No, my point was kind of that there is an implicit trust between all employees and their IT personnel. The IT people have all the keys to all the doors, they can know anything about your company, even that which should be restricted to the highest personnel. Refusal to divulge root passwords to those who shouldn't have them isn't a very good reason to throw someone in jail, even if it IS a city government network.
Instead of holding this man, they should congratulate him for bringing to light the colossal insufficiency of their manpower in this department and the total negligent lack of redundancy in key positions. The fact that they got into this position at all, with only a single person having the root passwords for key infrastructure is a sign of the departments lack of intelligible oversight.
$11M to reimplement IPv6 QOS. I suppose it's a bit more advanced since it makes QOS determination based on users or groups, but that doesn't seem that difficult.
This is a really good idea for a lot of people. I keep my personal data on my laptop, but I do keep a thumbdrive backup in my pocket for emergencies.
I can't imagine the interruption homeland security could cause by seizing a laptop with the only copy of a sales presentation or other business/time critical item on it. The damage in some cases could be unquantifiable.
This whole thread is filled with conspiracy theories involving rogue companies and international spying. So far, your explanation is the only one that seems remotely likely.
Kind of like an advanced order-a-pizza-for-your-neighbor prank, but one with fake purchase orders, fax machines and more money involved.
ACLU's kind of taking a weird angle at it, but I fully support their cause.
The retention period of the data is irrelevant, in my opinion. The fact that they deem fit to search laptops or other electronic devices at all without probable cause, let alone a warrant, and considering the highly private nature of most peoples electronic devices, seems obviously contrary to the intentions of the 4th amendment.
Physical searches to board airplanes, regardless of destination seem very reasonable given the public endangerment risk from terrorism like sabotage, bombs, hijacking, etc. Beyond addressing physical security risks, other types of searches should not be conducted without a warrant. If they deem someone a risk, they can detain them and obtain a warrant. If it's not worth the effort to obtain a warrant, then the search isn't justified.
Depends on whether Win7's VM for XP virtualizes the USB ports also. The only reason TI-Connect doesn't work with Vista 64 is because of the USB drivers. The program itself works great.
I have used VMWare for running Ubuntu on Vista 64 and it works really great, other than that VMWare doesn't seem to support my USB chipset so Ubuntu can't see any USB devices. If I could get VMWare to virtualize my USB devices, I might consider installing a Vista 32 or XP Pro image to use my calculator.
Wrong. PAE is essentially invisible to 99.9% of software, other than drivers that need to support DMA. If you read the article, or knew how modern operating systems use page tables to translate linear addresses into physical addresses, you would realize this already.
Are you just a MS shill? If you're right and PAE is so shitty, why does MS reserve the use of PAE to just the server editions where reliability counts for a lot more than consumer editions?
Exactly. I have a multi-function scan/fax/laser by Canon, it's probably 3 or 4 years old. I just was able to get Vista 64 drivers for it about 2 months ago. I asked Canon and they said(paraphrased) "we're working on it, the drivers are known to be incompatible, sorry."
Compare this to my shiny new Texas Instruments graphing calculator, complete with software disc and USB cable: "Unfortunately the TI84 is incompatible with Vista 64. Future versions of TI-Connect may support your operating system." I let them know that's quite ridiculous given Vista 64 popularity will only continue to rise as XP users abandon their older hardware. I would return the TI84 and go get a Casio Classpad but it's Vista 64 incompatible too!
That's been debunked. SCO admitted in bankruptcy court that the deal fell through.
Even if it did, the future of SCO's litigation lies with Edward N. Cahn, the new trustee. As a former litigation attorney, he may very well choose to move forward with the trial. Then again, as a former judge he may view SCO's litigation as a last ditch effort to save a dying company whose only income was from a dying operating system, and liquidate.
Your view of SCO's position is slightly inaccurate.
SCO does NOT have a lot of new funding, in fact they are knee deep in bankruptcy proceedings and Darl McBride isn't even in charge anymore.
The appeals court only partially overturned the lower courts decision, saying that the transfer of UNIX copyrights from Novell to SCO is at least worthy of a trial but did not give ANY opinion as to whether SCO or Novell owns them. Darl called a press conference scheduled for tomorrow, which is funny considering he isn't even behind the wheel anymore.
