the freedom of information act allows officer as well as all public officials inforation open to the public, or its supposed to. Since these officers are using phones this is now public information, just like criminal records, and other such things.
The issue I see arrising is more of a police officer who uses his phone to contact a 'source' for information and then the source gets 'outted' and killed as a result of the phone call being released to the public.
I'd have to agree with you. It doesn't really help, when they say Windows vulnerabilities and then list security issues in Semantic software. At that point its not the OS its the virus or firewall provided by a 3rd party.
Severity would also help. It would be good to know which were local exploits vs remote exploits and if the exploit was because of a certain option turned on or off. I know there are several OS exploits in FreeBSD, but if your are not running bind or ssh you wont be affected.
Talking about Apache or other services as exploits is kinda misleading when you are talking about OS exploits, because not everyone runs apache, and if they do not everyone is running the modules they mention here.
Its basically a list of exploits that needs more info to be really useful.
its not as unique as you think. I submitted a story similar to this to/. but it was rejected. Since I knew it would be I wrote it down in my/. journal. The link below is my journal, and it talks about a Yahoo! phish.
http://slashdot.org/~josepha48/journal/125456
Yes a user has to click the link. The issue is that with IM people usually assume that the link is from the actual sender of the IM. So in the case of Yahoo! someone who has you on their buddy list, which is usually someone you chat often with, sends you an IM with a link. These new phish, only require you to click on the link before they screw you.
Its been a day since I reported it to Yahoo! and they still have not taken the URL down. I wonder how far these things have to spread before anyone really decides its an issue.
Your a terrorist, or so your neighbor says. Does that mean we should monitor you?
After sept 11, there was this whole thing about 'report terrorism in your neighborhood' and tell on your neighbors. Some people just didn't like their neighbors. What if they reported them? Should we allow US citiznes to have their constitutional rights bent, because the goverment says they are are terrorists?
The goverment has been watching some peace activists, because they say they 'may' be terrorist too.
Are you okay with the philosophy of, speak out against the goverment go to jail? Better watch that one...
I think its more like they have gotton a lot of flack from web developers that are complaining that they have to support 2 browsers, IE and everyone else (gecko based browsers, opera, safari, konq). I can write code that works in 'everyone else', but not IE. It should not be that way, and I think people are complaining to MS about it and they are finally listening to the community.
Besides I can start to code to standards and then tell people sorry MS IE doesn't support standards so you have to get a browser that does to use this app, and really screw MS.
I as well as people I know use notepad and wordpad and other programs as temporary buffers to view data.
I copy part of a file to a notepad window. I have no intention of saving this data, but want to view it in notepad and not vi. Maybe I'm going to use notepads find / replace, because I find it easier than vi ( personal opinion ), or for some other reason. Why they hell would I want notepad to just save this data without me telling it to?
PDA's do what you ask already and so do phones. It is a case by case thing. When using a phone or pda you may want to save your files, but you don't always want to do that when using a computer. BTW: Word and outlook already do this.
you could experience less of a load as you will not be reserving up the entire page each time you "refresh".
An example is an application that display a list of cities in a state, after a user selects the state. (1) If you send ALL the data to the client at onece, its a large file transfer and takes a long time. This produces a heavy load all at once. (2) If you coded it to refresh the whole page after the selection then it is a smaller initial load, but on the 'refresh' you are sending the whole page plus the new data. (3) If you use AJAX, you only have to send the initial small request ( not the heavy load ) and then the second request for the part of the page that needs updating.
Between 2 & 3, #3 is better because it reduces the second hit on the server and network as it does not have to resend parts of the page that have already been sent. Between 1 and 3 you actually will have more hits on the server but #3 will result in less data being sent across the network.
The biggest problem with #2 is that sometimes refreshing a whole page ( onchange ) confuses users. Yes, this may sound weird, but I have had people tell me this.
The biggest problem with #3 is that if the server request fails, you must code for this and if you don't the user may not know what happened. Also how do you handle a retry on something like this?
