But here's a solution. If someone's phone is locked, you bring them into court. Show Probable Cause. The judge will order said someone to unlock their phone. They will decline. The judge will find them in contempt of court and sentence them to jail time. Or a fine.
After a week in the clink you bring them back into court. Rinse and repeat as necessary.
It's called Due Process. It's a Constitutional Right. (Although it feels like the only one anyone cares about is the Second Amendment.)
That "solution" probably violates the 5th amendment right to not self-incriminate.
I'm all for being able to keep data private from unauthorized viewing. But I'm also for law and order - my safety, and the safety of my family, depends on it. Encryption is a tool, like a hammer, but if you give perpetrators impenetrable boxes to hide their precious loot in then all the tools in the world will not allow them to be brought to justice - ever.
You do realize that those "impenetrable boxes" are also protecting your banking information, medical records, credit/debit card transactions, private communications, etc, etc, etc, don't you? You and your family's safety depends on it.
Streaming 4k video is far more compressed than UHD Blu-ray. Likewise, streaming HD video is far more compressed than Blu-ray. You're not getting the "exact same bits", and you're not getting the same quality.
Even if that were so, how does that change Pai cherry-picking statistics from 2016 to somehow claim repealing NN in 2017 (which hasn't even taken affect yet) magically "fixed" the broadband industry? How does that change Pai claiming infrastructure investments ISPs announced years ago were somehow magically caused by him repealing NN years later?
And if your system has any type of variation on "can not contain any previous password", it has to store your passwords in plaintext somewhere, which is another huge security issue.
No it doesn't... you can store previous password hashes and when the user attempts to change their password you compare the hash of the new password to the old hashes. No need to store plaintext at all.
Umm... no. The OG Pixels released with Android 7.0... they've already been updated to 8.0 (and 8.1). They'll get 9.0 next year before full support ends. That's two major releases... plus an additional year of security updates.
Also, my Pixel phone from last year, only got one update and now support discontinued. The whole reason I bought that stupid piece of shit for development was because Google couldn't blame the carriers for not updating it. Turns out they don't update their shit either! Fuck Google, Android is worse abomination that Windows ever was. This shit fucking sucks.
You're lying.
Google has not discontinued support for the original Pixel phones. The OG Pixels will continue getting new Android versions until October 2018, and security updates until at least October 2019. Phone and online support also lasts until October 2019.
Kinda crazy to sign off on allowing Iran to get nukes and pay them a few hundred billion dollars when the Iranian regime is working closely with al Qaeda, isn't it?
Except he didn't "sign off on allowing Iran to get nukes", nor did he pay them hundreds of billions of dollars. The Iran deal bars Iran from developing nuclear weapons. And the "payments" you refer to were millions, not billions, and were Iran's money to begin with, we had frozen those assets in 1979 and had never returned it, until ordered by international courts to do so, which coincidentally was about the same time as the nuclear deal.
Stringray is used mostly in minority neighborhoods (at least according to the complaint) and doesn't just affect the criminal targeted. Everybody in the neighborhood loses data service and has calls blocked or dropped, including 911 calls.
This applies to drivers already installed when upgrading to Windows 10. Re-install (while secure boot is on) then you're screwed, or do a clean install.
"To summarize, on non-upgraded fresh installations of Windows 10, version 1607 with Secure Boot ON, drivers must be signed by Microsoft or with cross-signed certificates issued prior to July 29th, 2015."
They'd be cutting off a significant portion of their users. I can't see that happening for at least a few years when non-UEFI machines far less common than they are now.
And when it does happen, you won't have to worry them pushing updates to your old machine that breaks stuff anymore.;)
Thanks for not even giving people the choice to run an unsigned driver, since there's lots and lots of hardware out there that will instantly be made 'obsolete' by this policy.
The restrictions only apply when secure boot is on. And drivers cross-signed prior to July 29th 2015 will continue to work even with secure boot on (drivers that aren't at least cross-signed wouldn't have worked in 64-bit versions of Windows going back to Windows Vista).
So no hardware is being made obsolete. Stop the FUD.
How is it beneficial to *any* users to remove the choice? Why not let the user decide if they want to run a driver that is not signed? It's not like the user is going to be asked every day. If you get a new device, you install the (presumably signed) driver from the CD or manufacturers website or MS website. If you want to run that super old piece of hardware, you can install the unsigned driver. Win-win.
Not really about safety. Mostly about control.
You still have a choice. From TFA:
Enforcement only happens on fresh installations, with Secure Boot on, and only applies to new kernel mode drivers:
PCs upgrading from a release of Windows prior to Windows 10 Version 1607 will still permit installation of cross-signed drivers.
PCs with Secure Boot OFF will still permit installation of cross-signed drivers.
Drivers signed with cross-signing certificate issued prior to July 29th 2015, when the initial policy went into place, will continue to be allowed.
To prevent systems from failing to boot properly, boot drivers will not be blocked, but they will be removed by the Program Compatibility Assistant. Future versions of Windows will block boot drivers.
To summarize, on non-upgraded fresh installations of Windows 10, version 1607 with Secure Boot ON, drivers must be signed by Microsoft or with cross-signed certificates issued prior to July 29th, 2015.
It's a non-issue for older computers. If secure boot is turned off, you can use unsigned drivers. Older computers that don't even have UEFI don't even support secure boot.
Slashdot Mirror
But here's a solution. If someone's phone is locked, you bring them into court. Show Probable Cause. The judge will order said someone to unlock their phone. They will decline. The judge will find them in contempt of court and sentence them to jail time. Or a fine.