Whoever comes to control SCO from the bankruptcy proceedings gets to decide if they want to continue pursuing the case, not Darl or any of SCO's employees. That isn't even speculation, the appeals court just said that in their decision.
Honestly, I think Novell should have completed a hostile takeover of SCO before the bankruptcy filing. It probably would have cost less than the cost of litigation.
My laptop came with Vista 64, although I did reinstall and try Vista 32 for a brief period when I had a lot of software compatibility problems.
Here's my Vista 64 nag list:
Printer driver support sucks unless you're ready to buy a brand new printer.
Many heavily customized WMI installers don't work right. MS anticipated this and tried to add detection and automatic compatibility mode, but that doesn't work generally.
Some software will not install on Vista 64, even if it IS compatible because the OS isn't on the installers allowed OS's list. Luckily I have the Windows SDK including Orca to fix that.
Browser based ActiveX content breaks OFTEN. This annoys me only because I have to use a website that employs ActiveX heavily for school.
I bought my laptop recently for $650 and it included 4 GB of memory.
Whether users need it or not, new computers are going to start including more than 4 GB sooner or later by default. The key here is that PAE support exists already in 32 bit Windows, but that Microsoft chooses to disable it for consumer operating systems so they can differentiate the consumer and server OS's.
I'm an avid open source software user and currently have zero software or media products that aren't legally licensed to me.
The DMCA places many users in the crosshairs of a fundamentally flawed witchhunt. Copyrights was literally called Copy Right for a reason; the original intent of copyright law was strictly regarding copying and distribution of creative works to preserve the ability for said creators to be compensated for that work. Media producers have twisted that to mean that they can control HOW you USE their works, not how you obtain it. The DMCA allows media companies to wrap everything they produce in anti-copying measures making it illegal for you to transcode your content into a format you like. If I want to watch movies on my laptop from the hard drive(like the many times I go up to my cabin or am in flight), or listen to encrypted music purchased online on my iPod, the DMCA disallows it. Or like when my Solidworks license manager flops because it's incompatible with Vista 64 and Solidworks won't work-modifying it to remove the license manager is disallowed by the DMCA, despite the fact that I possess a valid license to use the software.
Media producers want you to not only pay for your content, but pay many times over for each format you want it in. It's greedy and wrong and I won't stand for it. The law needs to be struck down.
The passing of laws within the United States isn't a democratic process, not exactly anyway. Citizens routinely rate their legislators very poorly for voting to pass laws that take only big corporate interests in mind.
We elect our legislators directly, but then they run off and pass lots of shit laws for the next 2-6 years.
While US laws aren't directly applicable to entities outside the US, it does have a big impact on the global marketplace. The US uses its global influence to push other countries into passing similar laws, like how they are currently trying to persuade Canada to implement a DMCA type law.
Stone v. Frederick Hobby Associates II, LLC, 2001 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1853, Superior Court, judicial district of Stamford-Norwalk, at Stamford, Docket No. CV000181620S (July 10, 2001) (Mintz, J.),
Using an LLC to shield yourself from fraud doesn't necessarily work. As always, YMMV, IANAL, subject to jurisdiction, etc.
Dr. Damage, intent is not a requirement of all crimes. Repeat that 3 times.
Tanktalus, actually when it comes to computers I can see that being a legitimate defense depending on the circumstances. I once uploaded one customers files to another customers FTP server. That was an egregious mistake that was quickly rectified. If one of my customers had gotten the police involved and claimed it was theft, it would have been very easy to explain how simple it can be to transfer a whole folder of documents without paying attention inadvertently.
I gather though that a jury wouldn't find the same true if the circumstances were me claiming I "accidentally" shared my 15,000 song music directory on limewire.
Slashdot Mirror
I have 1.5Mb down, 768Kb up for $29 a month. For another $8 a month, I could make that 3Mb down, 1.5Mb up.
Yes, it's expensive compared to broadband in other countries but I feel I pay a reasonable price for broadband.
No, my point was kind of that there is an implicit trust between all employees and their IT personnel. The IT people have all the keys to all the doors, they can know anything about your company, even that which should be restricted to the highest personnel. Refusal to divulge root passwords to those who shouldn't have them isn't a very good reason to throw someone in jail, even if it IS a city government network.
