I'm not speaking of the right answer, I'm speaking of what teachers and councilors are saying to the students (many of the parents as well).
Perhaps they SHOULD be talking to graduating high schoolers about the substantial risks of student loans and the benefits of avoiding them even if it means taking an extra year or two, but they're not.
Even back when I was about to graduate high school, the message was clear that the next step is definitely to get into a school (any school) and you will be needing a student loan or three. That was a strong message from pretty much any and every "adult influence" in your life. And that was before helicopter parenting and other think of the children measures had removed many of the opportunities a teen might have to operate semi-independently where they would gain some experience that might help them see through the scam.
Even a session wouldn't help. Many communications over the net are machine to machine. Also there's the whole solve the CAPTCHA by mechanical Turk (paid for with copied porn).
I wouldn't be surprised if within a year of setting up such a scheme, CAPTCHAs for certain websites would develop a very high failure rate.
Sorry, there's really no difference. An attacker can easily appear to be the browser of their choice.
Going to CAPTCHAs that would actually work would be as bad as shutting the routers off and going home. Are you really willing to solve a captcha every time a daemon on your system wants to do a DNS lookup of check in with a time server? Besides, they can actually be solved by putting up a porn site (solve the captcha, see the next image).
I can't claim to know the cause, but I have seen one proven case of a bit flip affecting processing on a machine that ran fine before and after the incident. Since it was doing batch processing I was able to re-run the job with identical inputs. It never made the error again.
Could have been a cosmic ray, alpha decay, power glitch that oddly didn't affect the other machines on the same circuit, who knows?
Since I am not going to vote for either one, I reserve the right to complain about the whole sordid affair. The Ds being wrong doesn't make the Rs right. It just makes them both unsuitable for office. Of course, nobody here likely voted for Ted Kennedy in a presidential election either, so I would suppose they have room to complain as well.
Unless, of course, you want to make it easy to cook the books. At one time, bankers and accountants understood that even the slioghtest whiff of impropriety was a problem even if you actually weren't actually doing anything wrong. Today, they're all YOLO.
And what would the expensive checkbox appliances have done about heartbleed? Nothing.
You are correct that there is no such thing as perfect security. That is true no matter what approach you take and no matter how much time or money you throw at it.
That would be my conclusion as well. Of course, there is a solution but that involves spending money so I doubt it'll happen. Not as long as they can keep fooling people with plans that allow you to burn up your entire monthly quota in ever smaller fractions of an hour.
That presupposes that I would or even could pay the amount they are demanding. If those aren't true, they benefit in no way at all from me not enjoying that content.
Or another case. Let's say I plan to watch something on cable that I subscribe to, but 30 minutes in, the idiot up the street manages to cut a tree down and take the cable with it. In that case, I already paid the cableco which already paid the broadcaster who already paid the content producer, etc etc. So who would I be stealing from if I download the torrent posted by the guy upstream of the idiot with a chainsaw?
If your idea of defense is buying hyper expensive checkboxes, then yes. If you do the little things like actually doing updates, actually configuring your servers properly, etc than perhaps not.
Alas, no. That would have been possible in the before time when a T1 was a lot of bandwidth and the threat was a DOS rather than a DDOS.
In a DDOS, no one host is a big contributor, but there are a lot of hosts. Consider, you have 10,000 hosts (a SMALL attack) fetching valid URLs from your web server and sending them to/dev/null. Now, which of the 10100 hosts fetching pages from you do you want shot down? Keep in mind, your objective includes not letting the attacker win. To add to the "fun", those 10,000 hosts will rotate out and be replaced by others in a much larger pool fairly frequently.
Nobody buys by the GB on the back end. It's all based on a combination of commit and 90th percentile of utilization. Someone as large as Verizon probably does a lot of settlement free peering. So their cost is limited to the carrying capacity to handle peak demand.
I was being very specific to what you presented because that was what I was calling out. OP asked for citations and got papered instead.
What I do know is ever since the craze over second hand smoke started in the '80s, I have never seen (pardon the pun) a smoking gun. I must say I was a bit soured on the subject after seeing someone quacking about 4th hand smoke (coming into contact with someone who was in a room someone once smoked in).
Apparently, there was a transient problem. That is much closer, but has a number of troubling signs such as condensing large amounts of the smoke and implanting the resulting crud under the skin of mice or placing them in what would be an extreme example of a smoke filled room 24/7 for 5 months. Of course, in the latter study, 60% of the CONTROLS (breathing only filtered air) also developed lung tumors.
