According to the original documentation, 'In early 2008, a security company identified one
botnet -- which it dubbed "Mega-D" -- that sent sparn promoting Affking's VPXL and King
Replica products as the worst botnet in the world, accounting for 32% of all spam.'
The Mega-D botnet consisted at least 264,784 computers.
Why the FUCK are we 'fining' someone who committed at least 264,784 felonies? We invade goddamn countries and charge people with war crimes for that level of criminality!
Anti-spam laws are nonsense. Forget the damn anti-spam laws. Lock them up for the felonies they're committing. Extradition would be a lot easier, too. (Of course, we could just find a few hundred IPs this guy hijacked in Australia, turn them over, and have him locked up there his entire life, instead.)
The laws are completely useless and always have been. They were passed to make consumers think that government is doing something. But the extradition and prosecution is a lot harder than it sounds, even when the criminal is in a friendly country like Australia. It takes forever and costs a lot of money, so the law enforcement agencies pass.
That's exactly it. The czar concept in general is flawed, even in departments or industries that have a clear mission and control of that mission. Neither is true in cyber security. We don't need another figurehead creating the illusion of action.
That's not true. MS gets killed no matter whether they release 15 patches in one day or 15 over the course of a month. The question is when they release them in relation to when the vuln is disclosed. Waiting 3 weeks makes no sense.
Slashdot Mirror
Ars might want to update its rewrite of the WSJ story. Burr isn't submitting the bill. http://www.wsj.com/articles/se...
"cuts the chord"? Are they dissecting sheet music now? Cripes.
No. This was actually announced 2 weeks ago by Google and Adobe, not today. http://blog.chromium.org/2010/12/rolling-out-sandbox-for-adobe-flash.html
This is a month old, and Schneier has since backed off this assertion.
How exactly can Microsoft be responding to an event that hasn't taken place yet (the Apple tablet announcement)? Is that "pre-sponding"?
According to the original documentation, 'In early 2008, a security company identified one botnet -- which it dubbed "Mega-D" -- that sent sparn promoting Affking's VPXL and King Replica products as the worst botnet in the world, accounting for 32% of all spam.'
The Mega-D botnet consisted at least 264,784 computers.
That's 264,784 UNAUTHORIZED COMPUTER ACCESS FELONIES.
Why the FUCK are we 'fining' someone who committed at least 264,784 felonies? We invade goddamn countries and charge people with war crimes for that level of criminality!
Anti-spam laws are nonsense. Forget the damn anti-spam laws. Lock them up for the felonies they're committing. Extradition would be a lot easier, too. (Of course, we could just find a few hundred IPs this guy hijacked in Australia, turn them over, and have him locked up there his entire life, instead.)
The laws are completely useless and always have been. They were passed to make consumers think that government is doing something. But the extradition and prosecution is a lot harder than it sounds, even when the criminal is in a friendly country like Australia. It takes forever and costs a lot of money, so the law enforcement agencies pass.
wait wait wait. They have computers in Canada?
Exactly. And this was on 2.0, and 3.0 is out already. Nothing to see here.
Are nominations still open? DC, B'more and Orlando should be at the top of the list. Maybe Dallas too.
That's exactly it. The czar concept in general is flawed, even in departments or industries that have a clear mission and control of that mission. Neither is true in cyber security. We don't need another figurehead creating the illusion of action.
Here's a better story with more info: http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid14_gci1332898,00.html Looks like they're able to mess with the session parameters, as you said.
Yeah they did. And, just for the record, the story is on Network World, not Computerworld.
First, this is more than a month old and has been patched. And B, ubiquitousness isn't a word. Not even in Australia.
Here endeth the discussion. Can't beat that.
That's not true. MS gets killed no matter whether they release 15 patches in one day or 15 over the course of a month. The question is when they release them in relation to when the vuln is disclosed. Waiting 3 weeks makes no sense.