It's just letting people know where the TV station gets their funding so people can make more informed decisions. Do people really think that _everything_ Russia does is an attack or attempt as disseminating propaganda?
This, exactly. You can go from MIT to GPL if you like, but you CANNOT go from GPL to MIT. So which one has more freedom? MIT. GPL is more restrictive to developers.
Firefox 54: I was visiting a page to get some schematics for some home made remote control system, and I noticed that the browser had all of my CPU threads busy, and the computer became oddly sluggish. I had No-Script installed, ad-blocker and my windows 10 was up to shape with the latest defender database plus latest updates I could possibly download, I always update immediately when it suggests an update.
I immediately wanted to force stop Firefox so I went to the Task Bar and looked at the processes, oh my goodness - several instances of firefox (hidden windows/popups that aren't immediately visible?) was running, and it was creating more as I watched. I ended up killing all processes, and ran anti malware software (well, windows defender with the latest definitions) and it came out clean, or so I thought.
Went to bed, and got woken up by my phone with several warnings from my various social media telling me that someone is posting from a different IP address than I normally used, I got out of bed and panicked.
So the problem is that they are on your computer. A router (by default) isn't going to stop that from calling home and letting them back in. You say the system is all up to date. Assuming that's true, there are three options: 1) You executed a program that you shouldn't have. It didn't even have to be in Firefox, that's just when you noticed things. 2) They broke into your router and from there are using a 0-day or unpublished exploit against you (since your OS is all updated.) 3) Things are misconfigured to allow easy remote access and nothing was actually exploited. This could be at the router level, the computer level, or both.
You should try and have things set so that even if an attacker is sitting right next to you, connected to the same network, that they will still have a tough time getting in.
Best of luck with your new router. I think you should take a hard look at your system setup as well.
True, so that's how the web player functioned. The end user would pick and choose what they did or did not want to see/hear and then as it would stream it would skip or mute automatically according to that. The master copy of the stream was obviously the full movie from the disc.
Editing moves is perfectly legal in the US (Family Movie Act of 2005).
So, as you know, the lawsuit focused on the technical side. In order to create a streaming copy, they had to break the encryption on the discs (DMCA). And then, even though they owned enough physical copies, they still streamed from that one master copy (obviously).
So I guess they would have needed a big warehouse with some massive disc changers so that you were actually watching the copy that you owned.
If your credentials are stolen and out there, then they are already available. One could easily get the same sources that he collected and have the entire database for free. Other sites will say: yes, your password has been stolen, but you might have no idea which one, or from which time frame without being able to see the password.
From Google's post: "Testing also showed that an attack running on one virtual machine was able to access the physical memory of the host machine, and through that, gain read-access to the memory of a different virtual machine on the same host."
Okay, so you're implying that the way to control this to have hotels or other gun-free zones search all bags before entry. Since everything else was legal up until that moment, that's obviously where the changes need to occur. There is no other possible change that should be made, right?
Someone not familiar with Linux isn't going to know, nor care at all about the distinction. So, without further clarification of the problem's requirements, we can't make that assumption.
I disagree. He's just looking for something else because he's "fed up" with Windows and MacOS. So as long as it works "with the mechanical equipment it controls" then I think this was a fine answer.
As others have pointed out, the systems are NOT physically separate. Just logically separated.
That's my only nit with your comment.
See also this comment from a previous article: http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...
I have the same question. From the article, "This is because RLNC can recreate any packet lost on the receiving side from a later sequenced packet." If this is truly the case, just send me the very last packet and I can recreate all the packets that were supposed to come before by working backwards.
My experience is that if an iPhone is unable to send an iMessage (shows as blue), it automatically falls back to text message after 5 minutes (shows as green). After a few of these in a row, it defaults to text message until the iMessage connection can be re-established with the other endpoint.
(Of course, this option can be turned off if you prefer to use only iMessages, at which point it's not going to be allowed it to fall back.)
How many people open up the deadbolts on their homes to make sure that they were properly constructed? Some, perhaps. But not many.
There has to be a trust at some level. Let's say you looked at my deadbolt and verified it as good. Why should I trust you either?
Slashdot Mirror
It's just letting people know where the TV station gets their funding so people can make more informed decisions. Do people really think that _everything_ Russia does is an attack or attempt as disseminating propaganda?
True. I had to disable "Accelerated 2D canvas" in order to get the fuzziness to go away on mine on Chrome 68, which was working just fine before that.
^/.*/\.git/
Protect git repositories in all subdirectories as well.
This, exactly.
You can go from MIT to GPL if you like, but you CANNOT go from GPL to MIT. So which one has more freedom? MIT.
GPL is more restrictive to developers.
