Email is cleartext, even if you encrypt the contents the addresses are wide open for anyone who can sniff the packets to see.
This isn't true. I think you confuse the (unfortunately) uncommon practice of end to end encryption with the common server-to-server encryption (ESMTP+STARTTLS, RFC 3207). No email addresses are leaked from encrypted SMTP connections.
I don't really like the CA model either, but your suggestion doesn't seem thought through. SSH asks you to actually verify the key fingerprint of the new host key you are trying to connect to; this would be quite hard for non technical users that want to visit their bank website etc.. And like other commented, that would also be a PITA with key rollovers.
No, the real solution I think is developed in the DANE IETF WG: distributing keys through DNS, secured by DNSSEC.
There's no problem accessing the IP from Comcast's route server (route-server.newyork.ny.ibone.comcast.net). Seems to indicate that it's closer to the access network.
*I* don't mind people smoking on the weekends, but it's still illegal. Change the law if you want to. And from my experience, yes, an initial positive drug screening is not a final result.
So unless they can prove that there is no more mtr code in WinMTR, they must absolutely provide WinMTR under the GPL. Otherwise they have no right to use mtr code.
Innocent until proven guilty, no? The burden of proof lies with the accuser.
The TPB case is however not a blatant disregard for copyright laws. The case is very important and sets a precedence for the legality of these kinds of services. It has never been tried before and was widely believed to be permitted. The new rulings does change this, but they haven't been made final yet. They can still appeal to the Swedish supreme court (and most probably will).
Even though Piratpartiet does host Piratebay (at least provide transit for), TPB does not operate under "parliamentary immunity" if not for other reasons so for the reason that Piratpartiet is not a member of the Swedish parliament.
They lose IPv4 address space. But I guess thay've made a cost analysis and concluded that the goodwill outweights that loss. I think it's awesome nonetheless (even though the win is negligible).
Actually, there was (don't now if "they" registered for this election) a party called "Kalle Anka-partiet" (Donald Duck Party). It is a traditional alternative to blank votes. The Donald Duck Party is run by a bearded old homeless guy from Malmo. "They" promise to give people wider sidewalks and free beer.
No, in that case the organization is just making the copies for itself. As a consequence, a company or other organization can develop a modified version and install that version through its own facilities, without giving the staff permission to release that modified version to outsiders.
"The GPL does not require you to release your modified version, or any part of it. You are free to make modifications and use them privately, without ever releasing them. This applies to organizations (including companies), too; an organization can make a modified version and use it internally without ever releasing it outside the organization."
Seems that most of the larger (well-known) *.govs doens't haven't deployed dnssec. I tried cia.gov, fbi.gov, nsa.gov (!), state.gov, whitehouse.gov, ins.gov, irs.gov... state.gov was the only one i found having published a DNSKEY rr. (I just picked a few at random I knew)
"But under the proposed settlement, works released under the GFDL and similar licenses are lumped in with works under full restrictive copyright. Google would therefore be given permission to display and distribute these works without abiding by the requirement to pass the freedoms guaranteed under the GFDL on to Google Books readers."
Slashdot Mirror
Email is cleartext, even if you encrypt the contents the addresses are wide open for anyone who can sniff the packets to see.
This isn't true. I think you confuse the (unfortunately) uncommon practice of end to end encryption with the common server-to-server encryption (ESMTP+STARTTLS, RFC 3207). No email addresses are leaked from encrypted SMTP connections.
I don't really like the CA model either, but your suggestion doesn't seem thought through. SSH asks you to actually verify the key fingerprint of the new host key you are trying to connect to; this would be quite hard for non technical users that want to visit their bank website etc.. And like other commented, that would also be a PITA with key rollovers.
No, the real solution I think is developed in the DANE IETF WG: distributing keys through DNS, secured by DNSSEC.
You mean... http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-05may10-en.htm ?
Oh, let me try!
"The more you look like a samurai, the better your chances of survival."
There's no problem accessing the IP from Comcast's route server (route-server.newyork.ny.ibone.comcast.net). Seems to indicate that it's closer to the access network.
*I* don't mind people smoking on the weekends, but it's still illegal. Change the law if you want to. And from my experience, yes, an initial positive drug screening is not a final result.
How is this a problem? An initial positive is not the final thing.
So unless they can prove that there is no more mtr code in WinMTR, they must absolutely provide WinMTR under the GPL. Otherwise they have no right to use mtr code.
Innocent until proven guilty, no? The burden of proof lies with the accuser.
And then they can sue him again for the money they lost in this litigation. Profit loop!
The TPB case is however not a blatant disregard for copyright laws. The case is very important and sets a precedence for the legality of these kinds of services. It has never been tried before and was widely believed to be permitted. The new rulings does change this, but they haven't been made final yet. They can still appeal to the Swedish supreme court (and most probably will).
Even though Piratpartiet does host Piratebay (at least provide transit for), TPB does not operate under "parliamentary immunity" if not for other reasons so for the reason that Piratpartiet is not a member of the Swedish parliament.
They lose IPv4 address space. But I guess thay've made a cost analysis and concluded that the goodwill outweights that loss. I think it's awesome nonetheless (even though the win is negligible).
Actually, there was (don't now if "they" registered for this election) a party called "Kalle Anka-partiet" (Donald Duck Party). It is a traditional alternative to blank votes. The Donald Duck Party is run by a bearded old homeless guy from Malmo. "They" promise to give people wider sidewalks and free beer.
noscript blocks all of the above (except for adobe, which is a company).
Yes, but you can still get repoterted to abuse@. I'm pretty sure that's the way they will go. (But ofc, i didn't rtfa.)
Even better answer: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#InternalDistribution
No, in that case the organization is just making the copies for itself. As a consequence, a company or other organization can develop a modified version and install that version through its own facilities, without giving the staff permission to release that modified version to outsiders.
This should answer your question: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequireSourcePostedPublic
"The GPL does not require you to release your modified version, or any part of it. You are free to make modifications and use them privately, without ever releasing them. This applies to organizations (including companies), too; an organization can make a modified version and use it internally without ever releasing it outside the organization."
Seems that most of the larger (well-known) *.govs doens't haven't deployed dnssec. I tried cia.gov, fbi.gov, nsa.gov (!), state.gov, whitehouse.gov, ins.gov, irs.gov... state.gov was the only one i found having published a DNSKEY rr. (I just picked a few at random I knew)
If you consider the border patrols trustworthy, sure. I don't. I'd bet the only "crime" Peter Watts committed was of arguing back.
Magnet link is an URI, your browser is supposed to send it to it directly.
http links are URI:s to, but rtorrent supports those (using libcurl). But libcurl does not support magnet-links :-).
You summarize my thoughts exactly. And I would also add that this deal is flamed by another party: the FSF. (fsf.org seems to be down atm, but here comes the link: http://www.fsf.org/news/2009-09-google-book-settlement-objection )
"But under the proposed settlement, works released under the GFDL and similar licenses are lumped in with works under full restrictive copyright. Google would therefore be given permission to display and distribute these works without abiding by the requirement to pass the freedoms guaranteed under the GFDL on to Google Books readers."
... named after the language it was implemented in.
They can face ongoing fines for non-compliance.
Monique Wadsted and the judge are both arbitrators for the swedish ccTLD (.se) Registry IIS/.SE's Alternative Dispute Resolution program.
Thank god we still have Lund, where you can get 100mbit for $7/mon. Gotta love it.