On top of all that, apparently some 90% of American currency tests positive for cocaine. (I've read this in articles about forfeiture; I don't know how accurate it is; anyone know any more about this?) I've read some horror stories of people having large amounts of cash confiscated; in one case a woman's life savings, while she was in the process of moving. More information about forfeiture here.
hmmm; perhaps that isn't theft, but when these companies intimidate another company into handing them millions of dollars for alleged copyright violations, how is that not theft? Giving legal sanction to theft does not make it any less theft.
Did you upgrade the processor? What upgrade card did you use, and was it easy to get OS X running on it? I have a Power Tower Pro with the original processor (225 MHz 604; when it first came out this thing screamed!). I still run MacOS 8.5.1 on it (8.6 and anything higher was way to slow). I also have SuSE 7.0 installed on it, but I would love to get OS X running on it. I've been considering a G4 upgrade card but they are practically the price of a new iMac.
By the way and totally offtopic... I was at an art opening last night and there was a bunch of what looked like Apple prototypes. One that looked like the millennium Mac - a tall thin greyish box with a small monitor built in and tall Bose speakers.... Another was an iBook but it was dark green plastic and it looked way cool and weighed little. Also a message pad that looked like a cross between a Palm and an old Newton. Anybody seen these things? They all had the Apple logo and looked legit, though it could I suppose have been someone's art installation. None of them had accessible keyboards (the clam shell laptop was closed and the newton couldn't open either) or were plugged in or anything but they looked cool as hell.
Yeah it looks like this guy is getting screwed; and it looks like the company was just getting back at him for sending thousands of "disparaging" emails. Did the guy actually go to jail or is the trial still in progress? This definitely sucks but I'm not going to let it stop me from sending email and I don't think slashdot (or CNN) should let it stop them from posting news. But that trial is interesting and worth discussion in its own right since it's another example of how the fear of "hackers" has led to injustices that often make no sense whatsoever.
Was the defendant spamming the server? Did he actually serve time for this? That seems ridiculous to me; I'm certainly not going to let it stop me from sending email, and I don't think it should stop slashdot (or any other popular site) from posting links. I agree that a slashdotting could be interpreted as a DOS attack by a sleazy lawyer. "Up" could be interpreted as "down" by such people. I can see it now; Ashcroft goes after slashdot as terrorists for DOSing a federal air traffic-related website. There are few things that could make the US govt look substantially more ridiculous than it already has looked throughout the war on terrorism, but that would definitely be one of them.
Heh, all that said, I'd like to see them try it. What would be really interesting would be if the webserver actually was on the same computer as some other critical system, and the person who sent the link to slashdot actually had reason to know that fact; then you'd actually have a case that made a little bit of sense.
It's just a webserver. It's not the control tower at the airport. And as I pointed out below, it's only arrogance that makes us think a slashdotting is different from a link appearing on the New York Times website or salon.com. And there is no information on the webserver that a pilot wouldn't be able to learn by looking out the window or making a phone call. Don't act like planes are going to start blowing to pieces and careening out of control all over Alaska if the server goes down for a couple hours.
This can *easily* be construed as a DOS attack.... This story should be pulled
Come on folks, it's not like slashdotting a picture of black sky in alaska is going to cause a freakin' plane crash! So many posters bitching about slashdot's responsibility for slashdotting servers, and now here's a post advocating censorship. First of all, web links were made to be clicked. And as much as many of us like to inflate our self-importance as we confidently click our mice, a slashdotting is hardly a DOS attack, any more than a link showing up on nytimes.com would be considered an attack. Also, "legitimate pilots" includes anyone with a pilot license; not just people actually in the process of flying a plane, or about to fly a plane. Finally, if someone actually flying a plane is relying on a freakin' webcam to land, we're all in trouble. Quit acting like this is some huge air safety issue; it's just a webserver ferchrissakes. Sometimes webservers have to reboot; life goes on.
How do you expect them to make a quality product if they can't earn a living selling it?
You are so right. DVD piracy is out of control, and Hollywood producers are out in the streets starving. I saw Steven Spielberg just the other day sitting on a corner wearing a $4000 suit with a sign that said "Will Direct for Food." And I saw Michael Eisner eating oysters at McCormick and Schmick's and he only ordered a $50 bottle of wine! Can you imagine? I swear I saw him wince with agony when he took the first sip. These poor poor men, and it's all the fault of you Linux zealots with your theftware on T-shirts!!
from a business perspective, the industry would be shooting itself in the foot.
