It is horribly obvious you have never even attempted a forensic analysis of an infected machine. Stop embarrassing yourself. Reimaging is NOT a forensic analysis. Reimaging does not take three days. Analysis takes three days AT MINIMUM for something like a rootkit.
I am a security engineer in a large, international software company with multiple datacenters. You are a punk kid talking out his rear. You're not fooling anyone.
It seems you do not know what "forensics" means. Hint: it's the only way you can be sure what the rootkit did to your system. Look it up. I think you would do best to leave security to the security professionals, machoman. There's nothing wrong with that. It's actually good to be able to recognize your own limitations.
Security engineer: "Our network logs show there is some sort of rootkit or bot on labAD01, boss."
Boss geekymachoman: "Find out how it got on there and what it did."
Security engineer: "OK, should take about three days to do a full forensic analysis."
Boss geekymachoman: "What? We can't delay all the other projects by three days! I hired you to do a job! Do it instantly or I will sack you! And I want a pony."
Yeah... it sure would be great working with you, buddy!
The PE does not have any such special status in the US. I don't even think the PE has a software engineering component. I assume the same is true of EE, as none of the EEs I know have the PE cert.
If what you're saying were true, then I would be taking serious legal risk if I (for example) claimed to experience diarrhea after eating a chalupa. Taco Bell could claim I lied, and I would have no evidence to the contrary. That is not the state of affairs I have observed.
"Under the Restatement (Second) of Torts, which is drafted by the American Law Institute and has been influential among state courts, a plaintiff must prove four elements. First, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant made a false and defamatory statement concerning the plain-tiff. Second, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant made an unprivileged publication to a third party. Third, the plaintiff must prove that the publisher acted at least negligently in publishing the communication. Fourth, in some cases, the plaintiff must prove special damages."
Sounds like the burden is on the plaintiff, not the defendant. You may want to rethink your own perception of reality.
That can't be right. If that were true, no person could ever make any negative claim about anyone without having legal proof in hand. Clearly, that is not the case.
It's not, if the person really is gay. Libel and Slander only apply if the person can prove he is not gay and the claim substantially damaged him in some way.
The PE exam is just another private certification, like MCSE or CCNA. Somebody selling the PE cert fed you some bullshit and you ate it with a smile, didn't you?
Use a web browser? Download files from the internet? Share a LAN with people who do those things? Share files, using a USB drive, with some other computer?
Then security matters to you.
I have seen machines infected with malware via all of these methods. You have just lost any credentials to comment on issues of security. Stick to your day job.
The contaminated blanket thing went on for a few hundred years? I'll have to ask for your source on that.
Fighting over land is not interesting. All dirt on the planet exchanged hands due to fighting. There are no rightful owners of land.
Exterminating entire populations is a different thing entirely. A crime against humanity. But the European colonists did not exterminate the native population. They died off due to disease--A natural thing, insignificantly impacted by that blanket tactic.
What percentage of the population was killed in that incident? Could I come up with an anecdote about some group of native americans brutalizing a european colonist, then make a statement about all native americans?
No, I could not. That would be misleading. You are simply being dishonest.
Come off it. Some poor dumb sucker had to write a report. He had to do research. It had to contain words. So he went to yahoo and typed "Anonymous," as that was the name used by the 4chan hooligans. Slashdot came up because it uses the term "Anonymous Coward."
This is what happened. Laziness. Probably, no one will ever act based on this portion of the report, because it's obvious BS. And if they do, and they seize slashdot servers or something, the legal system will eventually recognize it as BS (checks and balances).
It's not a perfect system, but it's not the end of the world or of America. There always were and always will be lazy and incompetent people who will make mistakes like this.
I've been booting linux servers off of flash for a few years. For some of them, the whole OS, even/var/log, is on the flash drive.
I've had one drive fail, and it basically got hot and stopped being recognized as being connected by the computer. It was older generation technology, though. Newer flash technology designed for computers doesn't fail, as far as I have experienced. I'm talking about the flash SATA drives from name-brand manufactures.
It is well known that Commander Taco is actually a commander in the Judean Peoples' Front terrorist organization. Titles like "Cmdr" just aren't given out to anyone. He's their #2 man.
Technology: Facebook Cuts Off Pirate Bay Links - file sharing Science: Sunspot Activity Continues to Drop - global warming Your Rights Online: Privacy In BitTorrent By Hiding In the Crowd - file sharing News: French Assembly Rejects Three Strikes Bill - file sharing
One of the older stories is about global warming, too.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh! The projector just got shut down because your power saving kicked in during a sales presentation. That was a million dollar deal. You're fired!
It is horribly obvious you have never even attempted a forensic analysis of an infected machine. Stop embarrassing yourself. Reimaging is NOT a forensic analysis. Reimaging does not take three days. Analysis takes three days AT MINIMUM for something like a rootkit.
I am a security engineer in a large, international software company with multiple datacenters. You are a punk kid talking out his rear. You're not fooling anyone.
