This is not "the economy" driving rent prices up or some other esoteric, abstract and complicated concept, it's simple basic supply and demand. If you don't put up your apartment for rent but instead decide to turn it into a one-bedroom hotel, you remove one apartment from the renting market, reducing supply of apartments with a steady or even increasing demand, thus driving the price up.
It doesn't get any simpler than that, I kinda doubt you don't know that...
And you think that someone in Generistan cares about either of them?
A while ago I was allowed to play with international law enforcement agencies. People who you'd think have the power to get shit done in international crimes. We had a server pinpointed down to the exact place where it was at. We literally knew exactly the physical location of the machine that was used for a rather large international criminal operation. Message from Interpol: By the time we get the local authorities to cooperate, get a warrant and raid the premises, everything's been gone for days. Why bother?
In other words, unless you sit in a country that has no real problems the police is more concerned about, don't worry about anyone knocking at your door if you defraud foreigners. At best, it's considered part of the GDP.
I was proposing a fun game, but you had to take it way out of proportion.
That's what you do when they don't get smart after the first few demos. Didn't you see your Batman, you don't start with the face, the victim doesn't feel anything afterwards anymore.
If this becomes law, it gets fairly easy to eliminate the competition. Here's how:
1. Find out IP address(es) belonging to your competitor. 2. Find a company that uses "offensive security" to defend itself. 3. Spoof it ip of rival from 1. and attack company from 2. 4. Watch rival go down in flames from the counter attack.
Damn right it's their business. So you better cough up the dough if you want to stalk someone, these people were essentially stealing from their company by not paying for it.
I'm somewhat certain that was the actual reason why they were fired. Not that they spied and stalked users, but that they didn't pay for the privilege.
It makes sure you end up at www.example.com. What it does not do, but what people apparently expect it to do, is to certify that www.example.com belongs to ExampleCo Ltd. Aside of this:
1) Those sites exist usually for hours or, at best, days anyway. Trojans that rely on these sites will get detected and... can't tell you how without causing an uproar here, but let's say I know that links in spam mail surprisingly stop working a few hours after they get sent out, too. We are already at the point where they are identified within hours of starting operation and shut down within days. Long before any credit card theft would be noticed.
2) Add identity theft to the fold.
3) How do you determine whether a page is being used for fraud? While it may still be easy for g00gle.com and bankofmerica.com, how about someone trying to register a domain like, say, xkcd.com. Looks fishy, doesn't it? Not to mention that with *-certs it doesn't even do any good. Just yesterday I got a mail trying to send me to www.mybank.somebullshitoranother.com. How would your idea keep them from doing this? You register *.bullshitdomain.com and fill in whatever attack target you might have this time around for the *.
Look, the problem is, if you raise the difficulty to get a certificate, what you primarily achieve is that smaller businesses and private boards stop encryption altogether because they either cannot afford it or won't jump through the hoops you present, while scammers won't be affected too badly. Either they find a way around it (if you plan to steal money from someone, do you care about credit card fraud, identity theft or other crimes to get your cert?) or they'll simply go without cert again and rely on people being stupid enough not to notice... which you know as well as I do that they are.
I have no TV. I know no people who feel the urge to spew propaganda. Where I observe that is for example here. Take a look around the boards and you'll find that, no matter the topic, some goofball will feel the urge to throw in how Trump will save us or how he should be thrown in jail or how Hillary is a (insert random insult here).
I remember a time when there was actually sensible discussion possible here. And I'm not talking about a sensible discussion about politics (that I have never seen, neither here nor anywhere) but one concerning technology and its development and use. From time to time, something like this emerges, like a brave little flower breaking out of the concrete of political bickering, only to be instantly derailed and taken over by this bickering. Like, say, this subthread. Started out as a bit about how emotions are barely understood and you can't sensible measure and control them and now we're talking again about whether the left or the right of the political spectrum are worse offenders when it comes to thought control.