After a week in the clink you bring them back into court. Rinse and repeat as necessary.
It's called Due Process. It's a Constitutional Right. (Although it feels like the only one anyone cares about is the Second Amendment.)
That "solution" probably violates the 5th amendment right to not self-incriminate.
I'm all for being able to keep data private from unauthorized viewing. But I'm also for law and order - my safety, and the safety of my family, depends on it. Encryption is a tool, like a hammer, but if you give perpetrators impenetrable boxes to hide their precious loot in then all the tools in the world will not allow them to be brought to justice - ever.
You do realize that those "impenetrable boxes" are also protecting your banking information, medical records, credit/debit card transactions, private communications, etc, etc, etc, don't you? You and your family's safety depends on it.
Streaming 4k video is far more compressed than UHD Blu-ray. Likewise, streaming HD video is far more compressed than Blu-ray. You're not getting the "exact same bits", and you're not getting the same quality.
Assuming you didn't uninstall the Intel microcode update package, it should get updated.
All major browsers have already been patched to prevent the JS variants.
You don't need 25 Mbps, so nobody else does?
Even if that were so, how does that change Pai cherry-picking statistics from 2016 to somehow claim repealing NN in 2017 (which hasn't even taken affect yet) magically "fixed" the broadband industry? How does that change Pai claiming infrastructure investments ISPs announced years ago were somehow magically caused by him repealing NN years later?
Skiball is skill, not random chance.
And if your system has any type of variation on "can not contain any previous password", it has to store your passwords in plaintext somewhere, which is another huge security issue.
No it doesn't... you can store previous password hashes and when the user attempts to change their password you compare the hash of the new password to the old hashes. No need to store plaintext at all.
Umm... no. The OG Pixels released with Android 7.0... they've already been updated to 8.0 (and 8.1). They'll get 9.0 next year before full support ends. That's two major releases... plus an additional year of security updates.
Also, my Pixel phone from last year, only got one update and now support discontinued. The whole reason I bought that stupid piece of shit for development was because Google couldn't blame the carriers for not updating it. Turns out they don't update their shit either! Fuck Google, Android is worse abomination that Windows ever was. This shit fucking sucks.
You're lying.
Google has not discontinued support for the original Pixel phones. The OG Pixels will continue getting new Android versions until October 2018, and security updates until at least October 2019. Phone and online support also lasts until October 2019.
https://support.google.com/nex...
Kinda crazy to sign off on allowing Iran to get nukes and pay them a few hundred billion dollars when the Iranian regime is working closely with al Qaeda, isn't it?
Except he didn't "sign off on allowing Iran to get nukes", nor did he pay them hundreds of billions of dollars. The Iran deal bars Iran from developing nuclear weapons. And the "payments" you refer to were millions, not billions, and were Iran's money to begin with, we had frozen those assets in 1979 and had never returned it, until ordered by international courts to do so, which coincidentally was about the same time as the nuclear deal.
While I don't disagree in a general sense, are you really expecting Google, Apple, Amazon, Disney, and Vudu to close their doors all at once?
Odd that your upload speed is actually better than your download speed.
Yeah I don't disagree with you, I was just bothered that so many people assumed it was women.
If you had read TFA, you'd know both victims who were named were teenage boys.
Stringray is used mostly in minority neighborhoods (at least according to the complaint) and doesn't just affect the criminal targeted. Everybody in the neighborhood loses data service and has calls blocked or dropped, including 911 calls.
This applies to drivers already installed when upgrading to Windows 10. Re-install (while secure boot is on) then you're screwed, or do a clean install.
"To summarize, on non-upgraded fresh installations of Windows 10, version 1607 with Secure Boot ON, drivers must be signed by Microsoft or with cross-signed certificates issued prior to July 29th, 2015."
You didn't read the very quote you included.
Exactly how would Microsoft remove the switch from your BIOS/UEFI?
They'd be cutting off a significant portion of their users. I can't see that happening for at least a few years when non-UEFI machines far less common than they are now.
And when it does happen, you won't have to worry them pushing updates to your old machine that breaks stuff anymore. ;)
See my other reply... you can reset a password for a Microsoft account from Microsoft's website.
Thanks for not even giving people the choice to run an unsigned driver, since there's lots and lots of hardware out there that will instantly be made 'obsolete' by this policy.
The restrictions only apply when secure boot is on. And drivers cross-signed prior to July 29th 2015 will continue to work even with secure boot on (drivers that aren't at least cross-signed wouldn't have worked in 64-bit versions of Windows going back to Windows Vista).
So no hardware is being made obsolete. Stop the FUD.
Why does your EPROM programmer need a kernel-mode driver?
How is it beneficial to *any* users to remove the choice? Why not let the user decide if they want to run a driver that is not signed? It's not like the user is going to be asked every day. If you get a new device, you install the (presumably signed) driver from the CD or manufacturers website or MS website. If you want to run that super old piece of hardware, you can install the unsigned driver. Win-win.
Not really about safety. Mostly about control.
You still have a choice. From TFA:
Enforcement only happens on fresh installations, with Secure Boot on, and only applies to new kernel mode drivers:
To summarize, on non-upgraded fresh installations of Windows 10, version 1607 with Secure Boot ON, drivers must be signed by Microsoft or with cross-signed certificates issued prior to July 29th, 2015.
It's a non-issue for older computers. If secure boot is turned off, you can use unsigned drivers. Older computers that don't even have UEFI don't even support secure boot.
Control Panel -> User Accounts is very much still there and let's you do more than Settings -> Accounts does.