This doesn't surprise anybody who's worked with the DOI, and especially the BIA, before.
I used to run an ISP for an indian tribe, and at one point the local BIA office asked us if they could run an Ethernet connection to our hub and use our link.
We made it clear to them that we were providing a link, not security, both before and after the fact, but they nevertheless didn't install any kind of firewall. Their servers had active Guest accounts that could access pretty much all data, and literally EVERY one of their desktops had C: drives shared with no passwords.
Oh, and BTW; they were the folks we were supposed to call if we got hacked and wanted it investigated for prosecution, since the FBI didn't have jurisdiction until brought in by BIA.
I know these folks; they used to accidentally send emails intended for The Economist to me all the time.
Much more fun than all the Rush Limbaugh emails I used to get; these would have secret details of stuff days or weeks before it was due to be released by the press.
Life has no other discipline to impose, if we would but realize it, than to accept life unquestioningly. Everything we shut our eyes to, everything we run away from, everything we deny, denigrate, or despise, serves to defeat us in the end. What seems nasty, painful, evil, can become a source of beauty, joy, and strength, if faced with an open mind. Every moment is a golden one for him who has the vision to recognize it as such.
-Henry Miller (1891 - 1980)
On the other hand:
A great many open minds should be closed for repairs.
-Toledo Blade
Cutting off you nose to spite your face
on
The LDP and Debian
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Would they really use a code freeze as an excuse for putting out a release with the majority of it's documentation removed?
Surely not. I would think the intelligent thing to do would be to set a seperate freeze date for the documentation.
It just occured to me that are you using RedHat because it offers superior something compared to others or what is the reason...
The decision came from the adminisphere. Way over my pay grade.:-)
Re:Hard to install and setup?
on
Future Of IDS
·
· Score: 2
It's "apt-get install snort". And if you had actually tried it before (which we all know you haven't due to your syntax slip) you would realize that it is in fact that easy.
It wasn't a syntax slip, cretin. It was a sarcastic comment on the fact that an installation is very different from a setup, and the fact that as any security professional can tell you (and pay attention, boy, because one is) Snort requires some setup if one wants it to actually help protect one's network, not just produce a nice warm fuzzy feeling that bears little relationship to reality.
And for the record, if I actually try "apt-get" anything I'll get a "command not found" error because I don't do Debian. Not due to any deficiency in Debian, just because the Fortune 500 company for which I administrate a couple hundred UNIX servers uses RedHat.
I'll take a stab at dispelling this image of Slashdotters.
I've been a full-on pro-x86 bigot since the days when the NEC V20 was cool, but in the last year I have changed my mind based on the current state of affairs in Linux.
Nowadays, for any given application (both senses of the word), there are a host of CPU speeds that are more than adequate, enough RAM is the cheapest it's ever been and enough RAM for 99% of desktop users costs less than dinner for two in a nice restaurant, and hard drives are in a similar state.
Linux is to the point where you can close your eyes and pick a "mainstream" computer at random, and Linux will probably run on it.
Open Source is to the point where you can find a program that will either have binaries available for your chosen architecture, or will have source available so you can compile it; and every processor made in the last couple of years will compile it fast.
The only things left to compare are:
Price.
Looks.
Mouse buttons.
For the iBook, that single mouse button is pretty damn annoying, but the price and looks are primo so they damn near even out. But for the iMac, the mouse button issue isn't one, because you can get another mouse with enough buttons so that X use won't completely piss you off, and you can get it really cheap. All that's left is price and looks, and damned if the iMac ain't competive in price, and top-notch in looks.
Of course, a variety in anything is good, and I whole-heartedly endorse the practice of not making every computer look like an iMac, even a little bit. I prefer my servers black, thankyouverymuch, but my desktops should be, well, for lack of a more masculine term, pretty.
I don't own one, and might very well not end up owning one any time soon, but the iMac is all right. If I had won a Mac in a contest three years ago I'd have sold it on eBay, but if I won an iMac today I'd plant that bad boy right where guests could see it, install Linux, and not fret one little bit about the lack of Intel Inside.
Re:More important implmentations
on
Quantum Holography
·
· Score: 5, Funny
No more exploratory surgery. Quickly detect cancer growths.
Yeah, I can see it now:
"After putting you in this big sphere and exposing you to massive amounts of electromagnetic radiation, we've determined that you do indeed have skin cancer."
