That's got to be one of a mariner's worst nightmares...
Hard to top that... capsizing amidst a swarm of hungry sharks, maybe.
Re:Philosophy versus reality
on
Lulu Introduces DRM
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I see Lulu as in a very precarious position here. It's likely just as much a result of new competition in the market, and not just Lulu needing more money to pay the bills.
The self-publishing market is very small.
Lulu cannot afford to give up business to competitors, as there may very well be not enough of it to go around.
Lulu sells or used to sell things via retailers Amazon.
However: recently, Amazon is now in direct competition with Lulu through Amazon Publishing Services and CreateSpace.
The new competition from Amazon and others has the potential to cut off Lulu's air supply.
In addition, Amazon has the Kindle, and their own proprietary file format, soon Barnes and Noble will too. They can publish eBooks for authors, and the authors then don't need Lulu.
With Amazon's services, authors can even get their books printed, in addition to making eBooks, so it is likely the authors simply take all their business to Amazon, which means, they no longer have a need to buy anything from Lulu.
If Lulu doesn't get new books, they don't get to take a cut from sales of new books, and then they die.
For many authors: DRM is considered essential or mandatory for eBook publication.
Or at least, considered an advantage, extra protection for the author's work.
So.. any publication / distribution channel that doesn't offer an option to utilize DRM technologies could be seen to be at a substantial competitive disadvantage, while they are simply handing customers over to the likes of Amazon, who do offer DRM.
In this case, files get moved to quarantine, maybe, and user gets a nice taste of why they shouldn't tempt fate by doing weird s***.
It's also conceivable, something will possess the user one day to type X5O!P%@AP[4\PZX54(P^)7CC)7}$EICAR-STANDARD-ANTIVIRUS-TEST-FILE!$H+H*
Or some other commonly recognized virus pattern into a text file.
Neither in that case, nor this one, is it a poor design for the AV program to have a false positive in such cases.
It's why AV software quarantines malware instead of outright deleting, and why there is generally an option to whitelist or exclude certain directories from scanning.
But in the case of MalwareBytes, the software is free, so it should definitely be no surprise to you that you don't have something that is currently an Enterprise-grade product when you use it.
Instead i'm going to make lots of recommendations.
Cleaning an infection is all about using lots of tools, since no one tool is perfect, every tool has a gap in what it can detect or clean.
But when it comes to prevention as few tools as possible should be used, and low-overhead choices should be used, since every tool installed and running slows down the workstation, and big-footprint tools have a big negative effect on users' productivity.
I've also emphasized the need to do the initial cleaning with the infected drive as the secondary in a second machine.
I don't recommend this. Your scanner has no way of knowing the secondary drive is a complete system.
Some malware/viruses make registry and system-level changes, and these registry changes can have serious long-term consequences. Get anti-malware on the system that can fix the registry in the proper removal process.
In the extreme case, running the scan on the medium plugged into another system, can result in you rendering the disk you are scanning an unbootable OS.
For cleaning process, I recommend having a bootable USB stick, with a hardware write-protect switch. Always set the physical write-protect switch to the read-only position when plugging into the system being cleaned.
Then install anti-virus/anti-malware tools, I use:
Avira Antivirus
SUPERAntispyware
Malwarebytes Anti-malware Technician Edition
PC Tools Spyware Doctor
PrevX Enterprise
Lavasoft Adaware Business
ESET NOD.32
ComboFix
HijackThis
Copy tools installers to some innocuous folder on the hard drive, or have them installed to run from USB.
Run a Malwarebytes quick scan first, if possible, since it's fastest. Since the USB stick MBAM is installed on is read-only, malware can't delete or tamper with mbam.exe. Sometimes it doesn't work: some malware detects specific cleaning tools.
In that case, use a different program. Or, actually have various methods of stopping malware from detecting the program: things like hexediting strings in anti-malware executables to make the anti-malware "undetectable" by malware's naive procedures.
Anyways, after the initial pass with some scanner, it will generally require a reboot, then another pass with the scanner to delete locked files. Do that.
After all that, boot from a bootable USB stick, which is either an Avira, ESET, BitDefender, or Kaspersky rescue disk image, and run a full scan from rescue media.
Then boot back into the system... and run a complete scan with all 6 anti-spyware tools (except HijackThis and Combofix, only use use once, pick only one AV tool to use. Only remove things with HijackThis if you understand what is not safe to remove).
Otherwise: any time that a tool reports something found, I clean it, reboot, and note that when finished this round of scanning with the next tools, the spyware scans need to be done over again with all tools.
Only after running a complete scan with all the anti-spyware tools and successfully getting "0 results found successively with each tool, can one reliably say "I think it's clean".
Once you get that, uninstall all anti-spyware and AV tools that were installed on the system, and install the preferred End-Point preventative security tools.
Many of the tools that are great for scanning aren't the ones good for prevention.
HijackThis and Spybot can make for reasonable cleaning in some cases. But for prevention of malware, it's gotta be something like PrevX or Spyware Doctor.
And virus prevention should be eEye Blink, or ESET + Trend Micro, with some sort of IDS and network-wide patch management in place, e.g. Shavlik NetChk.