.. it was called AT&T.. it was broken up and now it seems to be piecing itself back togeather again.
Problem is that if it gets broken up now, and it is forced to be broken up, it will only try to get back to its original size. It will be good for a few years, and then it will put itself back togeather again. Nice idea though. How does one stop megamonopolies?
First off it will depend on what you use ajax for. Its not going to be for everything, but it certainly has its place in the web. First off you can as a web designer require a fast internet connection. I certainly require this for my web app.
Second, within AJAX, you have access to the status code that is returned by the server. So you can do a if you are like me you would create 2 javascript functions that take the URL and the data and then either do a POST or a GET. Within these functions you create the object ( another function optional ) and then you check the status code and perform the necessary steps. If it is coded right you do not have to recode this each time you need to use it.
The point is that developers should be focusing on reusable code, and with that in mind this stuff gets built into the components. If developers do bad coding with AJAX, they are going to do bad coding with whatever tech is out there anyway.
I think AJAX has been poorly named. It implies asynchronous, but synchronous is also possible to do. So shouldn't it have been called ASJAX? Or pronounced AssJax?
I've started adding this stuff into parts of my web app. Why? Because it was a good way to update part of a dropdown menu. Imagine going to a site where you have 4 or 5 dropdown menues. Each menu is dependant on the selection of the previous one. Well that's what I have done, without the full page refresh.
Which brings us to the real benifit of AJAX. The fact that you do not have to refresh the whole page to update part of the page. I have actually been told by several web surfers, that when a FULL page refresh occurs they get confused as to where they were. Mostly because they have a slow connection and notice it alot. Using AJAX one can refresh this part of a page without a full page reload.
The other advantage is bandwidth savings. Instead of having to send ALL the page data, you only need to send part of the page data. The part that needs to change. This saves web server load as well as browser and network traffic.
I like the technology, lets hope it does not get sucked into a patent dispute and screw up the acceptance in apps.
Also throw in there the strong German-American and now hispanic Catholic elements that, at the recently increasing behest of Rome, are catching on that Intelligent Design is contrary to scriptural meanings, that it confuses the spiritual (some would say 'religious mythical truths') and the scientific truths to the vast detriment of both.
I guess you didn't read the part about the vatican rejecting intelligent design?
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11 /07/1526216&tid=99&tid=14
I guess the Catholics you refer to did not get the memo either.
This is just a space holder until they can regroup. It will be kicked out at some point. Personally I see it as a 1st ammendment violation, as catholics belive in evolution ( or according to the Vatican they are supposed to ) and thus this makes students have to hear a 'conservitive religions' argument that goes against thier belifs.
Actually they credit card company will only investigate it is it is over abour 5k. I know a friend of mine has his cards stolen. You can charge up alot, in a few hours and the guy got away with about 2k of stuff.
My friend also lost his ssn, and then had about 4500 in checks cashed against his bank account. The bank said they only investigate if it is more than 5k, and the police said they only investigate if the bank wants to persue it.
Financial institutions write off a lot of this. The 24.99 was not on 1 credit card company it was across companies. So if they guy only hita few cards he could have gotton a couple of thousand from each company and walked away with a small wad of doh. Credit card companies may or may not choose to investigate this, and go to the FBI.
One would think they would, but they may not. See the links below. Its a blog about this fraud!
You are assuming that they will be able to get the guy who is doing this. If the card company is in the US and the guy is in another country, how far will the credit card companies get?
.. no seriously, my dr office gave me a copy of my xray on cdrom, and I just took that to the second opinion and all the other doctors that have asked for it. It is a windows, exe file that has my xrays scanned already. You can zoom in and out and doctors here love it!
Ask your xray place to supply you with your xrays in cdrom format. Demand it!