Please, for the love of all that is good and right and doe-eyed cute, don't do this. Even I, a guy with somewhat leftist politics by any reasonable metric, think that this would be an awful idea.
Every argument you made against doing this with network security applies equally to doing it with the environment, among other things.
Re:Hard to install and setup?
on
Future Of IDS
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The article says it's hard to setup snort. What's so hard about: apt-get install snort?
Nothing's hard about that, but that isn't setting up snort.
Let me know when "apt-get setup snort" is working.
So... for those of you staying with AT&T Broadband, you better tell them about masqueraded hosts!
Your masqueraded hosts aren't connected to their network, and aren't connected to "the Service" any more than the web servers you speak to on the other end are.
Your NAT box is connected to the network, and it is the only thing sending traffic on their network. The fact that it gets the contents of some of those packets from other computers is irrelevant, and the fact that it sends traffic to other computers is equally irrelevant. After all, even if you had only one computer, it'd be sending packets to Slashdot, and Slashdot would be sending packets to it.
This provision is meant to stop you from discovering that in many locations, the DHCP servers will respond to multiple machines on your end, so that you could technically hook the cable modem into a hub and get multiple direct connections. As is becoming the norm for such things, they have the lawyers fix the technical problems instead of the system administrators.
I also believe IE was a failure with Microsoft as well, though people don't realize it. Now that IE is free MS makes no money on it, and does not, IMO, know how either.
Perhaps you weren't on the net when IE first came about, so your ignorance can be forgiven, but just so you'll know:
IE was *ALWAYS* free. It was, in fact, Spyglass Mosaic with Spyglass having been contracted to customize it for Microsoft, who gave it away free from day one.
Oh, and to those calling it a Windows component; they *DID* make a Windows 3.1 version for a while. It included dial-up networking software, and for a while was (although I hate to say this) the best free dial-up software around for Windows 3.1 (best in terms of being easy to set up for Joe BagODonuts). It even had a customization kit for ISPs. I know, I ran one back then.
Isn't Godel's theorem itself an attempt to use a formal system to make a statement about the universe of which that system (mathematics) is just a subset?
If his theorem is then true, doesn't it therefore state that it cannot be proven true?
OTOH, a buddy of mine bought a pin from some guy on the street, and ended up face first in the concrete with half a dozen Secret Service agents standing on his extremities. Seems the pin was property of the SS, only to be worn by their agents.
So that pin was really secure. Probably while the backpack bomb was being planted on the other end of the block...
I don't know if this would be a legitimate request on the part of the accused, but I have a feeling it might be. Of course it would be impossible to supply, because it would require people to testify against themselves if they were filming something unrelated and incriminating.
Is there a good way to compare this problem to a present day scenario in evidence rules?
Sure. This is no different than getting the spoken testimony of those people. First, you gotta find 'em. Then, you gotta either convince them to testify, or get a judge to compel them.
Then, you can't make 'em testify against their own Fifth Amendment rights. The courts wouldn't have any trouble sorting this one out.
Honestly, who really cares if _everything_ is open-sourced or free. Some software deserves to be paid for, this includes VMware.
The beauty of the Open Source movement is that it leaves things free for you to make that choice. More power to you. If you like, you could even pay double for the software, to make up for me not buying it. Think of it as a tip.
The folks here who *have* to run windows, don't really, they *have* to run certain windows apps, because they are a defacto standard in the relevant application domain and the linux apps aren't quite up to par yet and WINE isn't quite ready for that app.
That is not true of all the folks here who have to run Windows.
Some of them indeed do have to run whatever OS their company has selected, and don't think that what OS happens to be on their computer is reason enough to quit their job.
Slashdot Mirror
This doesn't surprise anybody who's worked with the DOI, and especially the BIA, before.
I used to run an ISP for an indian tribe, and at one point the local BIA office asked us if they could run an Ethernet connection to our hub and use our link.
We made it clear to them that we were providing a link, not security, both before and after the fact, but they nevertheless didn't install any kind of firewall. Their servers had active Guest accounts that could access pretty much all data, and literally EVERY one of their desktops had C: drives shared with no passwords.
Oh, and BTW; they were the folks we were supposed to call if we got hacked and wanted it investigated for prosecution, since the FBI didn't have jurisdiction until brought in by BIA.
I know these folks; they used to accidentally send emails intended for The Economist to me all the time.
