So, wow, you can continue to be unaffected by any of this... just like you were before. Or do you just feel compelled to whine about a product you weren't going to buy anyway?
Unaffected? The market for open mobile devices is pretty much completely gone. when it comes time to upgrade my phone I'll have to hack an open OS onto an Android phone or something. This curation craze is affecting desktop computing. I'm far from unaffected.
And, really, the "Game Boy" in your nick was pretty damned well curated since they use cartridges. So I find your objection amusing.
It was meant to mean Boy Who Plays Games. I'm not a Nintendo fanboy. If I was I'd have a space or at least initial caps. And that was a single-purpose game console anyways, not a general-purpose computing device that was artificially locked down. I don't want computers to be considered toys like consoles.
Shoulda thought further ahead when I was like 11 years old...
So in short, having the iPad open would be bad for SEO and would overwhelm the users' little minds.
Fuck this. What the hell happened to our species' intellect? Did we breed it out in just the few generations that have lived in a world where you can get by with your wallet as your only tool and skill? Shit.
Well it has come and gone in cycles in the past. Maybe the cycles are just swinging harder and longer with every oscillation. I mean before the iPhone came out we were at a level of openness unprecedented in computing history. It didn't seem so great back then, but we had forgotten what a proprietary hellhole felt like. Then Apple reminded us.
Say it was possible to install any OS you wanted on the iPad, and Apple even provided the tools to do so. How would that negatively affect the iPad's sales? This doesn't even break the Apple fanboy's mantra, that open isn't usable and usable isn't open.
The nook's strength is that it's a rootable Android tablet, the fact that it's cheap is just a bonus.
I've bought many "hacker" devices that companies produced shortly before they went out of business or otherwise ruined themselves. The Treo 180, Treo 650 (Palm made some awesome stuff as they split and merged repeatedly), and the Nokia N900. What do they have in common?
They allow open development, and they were all bloody expensive top-of-the-line devices when they came out.
Maybe they can use energy-collecting thongs that absorb the lasers and then they can sell the power back to the grid. Couple that with using the same material for the floor around the pole, the club sells that power back and repays the strippers based on how many watts were collected during their act.
This gave me an image in my head similar to Travolta's famous dance scene in Saturday Night Fever, but it was a guy in a laser suit (suit that emits lasers in all directions) breakdancing in the middle of the room to electro music with lasers going everywhere like an epileptic's worst nightmare. Also everybody was wearing Daft Punk-style helmets (which makes sense now that I think about it, you'd need to shield your eyes from the lasers).
Is that even necessary? If they're not monitoring torrent swarms, just force encrypted torrent traffic. Are they gonna cut you off for passing a lot of random-looking garbage back and forth?
No one can "steal" your existing certificate unless they also steal your web server's private key. A CA can issue a fraudulent certificate for your site, but anyone can generate a self-signed certificate for your site as well. How does a CA make MITM attacks more likely?
Because the CA issues certs that the browser trusts. That fraudulent cert will work A-OK and give no warnings to users. It's as good as the one already installed on the web server. Because the CA will cave to government requests and is a nice juicy target for black hats, this cert is more likely to be issued fraudulently than if the keys are stored on a flash drive in your desk drawer.
How many users visit your web site for the first time on an untrusted wireless network or in a country where the government may want to feed them a fake certificate anyway?
AKA the "prayer method" - pray you don't get MITMed the first time. It would be very shortsighted, at best, to rely on this.
I haven't heard of any reported MITM attacks resulting from the bad certificates, although I wouldn't be surprised if some occurred.
Yeah hopefully all those Iranians will upgrade their browsers before they open their Gmail interface again.
In a world of self-signed certificates there isn't even a way to begin to detect MITM attacks (much less stop them) unless you watch every connection between every client and web server and keep track of every possible certificate ever generated and its use history. Did your favorite web site just change its self-signed certificate because they lost the private key due to hardware failure, because it expired, or some other legitimate reason? Or is this a MITM attack?
