24/7 and fixed like yesterday. :)
Anyway, enjoy you uninformed, senseless bashing and flaming... trolls.
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
As if ANYONE on this site hasn't ever had to explain something that a some moron ^H^H^H^H^H^H manager said could or couldn't be done..
HIS boss is still the boss, wtf is he supposed to say?
"I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
A software company said to the public, "Our product is unbreakable." The public replied, "No, you are not unbreakable."
Another software company said to the public, "Our product is not unbreakable." And the public replied, "You're right, you are not unbreakable."
The more I've thought about this, the more likely it seems. And a key aspect to this is that my OS vendor, SuSE, and ilk (Red Hat, Mandrake, etc) would be nailed just as much as MS, except with less money in the bank, they would be killed much more swiftly. Now, two of those are outside of the USA, so it's not a direct correlation, but there are some serious ramifications to software liability that occur in as reactive a society as we have today.
Certainly this announcement would instantly have a dozen law firms seeking people running Oracle to launch a multi-billion dollar suit of some flavor. And while certainly not "unbreakable", and (IMO) a bit overpriced, Oracle being available is a Good Thing. Of course they have holes. I'm equally sure that they will likely address them quickly (Quickly being relative to the company involved). Introducing *sane* liability (at least in America) is going to be very difficult in a society that is making it neigh impossible to be a medical doctor, and is driving up medical costs due to the extensive CYA documentation (videotapes, extensive reports, etc) now required by industry insurance.
--
Evan "I'm pretty sure this is ontopic" E.
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
> Buffer overflow bugs can be prevented by a
> middle-school hacker. This is elementary stuff.
> Doesn't anybody believe in putting limits on
> characters? This is simple to prevent.
This is pure bullshit. Are the programmers of
Apache, IIS, Half-Life, Quake 3 Arena, Perl, SSHD, glibc, wu_ftpd, or BIND at the middle school level? Windows NT? How about the linux kernel? All have had buffer overflows, and I'll bet that many of them still do.
Unfortunately it is not always as simple as "putting limits on characters". The simple fact is that the C language is practically designed to make buffer overflow bugs easy to write and easy to exploit.
I agree with you that buffer overflows are serious, though. That's why I think it is ridiculous that we still write security-critical network software in C. Sometimes it is hard to get around, like in the linux kernel when you need to do hardware access (a microkernel architecture might make it easier to write certain parts in higher-level languages). You might argue that performance would be impacted (I don't think this is true, especially with network software where the network is the real bottleneck), but even this argument falls through for 99% of users, since most users are far from full utilization of their processor. However, almost all users *are* affected by security holes.
Can you really say that its the consumer who will win when no consumer programs require much processing power over a P2 400 or so?
I mean, it's nice that intel and AMD can make such fast processors, but where's the bottleneck on overall performance nowadays? I'm willing to bet it's not in the chip.
I think we've reached a point in personal computing where the software is years behind the hardware. Only in the fields of gaming or professional rendering do we need such high performance machines.
My friend's parents recently purchased a 1.5 Ghz Pentium 4 for day to day bookkeeping!