There is a kind of behavior that is not just hostile toward new people but is particularly hostile to women and POC. White men might not see any difference between that behavior and how newbies are treated but apparently women and POC do perceive a difference.
Sorry, forgot that today it's not about how it is but how people feel about it.
But clearly there is something going on. SO has chosen one explanatory path that apparently most of/. finds difficult to believe.
Yes. What's going on is what we have seen a lot of times recently. "They are against me, must be skin color, gender or sexual orientation". Despite the fact that it is virtually impossible to tell either of them on boards like S.O. The reason why I find it difficult to believe is that there is already a perfectly good explanation that does not rely on people having information they cannot have.
That's why I don't buy most conspiracy theories. The government, of all entities, is notoriously BAD at keeping secrets. If after years and decades of people actively digging for information nothing at all surfaces while at the same time tons of documents get "leaked" in other areas...
So I guess everything you do is legal. Now. Do you know whether these things will be legal in the future? A lot of things change, many things that we enjoyed are now frowned upon or even illegal. Smoking is one of them. Guns is another thing that gets more and more regulated.
Did you stop doing what we know you did 5 years ago when it was still legal or should we come and take a closer look?
They don't care that the bite the hand that feeds them, i.e. the industries that send them their fat donation checks? Wow, that's rough. Other whores I know at least have that much of a work ethic to at least perform their duties once you paid them...
Unlike these companies I can speak easily to you since I have no horse in that race. I don't have to bullshit you so you keep buying my software and so you don't send the IRS down on me to keep my finance department in enough red tape to ensure they don't do anything sensible anymore this decade.
Here's the problem: If you mandate a backdoor into software, nobody with at least a hint of sanity will use that software. If you mandate that all software used within your jurisdiction has to have that flaw, you put your domestic industry at a severe disadvantage over every other on the planet, because you open them up to industrial espionage.
"Government only" backdoor keys are much, but not government only for long. Such keys are valuable. They offer entrance to all the sweet, juicy R&D details that every company and some governments on this planet want. Do you think that such keys have a price? You bet. Do you think that "give me the key or your little baby girl gets a bullet through her head" is too high a price for some governments? Think again.
People have weaknesses. Everyone has them. Even if they can't be bribed, they can be bullied, coerced, threatened or simply blackmailed. Works with everyone. I have not met a single person that had no weak spot you could exploit to get them to do anything, literally anything, you wanted. For most it's family. People do a hell of a lot of things if you offer them the life of their children in return.
Even China, one of the most restrictive countries with a surveillance state that would make Orwell wonder whether they used his books as manuals, wasn't foolish enough to demand something like this from its industries. That alone should tell you just how bad an idea it is.
Sorry for pooping in your cereal, but unfortunately reality does not bend to wishful thinking of model systems that work so awesomely in theory. Not my fault, I swear.
More likely they live in countries where a legitimate job in IT security gets you 20k a year while jumping the fence to the other side of the legality puts you in the vicinity of Silicon Valley salaries while still living in a country where 20k a year means comfortable living.
Thanks to living in a world where LetsDecrypt has basically destroyed any notion of responsible behavior by certificate issuers these shorteners are even more dangerous.
I was right with you until this line. Because you want certificates to do something they were not only never designed for but simply and plainly cannot do. You want a certificate to mean that you are going to end up at the "right" destination. And that's not what they're for. All a certificate will do in your browser is to determine whether the server associated with the certificate is also the server that serves you the content you requested. Nothing more, nothing less.
What a certificate cannot and does not do is determine whether the server www.mycompany.com belongs to MyCompany.
Slashdot Mirror
You still didn't get the difference between equal opportunity and equal outcome, did you?
This is not "the economy" driving rent prices up or some other esoteric, abstract and complicated concept, it's simple basic supply and demand. If you don't put up your apartment for rent but instead decide to turn it into a one-bedroom hotel, you remove one apartment from the renting market, reducing supply of apartments with a steady or even increasing demand, thus driving the price up.
