If you catch cooties while running as root, it can access/dev/mem and hot-patch your kernel to carve out a nice little hiding place complete with a reverse shell. Then it can alter your kernel in/boot to make itself persistant. Just in case you might decide to upgrade your kernel, they can also replace a common utility in/bin (for example, bash) with a hacked version that re-installs the rootkit as soon as you reboot.
With a little care they can then use your system for months and you won't be the wiser. For added fun, since they'll be running as root, they can use your machine to set up a tunnel endpoint inside your NAT/Firewall and gainunfettered access to anything in your LAN.
In other words, for nearly every possible system access in the kernel, the ligic goes if (some special permission, correct user, etc, etc) OR root, allow. You make it very easy for them. Even MS eventually figured out that having the user run with admin privileges all the time is bad.
While you're at learning, google chkrootkit.
People tell you 'keep studying' because there are obvious gaping holes in your basic knowledge that no post on a forum will even make a dent in it. Perhaps you should consider the possibility that you can be wrong and if every single expert is going in the opposite direction, you should at least look around to make damned sure they don't know something very important that you don't.
So you run binaries of unknown quality and source as root and wonder what went wrong? If you don't think running as root makes any difference, keep studying.
Meanwhile, have a look at App Armour, SELinux, etc. Also ACLs and capabilities.
US law enforcement has proven to be quite capable of tracking down and cutting off the flow of cash to foreign entities when it wants to. Sadly, they're more interested in copyright enforcement and cutting off cheap but legitimate prescription drugs rather than scams.
It used to be kids writing them for acclaim from their peers. It was all about rep.
Then various criminal organizations got involved in massive botnets used for carding, stealing bank credentials and plain old paid spamming (that is, for money).
Sure, in fact I have a hard time imagining how it could lead to crappier jobs, unless we brought back indentured servitude (aka, non-compete agreements). When you have no skill, you're completely replaceable so your employer has all the power. When you have a skill, well, ever try to get a plumber in a hurry? You know who has the power there.
It's easy to imagine how the job gets crappier. Fire 50K low skill laborers (unskilled labor is a myth, just watch the highly skilled CEOs on Undercover Boss bumbling around ineffectively at 'unskilled labor'). Teach them a new skill and guess what? There's a glut and so the pay goes down and conditions get worse. In general, real income has been falling since the late '60s. That is, jobs are getting crappier.
Means testing produces Chavs. Why get a job when you'll have less money than you do now AND have to worry about getting laid off? (working more to have less IS for suckers) The actual basic income means that getting a job directly leads to having more money roughly in proportion to the amount of work you do.
If training programs were available such that you could acquire a real skill so that working would get you substantially more money than welfare and food stamps, more people might go for it. As it is, welfare barely meets basic needs. It certainly won't pay for tech school. Throw in actual basic income (no means test) and a great many will go to work. Yes, some (small) percentage will sit like lumps. there are a few people like that. Some will start out like that and then start working as they unlearn years of the wrong lessons from perverse incentive. Others might volunteer in their community. I have seen plenty of retirees who no longer have to work at all but choose to get a part time job just to stay busy.
A desperate industry attempt to push 3D and make larger lists of bullet points.
If you want to see how well it is catching on, you have to look at sales of extra glasses and how sales of 3D vs. non 3D content compare.
Those figures suggest that people won't actively refuse 3D capability but rarely if ever actually use it. They further suggest that 3D capability is a weak selling point at best.
Sure, the old jobs don't come back. TYhe new jobs tend to be crappier than the old jobs due to employers taking advantage of desperation (a form of rent seeking)
Training programs and strong unemployment benefits that actually support the displaced workers while they learn a new skill would be one aproach, but it would need careful controls so it didn't take part in pushing workers into crappier jobs.
The basic income is probably the strongest approach. By taking poverty off of the table once and for all, the workforce gains sufficient bargaining power to render a lot of other employment laws and regulations unnecessary. It would also allow us to eliminate food stamps, welfare, social security, and various programs for the disabled and their expensive and often demeaning means testing bureaucracy and the perverse incentives that go with it.
The Luddites came into being because they knew there were no social programs in place to help them once their jobs went away. They had no real power to force Parliament to help them, but they had the power to sabotage the machines meant to replace them. Not much has changed there. If you want to get rid of the Luddites, give them good reason to believe they can transition painlessly to new and better jobs In fact, they might voluntarily sign up to lose their old jobs.
Keep in mind in your calculations that the union victory on the 8 hour day and 40 hour week had a lot to do with getting people employed as well.Some of those new jobs came about because it was too expensive to work a smaller staff on double shifts.
