To clarify, I should say any brute forcing attacks rather than just dictionary attack. Any authentication program that allows unlimited tries without any rate limiting is totally broken.
Only if you're dumb enough to let authentication program be suspceptible to such an attack. Dictionary attacks can be trivially defeated by rating limiting tries and after, say, 5 tries not allowing any more attempts for some cooldown period. No attacker is going to bother if they can only have 5 tries every 15 to 20 minutes.
Is that before or after they lose all their tax breaks, special regulatory statuses and pay back all the taxpayer money they used to build their stadiums?
Sure, at the same time revoke their anti-trust exemptions, revoke their tax breaks and make them back pay with interest the taxpayer money used to build their stadiums.
No. My 17" high-end-at-the-time macbook pro is a dual core Intel chip -- it's not a PowerPC. Mavericks will not install on it.
Which model specially? Any 17" model from Mid 2007 and later are supported. If you have one of those MacBook Pros and it won't install it means you're doing something wrong.
The only people who can't upgrade are people with PowerPC or someone with a 32-bit Mac. Basically a minuscule minority. It's no different than Itanium systems losing support from Microsoft in 2005. It's also vastly less worse than WP7 users who were denied the WP8 update when even the oldest phones were only 2 years old or if you happened to own something like a T-Mobile Vibrant like I did that never got Android updates from Samsung after only 1 year so people would buy an S2.
And how pray tell do you presume someone would run a current version of OS X on a PowerPC system? You've basically constructed a scenario that is intentionally impossible.
W3Counter? You do realize how dumb the use of that is, right? Most people aren't web developers and as such don't go to that site. We call that biased sampling.
The only people who find it "nifty" are marketing drones and the huge number of people who can't wait to compromise these devices that are guaranteed to have shit security.
Your post was equivalent to not knowing what is being disucussed and posting "frist psot!" and so it was treated as such. On the other hand, I had actually read the complaint and knew what I was talking about.
Mr. Leopold seeks access to the public financial disclosure statements (Form 278) of former National Security Agency (NSA) Director Keith Alexander as part of a news report he is writing for distribution to the general public. Mr. Leopold sought access to these records pursuant to the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (“EGA”), 5 USC app. 101, et seq., by submitting a completed Form OGE 201 to the NSA.
Make sure to read the bolded part a few times. Now what pray tell is Form 278? From the Office of Government Ethics:
OGE Form 278: Public Financial Disclosure Report
Pretty sure a public financial disclosure report is public information. Maybe next time you might want to read about what is being discussed before putting your foot in your mouth.
Slashdot Mirror
To clarify, I should say any brute forcing attacks rather than just dictionary attack. Any authentication program that allows unlimited tries without any rate limiting is totally broken.
Rating limiting = rate limiting.
Only if you're dumb enough to let authentication program be suspceptible to such an attack. Dictionary attacks can be trivially defeated by rating limiting tries and after, say, 5 tries not allowing any more attempts for some cooldown period. No attacker is going to bother if they can only have 5 tries every 15 to 20 minutes.
Maybe it should have been written in Wyvern to be more secure?
Except it's not proprietary. It's GPLv2 and on Github.
Is that before or after they lose all their tax breaks, special regulatory statuses and pay back all the taxpayer money they used to build their stadiums?
Sure, at the same time revoke their anti-trust exemptions, revoke their tax breaks and make them back pay with interest the taxpayer money used to build their stadiums.
No. My 17" high-end-at-the-time macbook pro is a dual core Intel chip -- it's not a PowerPC. Mavericks will not install on it.
Which model specially? Any 17" model from Mid 2007 and later are supported. If you have one of those MacBook Pros and it won't install it means you're doing something wrong.
No, because there never was a home/workstation edition of windows for Itanium systems.
Windows XP 64-bit supported Itanium.
The issue is not PowerPC hardware.
You mentioned 10-year-old hardware. Unless you're being intentionally dense, the only 10-year-old Macs are PowerPC.
The issue is the early Intel hardware which is widely reported as unsupported by later versions of OS/X.
Yeah, less than a handful of models that represent a tiny minority of Macs in current use.
The only people who can't upgrade are people with PowerPC or someone with a 32-bit Mac. Basically a minuscule minority. It's no different than Itanium systems losing support from Microsoft in 2005. It's also vastly less worse than WP7 users who were denied the WP8 update when even the oldest phones were only 2 years old or if you happened to own something like a T-Mobile Vibrant like I did that never got Android updates from Samsung after only 1 year so people would buy an S2.
And how pray tell do you presume someone would run a current version of OS X on a PowerPC system? You've basically constructed a scenario that is intentionally impossible.
When you rent or buy a 1080p(or i) and player to watch a video, after having seen the same in 720, the difference makes people go crazy.
Not true. Many people don't see the difference. Many think upscaled DVDs and SDTV are "HD".
Both 1280x720 and 1920x1080 are HD according to the ATSC standards.
What customer data is in the infotainment system?
Those would be institutional shareholders. He said individual shareholder.
W3Counter? You do realize how dumb the use of that is, right? Most people aren't web developers and as such don't go to that site. We call that biased sampling.
You'd be wrong.
It's not a buzzword, it has a specific definition.
Excellent non sequitur. Buzzword means a trendy term or popular jargon. It in no way explicitly or implicitly means a lack of a definition.
The only people who find it "nifty" are marketing drones and the huge number of people who can't wait to compromise these devices that are guaranteed to have shit security.
Your post was equivalent to not knowing what is being disucussed and posting "frist psot!" and so it was treated as such. On the other hand, I had actually read the complaint and knew what I was talking about.
RTFA.
Mr. Leopold seeks access to the public financial disclosure statements (Form 278) of former National Security Agency (NSA) Director Keith Alexander as part of a news report he is writing for distribution to the general public. Mr. Leopold sought access to these records pursuant to the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (“EGA”), 5 USC app. 101, et seq., by submitting a completed Form OGE 201 to the NSA.
Make sure to read the bolded part a few times. Now what pray tell is Form 278? From the Office of Government Ethics:
OGE Form 278: Public Financial Disclosure Report
Pretty sure a public financial disclosure report is public information. Maybe next time you might want to read about what is being discussed before putting your foot in your mouth.
He's suing to get them to release what should be public information. That in no way requires him to be "damaged" in some way.
These are apps people have to choose to install and run. How do they have zero control when they chose to install them?
Because you think they wouldn't game this? Corporations never collude or anything, right?