Much more fun than all the Rush Limbaugh emails I used to get; these would have secret details of stuff days or weeks before it was due to be released by the press.
Do a majority of proprietary software users actually pay attention to the licenses of the software packages they utilize?
Of course not. If I read it, there's a meeting of the minds and it's a contract.
If I don't, in non-UCITA states there's no contract.
Someone once came to my modest how-to [handsononhowto.com] site, then sent me a screed worthy of RMS demanding that I contribute it to the LDP.
Ooooh, post it, post it! You can change the names to protect the guilty.
On the one hand:
Life has no other discipline to impose, if we would but realize it, than to accept life unquestioningly. Everything we shut our eyes to, everything we run away from, everything we deny, denigrate, or despise, serves to defeat us in the end. What seems nasty, painful, evil, can become a source of beauty, joy, and strength, if faced with an open mind. Every moment is a golden one for him who has the vision to recognize it as such.
-Henry Miller (1891 - 1980)
On the other hand:
A great many open minds should be closed for repairs.
-Toledo Blade
Would they really use a code freeze as an excuse for putting out a release with the majority of it's documentation removed?
Surely not. I would think the intelligent thing to do would be to set a seperate freeze date for the documentation.
It just occured to me that are you using RedHat because it offers superior something compared to others or what is the reason...
:-)
The decision came from the adminisphere. Way over my pay grade.
It's "apt-get install snort". And if you had actually tried it before (which we all know you haven't due to your syntax slip) you would realize that it is in fact that easy.
It wasn't a syntax slip, cretin. It was a sarcastic comment on the fact that an installation is very different from a setup, and the fact that as any security professional can tell you (and pay attention, boy, because one is) Snort requires some setup if one wants it to actually help protect one's network, not just produce a nice warm fuzzy feeling that bears little relationship to reality.
And for the record, if I actually try "apt-get" anything I'll get a "command not found" error because I don't do Debian. Not due to any deficiency in Debian, just because the Fortune 500 company for which I administrate a couple hundred UNIX servers uses RedHat.
I'll take a stab at dispelling this image of Slashdotters.
I've been a full-on pro-x86 bigot since the days when the NEC V20 was cool, but in the last year I have changed my mind based on the current state of affairs in Linux.
Nowadays, for any given application (both senses of the word), there are a host of CPU speeds that are more than adequate, enough RAM is the cheapest it's ever been and enough RAM for 99% of desktop users costs less than dinner for two in a nice restaurant, and hard drives are in a similar state.
Linux is to the point where you can close your eyes and pick a "mainstream" computer at random, and Linux will probably run on it.
Open Source is to the point where you can find a program that will either have binaries available for your chosen architecture, or will have source available so you can compile it; and every processor made in the last couple of years will compile it fast.
The only things left to compare are:
Price.
Looks.
Mouse buttons.
For the iBook, that single mouse button is pretty damn annoying, but the price and looks are primo so they damn near even out. But for the iMac, the mouse button issue isn't one, because you can get another mouse with enough buttons so that X use won't completely piss you off, and you can get it really cheap. All that's left is price and looks, and damned if the iMac ain't competive in price, and top-notch in looks.
Of course, a variety in anything is good, and I whole-heartedly endorse the practice of not making every computer look like an iMac, even a little bit. I prefer my servers black, thankyouverymuch, but my desktops should be, well, for lack of a more masculine term, pretty.
I don't own one, and might very well not end up owning one any time soon, but the iMac is all right. If I had won a Mac in a contest three years ago I'd have sold it on eBay, but if I won an iMac today I'd plant that bad boy right where guests could see it, install Linux, and not fret one little bit about the lack of Intel Inside.
No more exploratory surgery. Quickly detect cancer growths.
Yeah, I can see it now:
"After putting you in this big sphere and exposing you to massive amounts of electromagnetic radiation, we've determined that you do indeed have skin cancer."
Hey, didn't Dell lay some people off? Gee, Windows must be dying.
Didn't @Home go bankrupt? The Internet must be dying.
FedEx has a hiring freeze; oh, no, people must be using the Post Office more!
Please, for the love of all that is good and right and doe-eyed cute, don't do this. Even I, a guy with somewhat leftist politics by any reasonable metric, think that this would be an awful idea.
Every argument you made against doing this with network security applies equally to doing it with the environment, among other things.
The article says it's hard to setup snort. What's so hard about: apt-get install snort?