Firefox 54: I was visiting a page to get some schematics for some home made remote control system, and I noticed that the browser had all of my CPU threads busy, and the computer became oddly sluggish. I had No-Script installed, ad-blocker and my windows 10 was up to shape with the latest defender database plus latest updates I could possibly download, I always update immediately when it suggests an update.
I immediately wanted to force stop Firefox so I went to the Task Bar and looked at the processes, oh my goodness - several instances of firefox (hidden windows /popups that aren't immediately visible?) was running, and it was creating more as I watched. I ended up killing all processes, and ran anti malware software (well, windows defender with the latest definitions) and it came out clean, or so I thought.
Went to bed, and got woken up by my phone with several warnings from my various social media telling me that someone is posting from a different IP address than I normally used, I got out of bed and panicked.
So the problem is that they are on your computer. A router (by default) isn't going to stop that from calling home and letting them back in. You say the system is all up to date. Assuming that's true, there are three options:
1) You executed a program that you shouldn't have. It didn't even have to be in Firefox, that's just when you noticed things.
2) They broke into your router and from there are using a 0-day or unpublished exploit against you (since your OS is all updated.)
3) Things are misconfigured to allow easy remote access and nothing was actually exploited. This could be at the router level, the computer level, or both.
You should try and have things set so that even if an attacker is sitting right next to you, connected to the same network, that they will still have a tough time getting in.
Best of luck with your new router. I think you should take a hard look at your system setup as well.
True, so that's how the web player functioned. The end user would pick and choose what they did or did not want to see/hear and then as it would stream it would skip or mute automatically according to that. The master copy of the stream was obviously the full movie from the disc.
Editing moves is perfectly legal in the US (Family Movie Act of 2005).
So, as you know, the lawsuit focused on the technical side. In order to create a streaming copy, they had to break the encryption on the discs (DMCA). And then, even though they owned enough physical copies, they still streamed from that one master copy (obviously).
So I guess they would have needed a big warehouse with some massive disc changers so that you were actually watching the copy that you owned.
If your credentials are stolen and out there, then they are already available. One could easily get the same sources that he collected and have the entire database for free.
Other sites will say: yes, your password has been stolen, but you might have no idea which one, or from which time frame without being able to see the password.
From Google's post: "Testing also showed that an attack running on one virtual machine was able to access the physical memory of the host machine, and through that, gain read-access to the memory of a different virtual machine on the same host."
Source: http://security.googleblog.com...
So yes, for the average home user, no big deal. For anyone running something on a cloud provider, bigger deal that the host gets patched.
Okay, so you're implying that the way to control this to have hotels or other gun-free zones search all bags before entry. Since everything else was legal up until that moment, that's obviously where the changes need to occur. There is no other possible change that should be made, right?
There has to be something to disagree about
I was disagreeing with this claim:
Here the OP is likely referring to GNU/Linux
Someone not familiar with Linux isn't going to know, nor care at all about the distinction. So, without further clarification of the problem's requirements, we can't make that assumption.
I disagree. He's just looking for something else because he's "fed up" with Windows and MacOS. So as long as it works "with the mechanical equipment it controls" then I think this was a fine answer.
You are correct. The systems are NOT physically separated. Just logically separate. See also: http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...
As others have pointed out, the systems are NOT physically separate. Just logically separated. That's my only nit with your comment. See also this comment from a previous article: http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...
Except for Sony is not headquartered in America.
Relevant video. It is 15 minutes long, however. http://wimp.com/humansapply/
I have the same question. From the article, "This is because RLNC can recreate any packet lost on the receiving side from a later sequenced packet." If this is truly the case, just send me the very last packet and I can recreate all the packets that were supposed to come before by working backwards.
My experience is that if an iPhone is unable to send an iMessage (shows as blue), it automatically falls back to text message after 5 minutes (shows as green). After a few of these in a row, it defaults to text message until the iMessage connection can be re-established with the other endpoint. (Of course, this option can be turned off if you prefer to use only iMessages, at which point it's not going to be allowed it to fall back.)
Don't worry, there will still be people who claim the moon landings were faked.
According to Comcast DNS, that is exactly what is happening. http://dns.comcast.net/index.p...
is CA supposed to be an acronym for something? CA Inc? Computer Associates? California, Canada? I don't know what CA stands for.
In this context: certificate authority
Don't people burn memory blocks any more? This is sensitive data handling 101.
I knew I should have moved to the rim of that active volcano.
While good to know these types of attacks exist, TrueCrypt's security model is still holding strong. http://www.truecrypt.org/docs/security-model
How many people open up the deadbolts on their homes to make sure that they were properly constructed? Some, perhaps. But not many.
There has to be a trust at some level. Let's say you looked at my deadbolt and verified it as good. Why should I trust you either?