Instead of holding this man, they should congratulate him for bringing to light the colossal insufficiency of their manpower in this department and the total negligent lack of redundancy in key positions. The fact that they got into this position at all, with only a single person having the root passwords for key infrastructure is a sign of the departments lack of intelligible oversight.
There are a variety of techniques to hide backdoors even from the majority other security experts, such as portknocking.
You can have all the redundancy and safety protocols you want, but at some level, it comes down to a decision of trust.
Assigning QOS by user explicitly makes little sense. Not all traffic a person can generate should have the same priority.
An NSA military intelligence officer accessing a satellite mat should have greater priority than his commander surfing the net.
$11M to reimplement IPv6 QOS. I suppose it's a bit more advanced since it makes QOS determination based on users or groups, but that doesn't seem that difficult.
Consider me unimpressed.
This is more insightful then you think, seeing as there have been cases of firefighters being convicted of arson.
You must be new here.
This is a really good idea for a lot of people. I keep my personal data on my laptop, but I do keep a thumbdrive backup in my pocket for emergencies.
I can't imagine the interruption homeland security could cause by seizing a laptop with the only copy of a sales presentation or other business/time critical item on it. The damage in some cases could be unquantifiable.
This whole thread is filled with conspiracy theories involving rogue companies and international spying. So far, your explanation is the only one that seems remotely likely.
Kind of like an advanced order-a-pizza-for-your-neighbor prank, but one with fake purchase orders, fax machines and more money involved.
ACLU's kind of taking a weird angle at it, but I fully support their cause.
The retention period of the data is irrelevant, in my opinion. The fact that they deem fit to search laptops or other electronic devices at all without probable cause, let alone a warrant, and considering the highly private nature of most peoples electronic devices, seems obviously contrary to the intentions of the 4th amendment.
Physical searches to board airplanes, regardless of destination seem very reasonable given the public endangerment risk from terrorism like sabotage, bombs, hijacking, etc. Beyond addressing physical security risks, other types of searches should not be conducted without a warrant. If they deem someone a risk, they can detain them and obtain a warrant. If it's not worth the effort to obtain a warrant, then the search isn't justified.
Simple as that.
Open Source has grown beyond just a description of software, it's an ideology too.
And indeed, if we were talking about Verilog or VHDL, indeed, the "schematic" might just be little different from source.
Depends on whether Win7's VM for XP virtualizes the USB ports also. The only reason TI-Connect doesn't work with Vista 64 is because of the USB drivers. The program itself works great.
I have used VMWare for running Ubuntu on Vista 64 and it works really great, other than that VMWare doesn't seem to support my USB chipset so Ubuntu can't see any USB devices. If I could get VMWare to virtualize my USB devices, I might consider installing a Vista 32 or XP Pro image to use my calculator.
Wrong. PAE is essentially invisible to 99.9% of software, other than drivers that need to support DMA. If you read the article, or knew how modern operating systems use page tables to translate linear addresses into physical addresses, you would realize this already.
Are you just a MS shill? If you're right and PAE is so shitty, why does MS reserve the use of PAE to just the server editions where reliability counts for a lot more than consumer editions?
Exactly. I have a multi-function scan/fax/laser by Canon, it's probably 3 or 4 years old. I just was able to get Vista 64 drivers for it about 2 months ago. I asked Canon and they said(paraphrased) "we're working on it, the drivers are known to be incompatible, sorry."
Compare this to my shiny new Texas Instruments graphing calculator, complete with software disc and USB cable: "Unfortunately the TI84 is incompatible with Vista 64. Future versions of TI-Connect may support your operating system." I let them know that's quite ridiculous given Vista 64 popularity will only continue to rise as XP users abandon their older hardware. I would return the TI84 and go get a Casio Classpad but it's Vista 64 incompatible too!
Vista 64 is nice, but it has it's weak spots.
That's been debunked. SCO admitted in bankruptcy court that the deal fell through.
Even if it did, the future of SCO's litigation lies with Edward N. Cahn, the new trustee. As a former litigation attorney, he may very well choose to move forward with the trial. Then again, as a former judge he may view SCO's litigation as a last ditch effort to save a dying company whose only income was from a dying operating system, and liquidate.
Time will tell.