In many other studies in the report, particularly the human studies, the "positive" wasn't harm that occurred, but the ability to measure that substance in their urine (generally with no data provided on the concentration or source of the second hand smoke).
In other words, pretty weak stuff, but I'll grant you, they are actually relevant studies.
But you have never actually presented scientific evidence or anything that pointed to scientific evidence even vaguely relevant to the request. If you have something to contribute to the conversation, please do so. Preferably a link to actual scientific evidence (that second hand smoke causes measurable harm, not on the mating practices of the Tufted Titmouse) rather than a report about reports. Otherwise, admit you've been bamboozled and move on.
Not really. It's really only necessary when the address block will be dual homed. So that's going to be a class C or larger, certainly not a single IP allocated by DHCP.
For smaller blocks (but still more than a single IP), an upstream MAY wish to register it so abuse complaints will be routed to that customer rather than to them.
Go ahead and do a whois on your current IP address at home.
So perhaps you would care to ferret out one of those controlled studies. I looked at the complete report and found only references to other reports that reference more reports. There doesn't seem to be any scientific evidence to be found there.
I think, given the initial request for scientific evidence that second hand smoke causes harm that it was pretty clear that the request was for a controlled study and that X would not be the mating rituals of the Tufted Titmouse.
Where legitimate context simply means the study wasn't found defective. Of course, a leading sign of defects is failing to find the harm we "all know" must exist. I actually have never seen a study that found actual harm from second hand smoke, particularly from incidental exposure. If you have, post a link to that.
Essentially, it is political suicide these days to publish a study that finds no harm from second hand smoke. Even the very few that dare report any negative finding very anxiously include a few paragraphs dedicated to claiming without proof that while it doesn't cause X, we just know it causes every other letter of the alphabet.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not speaking of the right answer, I'm speaking of what teachers and councilors are saying to the students (many of the parents as well).
Perhaps they SHOULD be talking to graduating high schoolers about the substantial risks of student loans and the benefits of avoiding them even if it means taking an extra year or two, but they're not.
There honestly isn't. Especially if they use the system's TCP library. I say that as someone who has implemented a few network stacks.
Stupid or inexperienced?
Even back when I was about to graduate high school, the message was clear that the next step is definitely to get into a school (any school) and you will be needing a student loan or three. That was a strong message from pretty much any and every "adult influence" in your life. And that was before helicopter parenting and other think of the children measures had removed many of the opportunities a teen might have to operate semi-independently where they would gain some experience that might help them see through the scam.
Even a session wouldn't help. Many communications over the net are machine to machine. Also there's the whole solve the CAPTCHA by mechanical Turk (paid for with copied porn).
I wouldn't be surprised if within a year of setting up such a scheme, CAPTCHAs for certain websites would develop a very high failure rate.
How would a search engine spider the web?
Sorry, there's really no difference. An attacker can easily appear to be the browser of their choice.
Going to CAPTCHAs that would actually work would be as bad as shutting the routers off and going home. Are you really willing to solve a captcha every time a daemon on your system wants to do a DNS lookup of check in with a time server? Besides, they can actually be solved by putting up a porn site (solve the captcha, see the next image).
To be honest, considering how sore you still seem to be w/ Kennedy, it reads a bit more like this time your side did it so it's A-OK with you.
At least the Ds weren't willing to actually elect their traitor to the presidency.
Why not both sides?
I can't claim to know the cause, but I have seen one proven case of a bit flip affecting processing on a machine that ran fine before and after the incident. Since it was doing batch processing I was able to re-run the job with identical inputs. It never made the error again.
Could have been a cosmic ray, alpha decay, power glitch that oddly didn't affect the other machines on the same circuit, who knows?
If it's not wrong that Israel meddles in damn near every one of the US' affairs
Who here said they were fine with that? But by your logic, if you're NOT fine with that, you shouldn't be fine with Trump either.
Since I am not going to vote for either one, I reserve the right to complain about the whole sordid affair. The Ds being wrong doesn't make the Rs right. It just makes them both unsuitable for office. Of course, nobody here likely voted for Ted Kennedy in a presidential election either, so I would suppose they have room to complain as well.
Unless, of course, you want to make it easy to cook the books. At one time, bankers and accountants understood that even the slioghtest whiff of impropriety was a problem even if you actually weren't actually doing anything wrong. Today, they're all YOLO.