Lord knows the RIAA would never do that!
Seriously, it is shooting its own foot now, by attacking fans and consumers. Right now they can get away with selling 15 tracks for $20, but the price for that is a large amount of "piracy" from people who don't want to pay that much but still want to listen to the music. (I don't want to get into whether their actions are justified here; the point is, it is going on). If the RIAA wants to do something about that, this is not an unreasonable suggestion.
Are you saying that instead of having one set of rules, we should have several that depend on the size of your organization and the amount of power it wields?
How about a different set of rules that depend on whether or not your organization obeys the law?
First, the "crack-a-mac" contest a few years back led to a widely publicized crack, even though it was a mistake in configuration as I recall. (I don't remember what OS). Second there is no such thing as unhackable. If a mac hasn't been cracked yet it's because there are too many PCs for people to spend their time on macs. Third, MacOS 8 or 9 is easy to remotely administer if you gain enough access to install remote admin devices (there's one on http://securemac.com but I forget its name). Finally bugtraq has never called macs "unhackable" nor would they be so irresponsible as to call any machine that.
why bother with autorun CDs?
on
Network Hacking
·
· Score: 2
If you have unmonitored physical access to a machine, you can tell it what drive to boot from, which means you can root the machine by simply booting off a disk of your choice. The point is, don't expect a machine to be secure if untrusted parties have physical access to it.
That is PRECISELY what the hackers are doing - they're going to the press.
Exactly. And the assault on hackers who publicize bugs (and bad business practices) without worrying about the effects of their disclosures on the company's profits is analogous to an assault on corporate whistleblowers, because that is fundamentally what they are. The idea that only the government (or, even worse, the govt + the entertainment and/or software industries) should be allowed to publish information about how certain technologies work is not just an abridgement of free speech; it is a radical overthrow of the values that underlie it! Pay attention, folks. These battles are the first book burnings of the twenty-first century. Will history record another Dark Age, driven by a fanatical belief not in religious edicts but in rules governing the authorized use of technology?
Currently, dual boot OS X and 9 systems can be trashed by booting up in 9. Single boot OS X systems can be "rooted" instead by booting up with a CD that boots up on System 9 with the right key sequence at powerup.
If you have physical access to any machine enough to boot it up from a drive of your choice, you have the ability to control that machine no matter what OS is running on it.
Slashdot Mirror
On top of all that, apparently some 90% of American currency tests positive for cocaine. (I've read this in articles about forfeiture; I don't know how accurate it is; anyone know any more about this?) I've read some horror stories of people having large amounts of cash confiscated; in one case a woman's life savings, while she was in the process of moving. More information about forfeiture here.
Nah.... it was dark green and looked like something brand new.... but those eMates were cool; why hasn't anyone ever ported linux to it?
Because all the documents for this stuff are in Chinese!
oh.... er, nevermind.
Wasn't Beowulf just a giant rat anyway?
hmmm; perhaps that isn't theft, but when these companies intimidate another company into handing them millions of dollars for alleged copyright violations, how is that not theft? Giving legal sanction to theft does not make it any less theft.
Did you upgrade the processor? What upgrade card did you use, and was it easy to get OS X running on it? I have a Power Tower Pro with the original processor (225 MHz 604; when it first came out this thing screamed!). I still run MacOS 8.5.1 on it (8.6 and anything higher was way to slow). I also have SuSE 7.0 installed on it, but I would love to get OS X running on it. I've been considering a G4 upgrade card but they are practically the price of a new iMac.
.... Another was an iBook but it was dark green plastic and it looked way cool and weighed little. Also a message pad that looked like a cross between a Palm and an old Newton. Anybody seen these things? They all had the Apple logo and looked legit, though it could I suppose have been someone's art installation. None of them had accessible keyboards (the clam shell laptop was closed and the newton couldn't open either) or were plugged in or anything but they looked cool as hell.
By the way and totally offtopic... I was at an art opening last night and there was a bunch of what looked like Apple prototypes. One that looked like the millennium Mac - a tall thin greyish box with a small monitor built in and tall Bose speakers
that doesn't mean it's helping, just that some people are sympathetic to the hackers. I still think it isn't helping.
Sorry; the RIAA thinks that is piracy too and is looking to tax that next.