Nothing's hard about that, but that isn't setting up snort.
Let me know when "apt-get setup snort" is working.
So... for those of you staying with AT&T Broadband, you better tell them about masqueraded hosts!
Your masqueraded hosts aren't connected to their network, and aren't connected to "the Service" any more than the web servers you speak to on the other end are.
Your NAT box is connected to the network, and it is the only thing sending traffic on their network. The fact that it gets the contents of some of those packets from other computers is irrelevant, and the fact that it sends traffic to other computers is equally irrelevant. After all, even if you had only one computer, it'd be sending packets to Slashdot, and Slashdot would be sending packets to it.
This provision is meant to stop you from discovering that in many locations, the DHCP servers will respond to multiple machines on your end, so that you could technically hook the cable modem into a hub and get multiple direct connections. As is becoming the norm for such things, they have the lawyers fix the technical problems instead of the system administrators.
I also believe IE was a failure with Microsoft as well, though people don't realize it. Now that IE is free MS makes no money on it, and does not, IMO, know how either.
Perhaps you weren't on the net when IE first came about, so your ignorance can be forgiven, but just so you'll know:
IE was *ALWAYS* free. It was, in fact, Spyglass Mosaic with Spyglass having been contracted to customize it for Microsoft, who gave it away free from day one.
Oh, and to those calling it a Windows component; they *DID* make a Windows 3.1 version for a while. It included dial-up networking software, and for a while was (although I hate to say this) the best free dial-up software around for Windows 3.1 (best in terms of being easy to set up for Joe BagODonuts). It even had a customization kit for ISPs. I know, I ran one back then.
Mr. Senator, there is something you can actually do for us.
It even involves you getting to pass a law, which I know is something you Senators greatly enjoy.
It is:
REPEAL THE DMCA SO WE CAN GET SOME DAMN WORK DONE.
Thanks for taking my valuable time (because I pay for your time, too) to listen.
So you're saying that Plex86 (with Debian) sucks, even though the Debian port sucks more in its current state?
Yes. Why? Is there something wrong with saying that they both suck, and that there is value in trying to make them both suck less?
We'd have had it eventually anyway.
Sooner or later Apple will tire of shipping and supporting two OSes, and they'll have to write code for OSX supporting all their technologies.
Once they do, it won't be hard to wrap an emulation layer or two around it for Linux.
Well, OK, it'll be hard, but not beyond the capabilities of a small Open Source project.
because a system cannot descrie itself
How do you know? How does Godel know?
Isn't Godel's theorem itself an attempt to use a formal system to make a statement about the universe of which that system (mathematics) is just a subset?
If his theorem is then true, doesn't it therefore state that it cannot be proven true?
OTOH, a buddy of mine bought a pin from some guy on the street, and ended up face first in the concrete with half a dozen Secret Service agents standing on his extremities. Seems the pin was property of the SS, only to be worn by their agents.
So that pin was really secure. Probably while the backpack bomb was being planted on the other end of the block...
I don't know if this would be a legitimate request on the part of the accused, but I have a feeling it might be. Of course it would be impossible to supply, because it would require people to testify against themselves if they were filming something unrelated and incriminating.
Is there a good way to compare this problem to a present day scenario in evidence rules?
Sure. This is no different than getting the spoken testimony of those people. First, you gotta find 'em. Then, you gotta either convince them to testify, or get a judge to compel them.
Then, you can't make 'em testify against their own Fifth Amendment rights. The courts wouldn't have any trouble sorting this one out.
Bollocks. Don't you remember GEM?
The very fact that you have to ask underscores his point.
You wouldn't ask "don't you remember Windows?"
So use Plex86 instead.
Frankly, it sucks.
Honestly, who really cares if _everything_ is open-sourced or free. Some software deserves to be paid for, this includes VMware.
The beauty of the Open Source movement is that it leaves things free for you to make that choice. More power to you. If you like, you could even pay double for the software, to make up for me not buying it. Think of it as a tip.
The beauty of creation is that we will always have something more to discover.
How do you know?
The folks here who *have* to run windows, don't really, they *have* to run certain windows apps, because they are a defacto standard in the relevant application domain and the linux apps aren't quite up to par yet and WINE isn't quite ready for that app.
That is not true of all the folks here who have to run Windows.
Some of them indeed do have to run whatever OS their company has selected, and don't think that what OS happens to be on their computer is reason enough to quit their job.