this is really really cool for obvious reasons. it's also really really scary for equally obvious reasons. if I wasn't so afraid of the potential harm of misusing this power I'd sign my name now to be the third person done.
I run beryl using onboard intel video that was installed and configured right out of the box in fedora. runs like a champ as long as I don't turn everything on at once.
not once, and I use both daily. the advantage for windows on that front is that windows drivers are easier for the computer illiterate to get running. 1 missing driver in a linux distro is harder for an average joe to fix than 5 windows drivers.
how often do you use linux to have real familiarity with its "shitty hardware support" when was the last time you had to install chipset drivers with a linux distro to get usb 2.0 or onboard audio working? I have to do it every time with fresh installs of XP, yes even SP2.
don't just slander linux without naming specific devices that are an issue. those of us who use it admit wifi and 3d graphics are an issue. I don't ignore those issues because I feel its someone elses fault, I ignore them because I feel other advantages [speed, reliability, power] outweigh them. you will need to learn to work ndiswrapper or madwifi if you want wireless, but aside from people doing CAD and graphic design you don't need ultra high power 3d graphics except to game. and lack of games is more of an issue on that front than drivers are. especially considering most PC gamers I know have the knowledge to work a graphics driver out on their own. generic drivers will get you far enough to get recipes and driving directions off the web and check your email, all most people do on a daily basis. those people need to know there is something out there that can do what they need better and cheaper than windows and all on cheaper hardware as well.
wired card support is much better in linux than it is in windows. I have a couple of mobos with onboard 1 gig nic's that require a lot of work to run in windows. they install and run with 0 effort in every linux distro I've tried. even if it doesn't work out of the box the power is available to fix it yourself, instead of waiting for ms to decide its time to fix it for you. but thats an irrelevant point because the poeple they are targeting are not the kind of people who will be able to do that.
wireless cards require a fair amount of work that is beyond the "complete noobs" that this is targeting. other than that using generic drivers for ati or nvidia video cards will be enough to get just about every daily users computer up and running for them to have a look around. maybe the odd scanner will not work. dv and digital cameras and mp3 players that can't be switched to function as usb mass storage can be a hassle as well.
I definitely agree. the only alcatel equipment I am familiar with is their microwave t3's, saying they are vulnerable to this would be like listing cat-5 cable. fedora is maybe slightly different than other *nix's because it has selinux, but selinux always seemed to be more about solid file permissions than firewall and IDS work. I definitely agree with you that they need to talk specific packages in the *nix world to really have a useful list for the non windows crowd.
I do know what SPI is, I don't have a firm grasp of this exploit. from what I am reading here this is similar to the "this app can break" bug in notepad, they take too small of a data sample to be able to guess character encoding 100% of the time. I do see how SPI has nothing to do with that. and I'm not trying to come across as argumentative, just trying to get a better understanding and learn something. like I said before I am no security expert, but I do computer networking so that makes security relevant and I feel I should know more about it than I do.
the firewall in my dlink router does SPI, and can list "suspicious" traffic in a log file similar to snort. I agree that the list seemed kind of supsicious. on fedora I've always used snort for IDS, listing an OS in this list seemed suspicious to me... especially something like fedora or gentoo where I can choose my own IDS from any of a dozen different packages.
am I mistaken that this is really just a way to get past an IDS to get to the real goods when the networks security is overly dependant on that one piece of software.
will someone please explain to a non security guy why this list is so empty. it seems to me that this should be easy to test for in every IDS type software. I could see more exotic equipment like alcatel being untested yet but it seems there should be enough accessibility of d-link and fedora for example that they should be tested by now. I'd personally test them myself when I got home from work if I knew enough to be able to attempt the exploit.
I thought his method got shot down in favor of some one elses because of his complete lack of PR ability, like the rest of his inventions.
I might be totally wrong because I am no Tesla expert. know just enough to respect him and make myself sound like an idiot in front of anyone who really knows.
I use google every day, my entire life would be seriously inconvenienced without its existence. Tesla's ideas have unfortunately been essentially ignored by all of society don't know of anything he's credited for that I use as often as google or the incandescent lightbulb.