It's perfectly feasible in an async processor. You just have to hold the results in a buffer at the end of the computation until a timer fires. The timer being set to the longest the op might possibly take.
Async chips can have timers, they're just not driven by them.
It works just fine once you tell the wealthy owners to STFU.
We have some working 80 hours and some none at all because that is the most profitable configuration for the people who never have to worry about whjat things cost.
Historically, the wealthy owners have always attempted to pocket the entire benefit and throw the workers that helped make them wealthy to the wolves. The re-adjustment you speak of only happens after a great deal of union activity either threatening revolution or actually carrying it out.
The problem is all the crazies with big bux and a senator in their pocket would sooner slit OUR throats than give up capitalism. They don't feel rich until the rest of us are poor.
I wonder if it will be like portable music. We started with big heavy tube radios. Then they started shrinking until you could put one on the kitchen table. Next, the tinny sounding AM transistor radio. They got a bit bigger after that, but were in stereo and featured 8-track, cassette, and CD with respectable speakers. Then we saw monster 'boom boxes' with wheels and handles and Christmas lights in the speaker grilles (I think it might have had a black and white TV in there somewhere too). I'm pretty sure I saw one with a turntable. I have no idea how that was supposed to work.
So sooner or later we will see a 128 inch smartphone with surround sound. Don't worry, it'll be self propelled and powered by fuel cells. Once those become common, the hipsters will all go back to flip phones that somehow sound ironic when they ring. Then we'll all get implantable phones that pick up your thoughts directly and say them to the person you're talking to. The homicide rate will skyrocket. Then they'll be banned. Not for the homicide problem, of course. It'll be because the politicians claim they don't work. All the other party hears when they call is a long drawn out "Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh" and something about waffles.
TFA is saying that it might be smarter to knock the gene out of the deadly virus first and see if it becomes benign. That too tests the hypothesis without creating a superbug in the process.
Slashdot Mirror
You probably shouldn't run a trojan then.
That and have a backup, or at least filesystem snapshots.
Yes, they certainly should have thought of that before they let the cop 'find' a baggie under their seat and keep their car.
If you catch cooties while running as root, it can access /dev/mem and hot-patch your kernel to carve out a nice little hiding place complete with a reverse shell. Then it can alter your kernel in /boot to make itself persistant. Just in case you might decide to upgrade your kernel, they can also replace a common utility in /bin (for example, bash) with a hacked version that re-installs the rootkit as soon as you reboot.
With a little care they can then use your system for months and you won't be the wiser. For added fun, since they'll be running as root, they can use your machine to set up a tunnel endpoint inside your NAT/Firewall and gainunfettered access to anything in your LAN.
In other words, for nearly every possible system access in the kernel, the ligic goes if (some special permission, correct user, etc, etc) OR root, allow. You make it very easy for them. Even MS eventually figured out that having the user run with admin privileges all the time is bad.
While you're at learning, google chkrootkit.
People tell you 'keep studying' because there are obvious gaping holes in your basic knowledge that no post on a forum will even make a dent in it. Perhaps you should consider the possibility that you can be wrong and if every single expert is going in the opposite direction, you should at least look around to make damned sure they don't know something very important that you don't.
The thing is though, Linux servers are high value targets. They tend to have big pipes and they tend to serve many clients.
So you run binaries of unknown quality and source as root and wonder what went wrong? If you don't think running as root makes any difference, keep studying.
Meanwhile, have a look at App Armour, SELinux, etc. Also ACLs and capabilities.
Where did you get the idea Unix just lets the program access everything? Unless you're running as root for some reason...
US law enforcement has proven to be quite capable of tracking down and cutting off the flow of cash to foreign entities when it wants to. Sadly, they're more interested in copyright enforcement and cutting off cheap but legitimate prescription drugs rather than scams.
It used to be kids writing them for acclaim from their peers. It was all about rep.
Then various criminal organizations got involved in massive botnets used for carding, stealing bank credentials and plain old paid spamming (that is, for money).
Sure, in fact I have a hard time imagining how it could lead to crappier jobs, unless we brought back indentured servitude (aka, non-compete agreements). When you have no skill, you're completely replaceable so your employer has all the power. When you have a skill, well, ever try to get a plumber in a hurry? You know who has the power there.
It's easy to imagine how the job gets crappier. Fire 50K low skill laborers (unskilled labor is a myth, just watch the highly skilled CEOs on Undercover Boss bumbling around ineffectively at 'unskilled labor'). Teach them a new skill and guess what? There's a glut and so the pay goes down and conditions get worse. In general, real income has been falling since the late '60s. That is, jobs are getting crappier.
Means testing produces Chavs. Why get a job when you'll have less money than you do now AND have to worry about getting laid off? (working more to have less IS for suckers) The actual basic income means that getting a job directly leads to having more money roughly in proportion to the amount of work you do.