Yeah it looks like this guy is getting screwed; and it looks like the company was just getting back at him for sending thousands of "disparaging" emails. Did the guy actually go to jail or is the trial still in progress? This definitely sucks but I'm not going to let it stop me from sending email and I don't think slashdot (or CNN) should let it stop them from posting news. But that trial is interesting and worth discussion in its own right since it's another example of how the fear of "hackers" has led to injustices that often make no sense whatsoever.
not to mention he could look out the fucking window! sheesh....
Heh, all that said, I'd like to see them try it. What would be really interesting would be if the webserver actually was on the same computer as some other critical system, and the person who sent the link to slashdot actually had reason to know that fact; then you'd actually have a case that made a little bit of sense.
It's just a webserver. It's not the control tower at the airport. And as I pointed out below, it's only arrogance that makes us think a slashdotting is different from a link appearing on the New York Times website or salon.com. And there is no information on the webserver that a pilot wouldn't be able to learn by looking out the window or making a phone call. Don't act like planes are going to start blowing to pieces and careening out of control all over Alaska if the server goes down for a couple hours.
Come on folks, it's not like slashdotting a picture of black sky in alaska is going to cause a freakin' plane crash! So many posters bitching about slashdot's responsibility for slashdotting servers, and now here's a post advocating censorship. First of all, web links were made to be clicked. And as much as many of us like to inflate our self-importance as we confidently click our mice, a slashdotting is hardly a DOS attack, any more than a link showing up on nytimes.com would be considered an attack. Also, "legitimate pilots" includes anyone with a pilot license; not just people actually in the process of flying a plane, or about to fly a plane. Finally, if someone actually flying a plane is relying on a freakin' webcam to land, we're all in trouble. Quit acting like this is some huge air safety issue; it's just a webserver ferchrissakes. Sometimes webservers have to reboot; life goes on.
You mean "There's at least a chance that he's on something there."
How do you expect them to make a quality product if they can't earn a living selling it?
You are so right. DVD piracy is out of control, and Hollywood producers are out in the streets starving. I saw Steven Spielberg just the other day sitting on a corner wearing a $4000 suit with a sign that said "Will Direct for Food." And I saw Michael Eisner eating oysters at McCormick and Schmick's and he only ordered a $50 bottle of wine! Can you imagine? I swear I saw him wince with agony when he took the first sip. These poor poor men, and it's all the fault of you Linux zealots with your theftware on T-shirts!!
Yah, it's the vendor's fault for not treating the insecure services running "windowless" under Windows as damage and routing around them.
Lord knows the RIAA would never do that!
Seriously, it is shooting its own foot now, by attacking fans and consumers. Right now they can get away with selling 15 tracks for $20, but the price for that is a large amount of "piracy" from people who don't want to pay that much but still want to listen to the music. (I don't want to get into whether their actions are justified here; the point is, it is going on). If the RIAA wants to do something about that, this is not an unreasonable suggestion.
How about a different set of rules that depend on whether or not your organization obeys the law?
Well that last post got me looking for info on the crack a mac contest; here are some details.
First, the "crack-a-mac" contest a few years back led to a widely publicized crack, even though it was a mistake in configuration as I recall. (I don't remember what OS). Second there is no such thing as unhackable. If a mac hasn't been cracked yet it's because there are too many PCs for people to spend their time on macs. Third, MacOS 8 or 9 is easy to remotely administer if you gain enough access to install remote admin devices (there's one on http://securemac.com but I forget its name). Finally bugtraq has never called macs "unhackable" nor would they be so irresponsible as to call any machine that.
If you have unmonitored physical access to a machine, you can tell it what drive to boot from, which means you can root the machine by simply booting off a disk of your choice. The point is, don't expect a machine to be secure if untrusted parties have physical access to it.
Exactly. And the assault on hackers who publicize bugs (and bad business practices) without worrying about the effects of their disclosures on the company's profits is analogous to an assault on corporate whistleblowers, because that is fundamentally what they are. The idea that only the government (or, even worse, the govt + the entertainment and/or software industries) should be allowed to publish information about how certain technologies work is not just an abridgement of free speech; it is a radical overthrow of the values that underlie it! Pay attention, folks. These battles are the first book burnings of the twenty-first century. Will history record another Dark Age, driven by a fanatical belief not in religious edicts but in rules governing the authorized use of technology?
If you have physical access to any machine enough to boot it up from a drive of your choice, you have the ability to control that machine no matter what OS is running on it.
Did I imagine I would find myself laughing at Multifinder joke. It makes me sad I threw out that old Mac Plus....