Slashdot Mirror
this is really really cool for obvious reasons. it's also really really scary for equally obvious reasons. if I wasn't so afraid of the potential harm of misusing this power I'd sign my name now to be the third person done.
that kororaa livecd runs beautifully on my radeon9600xt with no tinkering at all.
I run beryl using onboard intel video that was installed and configured right out of the box in fedora. runs like a champ as long as I don't turn everything on at once.
not once, and I use both daily. the advantage for windows on that front is that windows drivers are easier for the computer illiterate to get running. 1 missing driver in a linux distro is harder for an average joe to fix than 5 windows drivers.
how often do you use linux to have real familiarity with its "shitty hardware support" when was the last time you had to install chipset drivers with a linux distro to get usb 2.0 or onboard audio working? I have to do it every time with fresh installs of XP, yes even SP2. don't just slander linux without naming specific devices that are an issue. those of us who use it admit wifi and 3d graphics are an issue. I don't ignore those issues because I feel its someone elses fault, I ignore them because I feel other advantages [speed, reliability, power] outweigh them. you will need to learn to work ndiswrapper or madwifi if you want wireless, but aside from people doing CAD and graphic design you don't need ultra high power 3d graphics except to game. and lack of games is more of an issue on that front than drivers are. especially considering most PC gamers I know have the knowledge to work a graphics driver out on their own. generic drivers will get you far enough to get recipes and driving directions off the web and check your email, all most people do on a daily basis. those people need to know there is something out there that can do what they need better and cheaper than windows and all on cheaper hardware as well.
wired card support is much better in linux than it is in windows. I have a couple of mobos with onboard 1 gig nic's that require a lot of work to run in windows. they install and run with 0 effort in every linux distro I've tried. even if it doesn't work out of the box the power is available to fix it yourself, instead of waiting for ms to decide its time to fix it for you. but thats an irrelevant point because the poeple they are targeting are not the kind of people who will be able to do that.
wireless cards require a fair amount of work that is beyond the "complete noobs" that this is targeting. other than that using generic drivers for ati or nvidia video cards will be enough to get just about every daily users computer up and running for them to have a look around. maybe the odd scanner will not work. dv and digital cameras and mp3 players that can't be switched to function as usb mass storage can be a hassle as well.
I'm picking my nose right now. this post written in the interest of keeping my ass out of jail.
I definitely agree. the only alcatel equipment I am familiar with is their microwave t3's, saying they are vulnerable to this would be like listing cat-5 cable. fedora is maybe slightly different than other *nix's because it has selinux, but selinux always seemed to be more about solid file permissions than firewall and IDS work. I definitely agree with you that they need to talk specific packages in the *nix world to really have a useful list for the non windows crowd.
I do know what SPI is, I don't have a firm grasp of this exploit. from what I am reading here this is similar to the "this app can break" bug in notepad, they take too small of a data sample to be able to guess character encoding 100% of the time. I do see how SPI has nothing to do with that. and I'm not trying to come across as argumentative, just trying to get a better understanding and learn something. like I said before I am no security expert, but I do computer networking so that makes security relevant and I feel I should know more about it than I do.
the firewall in my dlink router does SPI, and can list "suspicious" traffic in a log file similar to snort. I agree that the list seemed kind of supsicious. on fedora I've always used snort for IDS, listing an OS in this list seemed suspicious to me... especially something like fedora or gentoo where I can choose my own IDS from any of a dozen different packages. am I mistaken that this is really just a way to get past an IDS to get to the real goods when the networks security is overly dependant on that one piece of software.
will someone please explain to a non security guy why this list is so empty. it seems to me that this should be easy to test for in every IDS type software. I could see more exotic equipment like alcatel being untested yet but it seems there should be enough accessibility of d-link and fedora for example that they should be tested by now. I'd personally test them myself when I got home from work if I knew enough to be able to attempt the exploit.
my ribs hurt now, thank you.
I thought his method got shot down in favor of some one elses because of his complete lack of PR ability, like the rest of his inventions. I might be totally wrong because I am no Tesla expert. know just enough to respect him and make myself sound like an idiot in front of anyone who really knows.
I use google every day, my entire life would be seriously inconvenienced without its existence. Tesla's ideas have unfortunately been essentially ignored by all of society don't know of anything he's credited for that I use as often as google or the incandescent lightbulb.