It seems you do not know what "forensics" means. Hint: it's the only way you can be sure what the rootkit did to your system. Look it up. I think you would do best to leave security to the security professionals, machoman. There's nothing wrong with that. It's actually good to be able to recognize your own limitations.
Security engineer: "Our network logs show there is some sort of rootkit or bot on labAD01, boss."
Boss geekymachoman: "Find out how it got on there and what it did."
Security engineer: "OK, should take about three days to do a full forensic analysis."
Boss geekymachoman: "What? We can't delay all the other projects by three days! I hired you to do a job! Do it instantly or I will sack you! And I want a pony."
Yeah... it sure would be great working with you, buddy!
Forensics is such an incredibly time-consuming process, most businesses have no time for it. Reimage the machine and get back to work. It's a shame.
The PE does not have any such special status in the US. I don't even think the PE has a software engineering component. I assume the same is true of EE, as none of the EEs I know have the PE cert.
If what you're saying were true, then I would be taking serious legal risk if I (for example) claimed to experience diarrhea after eating a chalupa. Taco Bell could claim I lied, and I would have no evidence to the contrary. That is not the state of affairs I have observed.
Some web research supports my claim.
http://lawdigest.uslegal.com/tort-and-personal-injury-actions/libel-and-slander/7311/
"Under the Restatement (Second) of Torts, which is drafted by the American Law Institute and has been influential among state courts, a plaintiff must prove four elements. First, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant made a false and defamatory statement concerning the plain-tiff. Second, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant made an unprivileged publication to a third party. Third, the plaintiff must prove that the publisher acted at least negligently in publishing the communication. Fourth, in some cases, the plaintiff must prove special damages."
Sounds like the burden is on the plaintiff, not the defendant. You may want to rethink your own perception of reality.
That can't be right. If that were true, no person could ever make any negative claim about anyone without having legal proof in hand. Clearly, that is not the case.
If you go after someone for slandering you, you must prove they lied. They do not need to prove they told the truth.
It's not, if the person really is gay. Libel and Slander only apply if the person can prove he is not gay and the claim substantially damaged him in some way.
It's still a dick move, though.
The PE exam is just another private certification, like MCSE or CCNA. Somebody selling the PE cert fed you some bullshit and you ate it with a smile, didn't you?
Oh, I assumed you meant behind a firewall. Because otherwise, the computer would be worthless, anyway.
It pushes against the micro-aether. Duh.
Wrong.
Use a web browser? Download files from the internet? Share a LAN with people who do those things? Share files, using a USB drive, with some other computer?
Then security matters to you.
I have seen machines infected with malware via all of these methods. You have just lost any credentials to comment on issues of security. Stick to your day job.
Try something like Ikariam. That chokes on the Atom.
Power matters. The intel atom chokes when simply browsing some ajax-enabled web pages in firefox, while more powerful CPUs don't blink.
The contaminated blanket thing went on for a few hundred years? I'll have to ask for your source on that.
Fighting over land is not interesting. All dirt on the planet exchanged hands due to fighting. There are no rightful owners of land.
Exterminating entire populations is a different thing entirely. A crime against humanity. But the European colonists did not exterminate the native population. They died off due to disease--A natural thing, insignificantly impacted by that blanket tactic.
What percentage of the population was killed in that incident? Could I come up with an anecdote about some group of native americans brutalizing a european colonist, then make a statement about all native americans?
No, I could not. That would be misleading. You are simply being dishonest.
Come off it. Some poor dumb sucker had to write a report. He had to do research. It had to contain words. So he went to yahoo and typed "Anonymous," as that was the name used by the 4chan hooligans. Slashdot came up because it uses the term "Anonymous Coward."
This is what happened. Laziness. Probably, no one will ever act based on this portion of the report, because it's obvious BS. And if they do, and they seize slashdot servers or something, the legal system will eventually recognize it as BS (checks and balances).
It's not a perfect system, but it's not the end of the world or of America. There always were and always will be lazy and incompetent people who will make mistakes like this.
Native new-worlders died due to old-world disease. Wars over land killed only a tiny tiny fraction of the population.
If you want to make accusations of ethnic cleansing, blame the germs.
I've been booting linux servers off of flash for a few years. For some of them, the whole OS, even /var/log, is on the flash drive.
I've had one drive fail, and it basically got hot and stopped being recognized as being connected by the computer. It was older generation technology, though. Newer flash technology designed for computers doesn't fail, as far as I have experienced. I'm talking about the flash SATA drives from name-brand manufactures.
It is well known that Commander Taco is actually a commander in the Judean Peoples' Front terrorist organization. Titles like "Cmdr" just aren't given out to anyone. He's their #2 man.
I hear the price on transparent copper is through the roof these days.
Why do people who particularly dislike Obama call him "the chosen one" or "the messiah"? I never hear his supporters refer to him in that way.
It seems like quite a silly practice, and incredibly childish.
Quoting you:
One of the older stories is about global warming, too.