It doesn't get any simpler than that, I kinda doubt you don't know that...
And you think that someone in Generistan cares about either of them?
A while ago I was allowed to play with international law enforcement agencies. People who you'd think have the power to get shit done in international crimes. We had a server pinpointed down to the exact place where it was at. We literally knew exactly the physical location of the machine that was used for a rather large international criminal operation. Message from Interpol: By the time we get the local authorities to cooperate, get a warrant and raid the premises, everything's been gone for days. Why bother?
In other words, unless you sit in a country that has no real problems the police is more concerned about, don't worry about anyone knocking at your door if you defraud foreigners. At best, it's considered part of the GDP.
I was proposing a fun game, but you had to take it way out of proportion.
That's what you do when they don't get smart after the first few demos. Didn't you see your Batman, you don't start with the face, the victim doesn't feel anything afterwards anymore.
Chrome is now about half as useful as the average adblocker.
If this becomes law, it gets fairly easy to eliminate the competition. Here's how:
1. Find out IP address(es) belonging to your competitor.
2. Find a company that uses "offensive security" to defend itself.
3. Spoof it ip of rival from 1. and attack company from 2.
4. Watch rival go down in flames from the counter attack.
When mainstream media reports about it.
How do you know a financial trend is over?
When Goldman Sachs et al get involved in it.
Damn right it's their business. So you better cough up the dough if you want to stalk someone, these people were essentially stealing from their company by not paying for it.
I'm somewhat certain that was the actual reason why they were fired. Not that they spied and stalked users, but that they didn't pay for the privilege.
And you'll notice that only recently the research has become interesting for investors and to people outside of universities.
It makes sure you end up at www.example.com. What it does not do, but what people apparently expect it to do, is to certify that www.example.com belongs to ExampleCo Ltd. Aside of this:
1) Those sites exist usually for hours or, at best, days anyway. Trojans that rely on these sites will get detected and ... can't tell you how without causing an uproar here, but let's say I know that links in spam mail surprisingly stop working a few hours after they get sent out, too. We are already at the point where they are identified within hours of starting operation and shut down within days. Long before any credit card theft would be noticed.
2) Add identity theft to the fold.
3) How do you determine whether a page is being used for fraud? While it may still be easy for g00gle.com and bankofmerica.com, how about someone trying to register a domain like, say, xkcd.com. Looks fishy, doesn't it? Not to mention that with *-certs it doesn't even do any good. Just yesterday I got a mail trying to send me to www.mybank.somebullshitoranother.com. How would your idea keep them from doing this? You register *.bullshitdomain.com and fill in whatever attack target you might have this time around for the *.
Look, the problem is, if you raise the difficulty to get a certificate, what you primarily achieve is that smaller businesses and private boards stop encryption altogether because they either cannot afford it or won't jump through the hoops you present, while scammers won't be affected too badly. Either they find a way around it (if you plan to steal money from someone, do you care about credit card fraud, identity theft or other crimes to get your cert?) or they'll simply go without cert again and rely on people being stupid enough not to notice... which you know as well as I do that they are.
Ok, that's a different beast, that's user error.
I have no TV. I know no people who feel the urge to spew propaganda. Where I observe that is for example here. Take a look around the boards and you'll find that, no matter the topic, some goofball will feel the urge to throw in how Trump will save us or how he should be thrown in jail or how Hillary is a (insert random insult here).
I remember a time when there was actually sensible discussion possible here. And I'm not talking about a sensible discussion about politics (that I have never seen, neither here nor anywhere) but one concerning technology and its development and use. From time to time, something like this emerges, like a brave little flower breaking out of the concrete of political bickering, only to be instantly derailed and taken over by this bickering. Like, say, this subthread. Started out as a bit about how emotions are barely understood and you can't sensible measure and control them and now we're talking again about whether the left or the right of the political spectrum are worse offenders when it comes to thought control.