This is what the network notary system (Perspectives / Convergence plugin) is for, take a look at it. When you visit a site, it compares the cert your browser receives with what other computers around the world are seeing at the same time. Only a short history of certs for a site would be useful, but not strictly necessary. This doesn't prevent an MITM between the hosting provider and the rest of the Internet, but neither would our CA system that issues fraudulent certificates to governments and any black hats who manage to break in.
The only advantage CA certs had was that they came with a promise that key distribution would be securely and responsibly managed to prevent fraudulent certificates from being issued, which would allow MITMs. This was the only advantage among a sea of disadvantages. That advantage is gone.
By default, precisely dick. If you Windows guys get to pretend that NTFS execute permissions are commonly used, we Linux guys get to pretend that people commonly set/home and/tmp noexec and use SELinux. Deal?
BTW, after giving Convergence a try, I still prefer Perspectives. Convergence's anonymization feature is nice but it uses a mechanism that installs a local CA, causing CertPatrol to go nuts, and it doesn't offer anywhere near the level of customization of Perspectives.
We'll see how it turns out. What's funny is that these tree ring and ice core sources are "controversial" yet they both match up pretty well. What an odd coincidence.
CAs are done, stick a fork in 'em. Just generate your own certs. A CA cert only increases your chance of getting MITM'ed (since you don't have sole control over distribution), and without a big store of certs in one place, they'll be harder to steal.
Fuck CAs, install Convergence / Perspectives, call it a day.
Slashdot Mirror
So, wow, you can continue to be unaffected by any of this ... just like you were before. Or do you just feel compelled to whine about a product you weren't going to buy anyway?
Unaffected? The market for open mobile devices is pretty much completely gone. when it comes time to upgrade my phone I'll have to hack an open OS onto an Android phone or something. This curation craze is affecting desktop computing. I'm far from unaffected.
And, really, the "Game Boy" in your nick was pretty damned well curated since they use cartridges. So I find your objection amusing.
It was meant to mean Boy Who Plays Games. I'm not a Nintendo fanboy. If I was I'd have a space or at least initial caps. And that was a single-purpose game console anyways, not a general-purpose computing device that was artificially locked down. I don't want computers to be considered toys like consoles.
Shoulda thought further ahead when I was like 11 years old...
Exactly.
I hope so. 2000, ME, XP, Vista, 7, 8, Next Version That Doesn't Suck.
So in short, having the iPad open would be bad for SEO and would overwhelm the users' little minds.
Fuck this. What the hell happened to our species' intellect? Did we breed it out in just the few generations that have lived in a world where you can get by with your wallet as your only tool and skill? Shit.
Well it has come and gone in cycles in the past. Maybe the cycles are just swinging harder and longer with every oscillation. I mean before the iPhone came out we were at a level of openness unprecedented in computing history. It didn't seem so great back then, but we had forgotten what a proprietary hellhole felt like. Then Apple reminded us.
Yeah that will be much worse than every geek on the planet calling it the electronic embodiment of Orwell's 1984.
Why not have both?
Say it was possible to install any OS you wanted on the iPad, and Apple even provided the tools to do so. How would that negatively affect the iPad's sales? This doesn't even break the Apple fanboy's mantra, that open isn't usable and usable isn't open.
The nook's strength is that it's a rootable Android tablet, the fact that it's cheap is just a bonus.
I've bought many "hacker" devices that companies produced shortly before they went out of business or otherwise ruined themselves. The Treo 180, Treo 650 (Palm made some awesome stuff as they split and merged repeatedly), and the Nokia N900. What do they have in common?
They allow open development, and they were all bloody expensive top-of-the-line devices when they came out.
Have people seen the light? Is the current cycle of the curated computing craze coming to an end?
I sure hope so.
Set up your blog as a Tor hidden service. Tell teh cyber police good luck.
When one programmer panda touches another programmer panda in a private place without permission, that makes me a saaaad panda :-(
Maybe they can use energy-collecting thongs that absorb the lasers and then they can sell the power back to the grid. Couple that with using the same material for the floor around the pole, the club sells that power back and repays the strippers based on how many watts were collected during their act.