If training programs were available such that you could acquire a real skill so that working would get you substantially more money than welfare and food stamps, more people might go for it. As it is, welfare barely meets basic needs. It certainly won't pay for tech school. Throw in actual basic income (no means test) and a great many will go to work. Yes, some (small) percentage will sit like lumps. there are a few people like that. Some will start out like that and then start working as they unlearn years of the wrong lessons from perverse incentive. Others might volunteer in their community. I have seen plenty of retirees who no longer have to work at all but choose to get a part time job just to stay busy.
A desperate industry attempt to push 3D and make larger lists of bullet points.
If you want to see how well it is catching on, you have to look at sales of extra glasses and how sales of 3D vs. non 3D content compare.
Those figures suggest that people won't actively refuse 3D capability but rarely if ever actually use it. They further suggest that 3D capability is a weak selling point at best.
Sure, the old jobs don't come back. TYhe new jobs tend to be crappier than the old jobs due to employers taking advantage of desperation (a form of rent seeking)
Training programs and strong unemployment benefits that actually support the displaced workers while they learn a new skill would be one aproach, but it would need careful controls so it didn't take part in pushing workers into crappier jobs.
The basic income is probably the strongest approach. By taking poverty off of the table once and for all, the workforce gains sufficient bargaining power to render a lot of other employment laws and regulations unnecessary. It would also allow us to eliminate food stamps, welfare, social security, and various programs for the disabled and their expensive and often demeaning means testing bureaucracy and the perverse incentives that go with it.
The Luddites came into being because they knew there were no social programs in place to help them once their jobs went away. They had no real power to force Parliament to help them, but they had the power to sabotage the machines meant to replace them. Not much has changed there. If you want to get rid of the Luddites, give them good reason to believe they can transition painlessly to new and better jobs In fact, they might voluntarily sign up to lose their old jobs.
Keep in mind in your calculations that the union victory on the 8 hour day and 40 hour week had a lot to do with getting people employed as well.Some of those new jobs came about because it was too expensive to work a smaller staff on double shifts.
until the Sontarans invade.
It's perfectly feasible in an async processor. You just have to hold the results in a buffer at the end of the computation until a timer fires. The timer being set to the longest the op might possibly take.
Async chips can have timers, they're just not driven by them.
It works just fine once you tell the wealthy owners to STFU.
We have some working 80 hours and some none at all because that is the most profitable configuration for the people who never have to worry about whjat things cost.
You're forgetting that in your reasoning, all of those new jobs pay less than the jobs people have now.
Perhaps the middle class would like to benefit from the wonders they have created rather than becoming ass wipers to the rich and shameless.
Historically, the wealthy owners have always attempted to pocket the entire benefit and throw the workers that helped make them wealthy to the wolves. The re-adjustment you speak of only happens after a great deal of union activity either threatening revolution or actually carrying it out.
It might be better to be proactive for a change.
So you mean the nuclear plant and surrounding hot zone?
The problem is all the crazies with big bux and a senator in their pocket would sooner slit OUR throats than give up capitalism. They don't feel rich until the rest of us are poor.
Meanwhile, 2b describes the company itself.
Mostly because it's a decade overdue and they seem to be doing their damndest to make sure the fiber doesn't actually benefit the customer.
Because for many, fiber is like hot fusion. It's been right around the corner for decades now.
I wonder if it will be like portable music. We started with big heavy tube radios. Then they started shrinking until you could put one on the kitchen table. Next, the tinny sounding AM transistor radio. They got a bit bigger after that, but were in stereo and featured 8-track, cassette, and CD with respectable speakers. Then we saw monster 'boom boxes' with wheels and handles and Christmas lights in the speaker grilles (I think it might have had a black and white TV in there somewhere too). I'm pretty sure I saw one with a turntable. I have no idea how that was supposed to work.
So sooner or later we will see a 128 inch smartphone with surround sound. Don't worry, it'll be self propelled and powered by fuel cells. Once those become common, the hipsters will all go back to flip phones that somehow sound ironic when they ring. Then we'll all get implantable phones that pick up your thoughts directly and say them to the person you're talking to. The homicide rate will skyrocket. Then they'll be banned. Not for the homicide problem, of course. It'll be because the politicians claim they don't work. All the other party hears when they call is a long drawn out "Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh" and something about waffles.
TFA is saying that it might be smarter to knock the gene out of the deadly virus first and see if it becomes benign. That too tests the hypothesis without creating a superbug in the process.
I didn't see your request for info since it was surrounded by a bunch of screechy blather. *PLONK*
EULAs claim all sorts of wacky things.