I'd rather them post it like a dumb***. Yes SSN is the key to stealing someone's id, but you can charge up a lot with the credit card number. There is a scam out now, where someone is charging 24.99 to credit cards. Yes, it seems like a small amount and many people wont even notice it ( the dumb people who don't review their bill ). Myltiply that number by 10000, and you start to make some doh! The credit card companies will give you your money back, but they still loose money that way and the theif gets away with thousands if not millions of dollars.
Without the bible, please prove the existance of God.
Then prove the existance of intelligent design.
The problem I have is that, there are many religions that we would laugh at today. How many people today believe in Zues the king of the gods? Probably none, but once upon a time it was a wide spread belief. Up until about 300 AD it was an accepted thing. Yes at some point people will hopefully move forward and either God will come down from heaven and the apololypse will happen, or we'll never see God again.
Or if you are like me and believe god == nature, then he is already here. Intelligent design? Mother nature has here own intelligent design. Its called survival of the fitest. If you think about it that way then you have your intelligent design. Outside of that, I'd really like to see someone prove intelligent design.
Slashdot Mirror
The issue I see arrising is more of a police officer who uses his phone to contact a 'source' for information and then the source gets 'outted' and killed as a result of the phone call being released to the public.
Severity would also help. It would be good to know which were local exploits vs remote exploits and if the exploit was because of a certain option turned on or off. I know there are several OS exploits in FreeBSD, but if your are not running bind or ssh you wont be affected.
Talking about Apache or other services as exploits is kinda misleading when you are talking about OS exploits, because not everyone runs apache, and if they do not everyone is running the modules they mention here.
Its basically a list of exploits that needs more info to be really useful.
All OS's and software has bugs.
http://slashdot.org/~josepha48/journal/125456
Yes a user has to click the link. The issue is that with IM people usually assume that the link is from the actual sender of the IM. So in the case of Yahoo! someone who has you on their buddy list, which is usually someone you chat often with, sends you an IM with a link. These new phish, only require you to click on the link before they screw you.
Its been a day since I reported it to Yahoo! and they still have not taken the URL down. I wonder how far these things have to spread before anyone really decides its an issue.
.. maybe they should buy them out...
After sept 11, there was this whole thing about 'report terrorism in your neighborhood' and tell on your neighbors. Some people just didn't like their neighbors. What if they reported them? Should we allow US citiznes to have their constitutional rights bent, because the goverment says they are are terrorists?
The goverment has been watching some peace activists, because they say they 'may' be terrorist too.
Are you okay with the philosophy of, speak out against the goverment go to jail? Better watch that one...
Besides I can start to code to standards and then tell people sorry MS IE doesn't support standards so you have to get a browser that does to use this app, and really screw MS.
It boggles my mind!
I copy part of a file to a notepad window. I have no intention of saving this data, but want to view it in notepad and not vi. Maybe I'm going to use notepads find / replace, because I find it easier than vi ( personal opinion ), or for some other reason. Why they hell would I want notepad to just save this data without me telling it to?
PDA's do what you ask already and so do phones. It is a case by case thing. When using a phone or pda you may want to save your files, but you don't always want to do that when using a computer. BTW: Word and outlook already do this.
its like looking into the sun, you'll be blinded!!!!
An example is an application that display a list of cities in a state, after a user selects the state. (1) If you send ALL the data to the client at onece, its a large file transfer and takes a long time. This produces a heavy load all at once. (2) If you coded it to refresh the whole page after the selection then it is a smaller initial load, but on the 'refresh' you are sending the whole page plus the new data. (3) If you use AJAX, you only have to send the initial small request ( not the heavy load ) and then the second request for the part of the page that needs updating.
Between 2 & 3, #3 is better because it reduces the second hit on the server and network as it does not have to resend parts of the page that have already been sent. Between 1 and 3 you actually will have more hits on the server but #3 will result in less data being sent across the network.
The biggest problem with #2 is that sometimes refreshing a whole page ( onchange ) confuses users. Yes, this may sound weird, but I have had people tell me this.
The biggest problem with #3 is that if the server request fails, you must code for this and if you don't the user may not know what happened. Also how do you handle a retry on something like this?