This gave me an image in my head similar to Travolta's famous dance scene in Saturday Night Fever, but it was a guy in a laser suit (suit that emits lasers in all directions) breakdancing in the middle of the room to electro music with lasers going everywhere like an epileptic's worst nightmare. Also everybody was wearing Daft Punk-style helmets (which makes sense now that I think about it, you'd need to shield your eyes from the lasers).
LASER AGE! pewpewpew!
I thought it was hilarious and it made me feel better about myself for not being a bitter woman-hater.
"something might happen somewhere at some time so LOOK SHARP!" - Stan Smith
Is that even necessary? If they're not monitoring torrent swarms, just force encrypted torrent traffic. Are they gonna cut you off for passing a lot of random-looking garbage back and forth?
All good points, but you've been whooshed.
No one can "steal" your existing certificate unless they also steal your web server's private key. A CA can issue a fraudulent certificate for your site, but anyone can generate a self-signed certificate for your site as well. How does a CA make MITM attacks more likely?
Because the CA issues certs that the browser trusts. That fraudulent cert will work A-OK and give no warnings to users. It's as good as the one already installed on the web server. Because the CA will cave to government requests and is a nice juicy target for black hats, this cert is more likely to be issued fraudulently than if the keys are stored on a flash drive in your desk drawer.
How many users visit your web site for the first time on an untrusted wireless network or in a country where the government may want to feed them a fake certificate anyway?
AKA the "prayer method" - pray you don't get MITMed the first time. It would be very shortsighted, at best, to rely on this.
I haven't heard of any reported MITM attacks resulting from the bad certificates, although I wouldn't be surprised if some occurred.
Yeah hopefully all those Iranians will upgrade their browsers before they open their Gmail interface again.
In a world of self-signed certificates there isn't even a way to begin to detect MITM attacks (much less stop them) unless you watch every connection between every client and web server and keep track of every possible certificate ever generated and its use history. Did your favorite web site just change its self-signed certificate because they lost the private key due to hardware failure, because it expired, or some other legitimate reason? Or is this a MITM attack?
This is what the network notary system (Perspectives / Convergence plugin) is for, take a look at it. When you visit a site, it compares the cert your browser receives with what other computers around the world are seeing at the same time. Only a short history of certs for a site would be useful, but not strictly necessary. This doesn't prevent an MITM between the hosting provider and the rest of the Internet, but neither would our CA system that issues fraudulent certificates to governments and any black hats who manage to break in.
The only advantage CA certs had was that they came with a promise that key distribution would be securely and responsibly managed to prevent fraudulent certificates from being issued, which would allow MITMs. This was the only advantage among a sea of disadvantages. That advantage is gone.
...Of Alyx Vance's PDA? Just give it a good zap, it'll do what you want!
The bad guys have definitely won when it comes to credit cards, those rely entirely on security by obscurity. Other stuff, not so much.
And if credit card losses were the bank's/data-spilling organization's responsibility things would be VERY different...
By default, precisely dick. If you Windows guys get to pretend that NTFS execute permissions are commonly used, we Linux guys get to pretend that people commonly set /home and /tmp noexec and use SELinux. Deal?
Speed limits actually hinder driving safety more often than they help.
Citation, please.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Speed_limit#Opposition
http://www.motorists.org/press/montana-no-speed-limit-safety-paradox
http://money.msn.com/auto-insurance/town-slams-brakes-on-traffic-tickets-carinsurance.aspx?page=2
BTW, after giving Convergence a try, I still prefer Perspectives. Convergence's anonymization feature is nice but it uses a mechanism that installs a local CA, causing CertPatrol to go nuts, and it doesn't offer anywhere near the level of customization of Perspectives.
We'll see how it turns out. What's funny is that these tree ring and ice core sources are "controversial" yet they both match up pretty well. What an odd coincidence.
CAs are done, stick a fork in 'em. Just generate your own certs. A CA cert only increases your chance of getting MITM'ed (since you don't have sole control over distribution), and without a big store of certs in one place, they'll be harder to steal.
Fuck CAs, install Convergence / Perspectives, call it a day.