Your view of SCO's position is slightly inaccurate.
SCO does NOT have a lot of new funding, in fact they are knee deep in bankruptcy proceedings and Darl McBride isn't even in charge anymore.
The appeals court only partially overturned the lower courts decision, saying that the transfer of UNIX copyrights from Novell to SCO is at least worthy of a trial but did not give ANY opinion as to whether SCO or Novell owns them. Darl called a press conference scheduled for tomorrow, which is funny considering he isn't even behind the wheel anymore.
Whoever comes to control SCO from the bankruptcy proceedings gets to decide if they want to continue pursuing the case, not Darl or any of SCO's employees. That isn't even speculation, the appeals court just said that in their decision.
Honestly, I think Novell should have completed a hostile takeover of SCO before the bankruptcy filing. It probably would have cost less than the cost of litigation.
A lot of enterprise customers are still using 32 bit Windows and are weary(rightfully so imo) of driver compatibility issues.
My laptop came with Vista 64, although I did reinstall and try Vista 32 for a brief period when I had a lot of software compatibility problems.
Here's my Vista 64 nag list:
Me either, after the FCC being suspiciously absent from any meaningful reformist type discussions during the last 10 years.
Other than Google Voice and a bandwidth auction, I haven't heard much about the FCC in some years, aside of course from Janet Jackson's nipple.
I bought my laptop recently for $650 and it included 4 GB of memory.
Whether users need it or not, new computers are going to start including more than 4 GB sooner or later by default. The key here is that PAE support exists already in 32 bit Windows, but that Microsoft chooses to disable it for consumer operating systems so they can differentiate the consumer and server OS's.
Don't speak for me, you don't know me.
I'm an avid open source software user and currently have zero software or media products that aren't legally licensed to me.
The DMCA places many users in the crosshairs of a fundamentally flawed witchhunt. Copyrights was literally called Copy Right for a reason; the original intent of copyright law was strictly regarding copying and distribution of creative works to preserve the ability for said creators to be compensated for that work. Media producers have twisted that to mean that they can control HOW you USE their works, not how you obtain it. The DMCA allows media companies to wrap everything they produce in anti-copying measures making it illegal for you to transcode your content into a format you like. If I want to watch movies on my laptop from the hard drive(like the many times I go up to my cabin or am in flight), or listen to encrypted music purchased online on my iPod, the DMCA disallows it. Or like when my Solidworks license manager flops because it's incompatible with Vista 64 and Solidworks won't work-modifying it to remove the license manager is disallowed by the DMCA, despite the fact that I possess a valid license to use the software.
Media producers want you to not only pay for your content, but pay many times over for each format you want it in. It's greedy and wrong and I won't stand for it. The law needs to be struck down.
The passing of laws within the United States isn't a democratic process, not exactly anyway. Citizens routinely rate their legislators very poorly for voting to pass laws that take only big corporate interests in mind.
We elect our legislators directly, but then they run off and pass lots of shit laws for the next 2-6 years.
While US laws aren't directly applicable to entities outside the US, it does have a big impact on the global marketplace. The US uses its global influence to push other countries into passing similar laws, like how they are currently trying to persuade Canada to implement a DMCA type law.
Stone v. Frederick Hobby Associates II, LLC, 2001 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1853,
Superior Court, judicial district of Stamford-Norwalk, at Stamford, Docket No.
CV000181620S (July 10, 2001) (Mintz, J.),
Using an LLC to shield yourself from fraud doesn't necessarily work. As always, YMMV, IANAL, subject to jurisdiction, etc.
Unless of course it's a password to your laptop that the police want. Then you can go to jail for not providing it apparently.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/court-self-incrimination-privilege-stops-with-passwords.ars
Dr. Damage, intent is not a requirement of all crimes. Repeat that 3 times.
Tanktalus, actually when it comes to computers I can see that being a legitimate defense depending on the circumstances. I once uploaded one customers files to another customers FTP server. That was an egregious mistake that was quickly rectified. If one of my customers had gotten the police involved and claimed it was theft, it would have been very easy to explain how simple it can be to transfer a whole folder of documents without paying attention inadvertently.
I gather though that a jury wouldn't find the same true if the circumstances were me claiming I "accidentally" shared my 15,000 song music directory on limewire.