Problem is that if it gets broken up now, and it is forced to be broken up, it will only try to get back to its original size. It will be good for a few years, and then it will put itself back togeather again. Nice idea though. How does one stop megamonopolies?
.. remove MS OS and install Linux or FreeBSD. FreeBSD really does a better job at patching IMHO.
Second, within AJAX, you have access to the status code that is returned by the server. So you can do a if you are like me you would create 2 javascript functions that take the URL and the data and then either do a POST or a GET. Within these functions you create the object ( another function optional ) and then you check the status code and perform the necessary steps. If it is coded right you do not have to recode this each time you need to use it.
The point is that developers should be focusing on reusable code, and with that in mind this stuff gets built into the components. If developers do bad coding with AJAX, they are going to do bad coding with whatever tech is out there anyway.
I've started adding this stuff into parts of my web app. Why? Because it was a good way to update part of a dropdown menu. Imagine going to a site where you have 4 or 5 dropdown menues. Each menu is dependant on the selection of the previous one. Well that's what I have done, without the full page refresh.
Which brings us to the real benifit of AJAX. The fact that you do not have to refresh the whole page to update part of the page. I have actually been told by several web surfers, that when a FULL page refresh occurs they get confused as to where they were. Mostly because they have a slow connection and notice it alot. Using AJAX one can refresh this part of a page without a full page reload.
The other advantage is bandwidth savings. Instead of having to send ALL the page data, you only need to send part of the page data. The part that needs to change. This saves web server load as well as browser and network traffic.
I like the technology, lets hope it does not get sucked into a patent dispute and screw up the acceptance in apps.
is this just windows or did they test other x86 oses as well? IE: Could it be a problem with the OS itself and not hyperthreading?
need I say more?
D&D was done when NS 4 or 3 came our I thought with that layser iframe crap. AJAX was after that.
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/1
I guess the Catholics you refer to did not get the memo either.
This is just a space holder until they can regroup. It will be kicked out at some point. Personally I see it as a 1st ammendment violation, as catholics belive in evolution ( or according to the Vatican they are supposed to ) and thus this makes students have to hear a 'conservitive religions' argument that goes against thier belifs.
My friend also lost his ssn, and then had about 4500 in checks cashed against his bank account. The bank said they only investigate if it is more than 5k, and the police said they only investigate if the bank wants to persue it.
Financial institutions write off a lot of this. The 24.99 was not on 1 credit card company it was across companies. So if they guy only hita few cards he could have gotton a couple of thousand from each company and walked away with a small wad of doh. Credit card companies may or may not choose to investigate this, and go to the FBI.
One would think they would, but they may not. See the links below. Its a blog about this fraud!
http://www.robertkbrown.com/2005/10/04/digital_a ge_fraud.html
http://www.robertkbrown.com/2005/10/11/digital_a ge_update.html
You are assuming that they will be able to get the guy who is doing this. If the card company is in the US and the guy is in another country, how far will the credit card companies get?
Ask your xray place to supply you with your xrays in cdrom format. Demand it!
Oh, he should post his bank account numbers also.
we'll be back in the 1950's in no time. Only with MS and AT&T and mega corp x. Kinda reminds me of resident evil.
Then prove the existance of intelligent design.
The problem I have is that, there are many religions that we would laugh at today. How many people today believe in Zues the king of the gods? Probably none, but once upon a time it was a wide spread belief. Up until about 300 AD it was an accepted thing. Yes at some point people will hopefully move forward and either God will come down from heaven and the apololypse will happen, or we'll never see God again.
Or if you are like me and believe god == nature, then he is already here. Intelligent design? Mother nature has here own intelligent design. Its called survival of the fitest. If you think about it that way then you have your intelligent design. Outside of that, I'd really like to see someone prove intelligent design.
Also centralized file repositories would help. A place where certain people could put files for others to read and get.
This really sounds like a poorly managed workplace.