And what would the expensive checkbox appliances have done about heartbleed? Nothing.
You are correct that there is no such thing as perfect security. That is true no matter what approach you take and no matter how much time or money you throw at it.
That would be my conclusion as well. Of course, there is a solution but that involves spending money so I doubt it'll happen. Not as long as they can keep fooling people with plans that allow you to burn up your entire monthly quota in ever smaller fractions of an hour.
That presupposes that I would or even could pay the amount they are demanding. If those aren't true, they benefit in no way at all from me not enjoying that content.
Or another case. Let's say I plan to watch something on cable that I subscribe to, but 30 minutes in, the idiot up the street manages to cut a tree down and take the cable with it. In that case, I already paid the cableco which already paid the broadcaster who already paid the content producer, etc etc. So who would I be stealing from if I download the torrent posted by the guy upstream of the idiot with a chainsaw?
If your idea of defense is buying hyper expensive checkboxes, then yes. If you do the little things like actually doing updates, actually configuring your servers properly, etc than perhaps not.
Alas, no. That would have been possible in the before time when a T1 was a lot of bandwidth and the threat was a DOS rather than a DDOS.
In a DDOS, no one host is a big contributor, but there are a lot of hosts. Consider, you have 10,000 hosts (a SMALL attack) fetching valid URLs from your web server and sending them to /dev/null. Now, which of the 10100 hosts fetching pages from you do you want shot down? Keep in mind, your objective includes not letting the attacker win. To add to the "fun", those 10,000 hosts will rotate out and be replaced by others in a much larger pool fairly frequently.
Nobody buys by the GB on the back end. It's all based on a combination of commit and 90th percentile of utilization. Someone as large as Verizon probably does a lot of settlement free peering. So their cost is limited to the carrying capacity to handle peak demand.
Being raided at 6 A.M. probably wasn't very fun.
As for ISP policy, that depends. They may well have had a business account.
I was being very specific to what you presented because that was what I was calling out. OP asked for citations and got papered instead.
What I do know is ever since the craze over second hand smoke started in the '80s, I have never seen (pardon the pun) a smoking gun. I must say I was a bit soured on the subject after seeing someone quacking about 4th hand smoke (coming into contact with someone who was in a room someone once smoked in).
Apparently, there was a transient problem. That is much closer, but has a number of troubling signs such as condensing large amounts of the smoke and implanting the resulting crud under the skin of mice or placing them in what would be an extreme example of a smoke filled room 24/7 for 5 months. Of course, in the latter study, 60% of the CONTROLS (breathing only filtered air) also developed lung tumors.
In many other studies in the report, particularly the human studies, the "positive" wasn't harm that occurred, but the ability to measure that substance in their urine (generally with no data provided on the concentration or source of the second hand smoke).
In other words, pretty weak stuff, but I'll grant you, they are actually relevant studies.
I did: ERROR 403: Forbidden.
But you have never actually presented scientific evidence or anything that pointed to scientific evidence even vaguely relevant to the request. If you have something to contribute to the conversation, please do so. Preferably a link to actual scientific evidence (that second hand smoke causes measurable harm, not on the mating practices of the Tufted Titmouse) rather than a report about reports. Otherwise, admit you've been bamboozled and move on.
Have a reference
Not really. It's really only necessary when the address block will be dual homed. So that's going to be a class C or larger, certainly not a single IP allocated by DHCP.
For smaller blocks (but still more than a single IP), an upstream MAY wish to register it so abuse complaints will be routed to that customer rather than to them.
Go ahead and do a whois on your current IP address at home.
So perhaps you would care to ferret out one of those controlled studies. I looked at the complete report and found only references to other reports that reference more reports. There doesn't seem to be any scientific evidence to be found there.
I think, given the initial request for scientific evidence that second hand smoke causes harm that it was pretty clear that the request was for a controlled study and that X would not be the mating rituals of the Tufted Titmouse.
Where legitimate context simply means the study wasn't found defective. Of course, a leading sign of defects is failing to find the harm we "all know" must exist. I actually have never seen a study that found actual harm from second hand smoke, particularly from incidental exposure. If you have, post a link to that.
Essentially, it is political suicide these days to publish a study that finds no harm from second hand smoke. Even the very few that dare report any negative finding very anxiously include a few paragraphs dedicated to claiming without proof that while it doesn't cause X, we just know it causes every other letter of the alphabet.