There is a kind of behavior that is not just hostile toward new people but is particularly hostile to women and POC. White men might not see any difference between that behavior and how newbies are treated but apparently women and POC do perceive a difference.
Sorry, forgot that today it's not about how it is but how people feel about it.
But clearly there is something going on. SO has chosen one explanatory path that apparently most of /. finds difficult to believe.
Yes. What's going on is what we have seen a lot of times recently. "They are against me, must be skin color, gender or sexual orientation". Despite the fact that it is virtually impossible to tell either of them on boards like S.O. The reason why I find it difficult to believe is that there is already a perfectly good explanation that does not rely on people having information they cannot have.
That's why I don't buy most conspiracy theories. The government, of all entities, is notoriously BAD at keeping secrets. If after years and decades of people actively digging for information nothing at all surfaces while at the same time tons of documents get "leaked" in other areas...
I'd rather support child molesters than government surveillance. Pure self interest. The former are no threat to me, the latter is.
So I guess everything you do is legal. Now. Do you know whether these things will be legal in the future? A lot of things change, many things that we enjoyed are now frowned upon or even illegal. Smoking is one of them. Guns is another thing that gets more and more regulated.
Did you stop doing what we know you did 5 years ago when it was still legal or should we come and take a closer look?
They don't care that the bite the hand that feeds them, i.e. the industries that send them their fat donation checks? Wow, that's rough. Other whores I know at least have that much of a work ethic to at least perform their duties once you paid them...
Unlike these companies I can speak easily to you since I have no horse in that race. I don't have to bullshit you so you keep buying my software and so you don't send the IRS down on me to keep my finance department in enough red tape to ensure they don't do anything sensible anymore this decade.
Here's the problem: If you mandate a backdoor into software, nobody with at least a hint of sanity will use that software. If you mandate that all software used within your jurisdiction has to have that flaw, you put your domestic industry at a severe disadvantage over every other on the planet, because you open them up to industrial espionage.
"Government only" backdoor keys are much, but not government only for long. Such keys are valuable. They offer entrance to all the sweet, juicy R&D details that every company and some governments on this planet want. Do you think that such keys have a price? You bet. Do you think that "give me the key or your little baby girl gets a bullet through her head" is too high a price for some governments? Think again.
People have weaknesses. Everyone has them. Even if they can't be bribed, they can be bullied, coerced, threatened or simply blackmailed. Works with everyone. I have not met a single person that had no weak spot you could exploit to get them to do anything, literally anything, you wanted. For most it's family. People do a hell of a lot of things if you offer them the life of their children in return.
Even China, one of the most restrictive countries with a surveillance state that would make Orwell wonder whether they used his books as manuals, wasn't foolish enough to demand something like this from its industries. That alone should tell you just how bad an idea it is.
So we add credit card fraud to the fold, what does that change exactly?
Sorry for pooping in your cereal, but unfortunately reality does not bend to wishful thinking of model systems that work so awesomely in theory. Not my fault, I swear.
I usually feel like I need a shower afterwards, though.
How about making it illegal to access such systems with malicious intent? That should solve it, right?
(I think I play too much with the boys from the legal department recently...)
Yes, IRC is still a thing. Care to inform me what other tool you know that delivers its functionality AND is under your control?
More likely they live in countries where a legitimate job in IT security gets you 20k a year while jumping the fence to the other side of the legality puts you in the vicinity of Silicon Valley salaries while still living in a country where 20k a year means comfortable living.
Thanks to living in a world where LetsDecrypt has basically destroyed any notion of responsible behavior by certificate issuers these shorteners are even more dangerous.
I was right with you until this line. Because you want certificates to do something they were not only never designed for but simply and plainly cannot do. You want a certificate to mean that you are going to end up at the "right" destination. And that's not what they're for. All a certificate will do in your browser is to determine whether the server associated with the certificate is also the server that serves you the content you requested. Nothing more, nothing less.
What a certificate cannot and does not do is determine whether the server www.mycompany.com belongs to MyCompany.