The major consideration with prevention of AV on user workstations, is that: realtime protection should be available, enabled, and configured properly.
The footprint should be minimal. Users shouldn't notice any slowdown,
This is typical of AV-comparatives. They don't test every single product in every single comparative, see their testing methodology and conditions for participation; they test a select list of products that have passed certain criteria, generally no more than 16 per test, and their board chooses which products.
Note, they didn't test other popular AV software such as Trend Micro, CA Antivirus, F-Prot, Fortinet, Panda, ZoneAlarm, DriveSentry, Cisco Security Agent, nProtect, eSafe, in this test, either.
Also, the vendor has to choose to participate and have applied for inclusion. AV comparitives won't just take any AV products they see off the street and test them, the vendor participates in this, and signed an application and agreement with the vendor's seal. The vendor gets to provide software and license keys, pay some fees for using AV Comparitives logos, etc, and make some agreements regarding the exchange of missed virus/malware samples.
Qualified Candidates: At AV-Comparatives we limit the participants in our tests to about sixteen and where possible we include only good and reliable products/vendors. Due to this, we have devised various requirements in order to take part. One of these is the detection of a minimum percentage of SET A test set. We believe that even for new vendors this should be easy to pass, as long as they have a good engine (products included in the current main tests all scored between 97-100% over SET A). This also aids us identifying and filtering out rouge anti-virus vendors. Fulfilling this requirement does not necessarily mean that a product has good detection rates over SET B.
AV/Anti-malware software should be a product that can expunge/protect against one type of security threat: rogue/malicious software.
Nothing beyond the product should be required for expunging malware. If you are updating and the software maker is doing their job, that security threat is permanently dispensed with, and you can move on to other threat categories, if they ever become important to you.
If not, you are secure, and done.
Security is a process, not a product, refers to security in general, which is a lot harder than security against specific types of threats.
Anti-malware won't stop an insider from offloading sensitive customer records to their USB stick and selling them off to some ID thief living in india.
Well, you use another security tool for that: group policy. Configure all workstations so that removable media is allowed, and you no longer need to worry about USB sticks.
Group policy won't protect against a hacker guessing your admin password, FTP'ing into your server, and pulling the files.
There's a product for that too: A firewall.
Which you install, and configure properly.
Voila: hacker FTP'ing in is no longer a threat.
Security is not just a process, but a bunch of products and proper configuration of those products.
Probably one of the most important products is proper training and education of your staff, and proper configuration and choice of what issues to educate them about, and how you configure your organization's HUMAN security policies, for example, how you prevent random untrusted outsiders from pretending to be "maintenance" and gaining unescorted/unapproved access to your server room, from an employee @ front desk who knows where the key is.
There aren't many good recursive DNS servers that will run on Windows XP.. unless you're a power user and have a 2003 or 2008 server on your LAN that can run MS DNS Service...
They haven't ruled out punishments like sending someone to pwn kids' level 80 Rogue in PK.
Imposing cash fines/property seizure type penalties.
Or (oh no) use firewalls to block access from their network to World of Warcraft, Facebook, Wikipedia, Youtube, etc, while instead forcing kids to watch the chinese equivalent to Don't copy that floppy II and similar propaganda.
Some pretty severe punishments can be non-physical in nature.
Realistically.. what can be done about prison rape.. throw the perpetrator in jail? oh wait...
Personally, I think prisons should be required to monitor 24/7 for such activities, video surveillance over every nook and cranny, and isolate prisoners at all times when not directly supervised: no 'visiting' other prisoners' cells, no case at any time whatsoever that multiple prisoners are in the same cell: no unsupervised groups, period.
Criminals by the very definition require that isolation and supervision, they are an unstable lot and cannot be trusted
Toddlers are not mentally stable and can't make their own rational decisions, which is exactly what he was referring to.
Some toddlers would pass for mentally stable, and some can make their own rational decisions.
Most toddlers make some irrational decisions, but almost everyone makes some irrational decisions.
For example: type of food to eat, is often an irrational decision many people make based on arbitrary preference.
A toddler definitely knows if they want to walk about for a while to relieve some boredom.
China: You were shot in the head 20 years ago... every few years, the doctor is working on the bullet a little more, taking another piece out safely. You can't leave the bed until every bit is removed.
The US: You haven't quite been shot yet.. you are strapped down to a table, fully restrained, the gun is above your head, at the other end of a tube also strapped to your head, the trigger was pulled 20 years ago.
The bullet is inching down a few centimeters every year.
It's only a matter of time before it hits you... one year was the Sonny Bono copyright extension act... next year was the DMCA... pirate act of 2004... next year was the broadcast flag......
The bullet is coming towards you.. they've put you on just enough tranquilizers to keep you from moving, you're fully conscious of your fate, and there are lots of people in the room, but they've all got iPod earbuds or plugs in their ears, so they can't hear your screams..
google is going to takeover the world
google is skynet
google is your friend
google is watching you
google is hiring at home workers
google is making us stupid
google is a number
google is broken
Other fun things to try: windows is... (Hint: the first suggestion is an error message)
vista is.... (first suggestion is slow)
windows 7 is...
linux is.....
linux is better than windows
linux is distributed by several different companies whose versions of linux are sometimes called
linux is illegal ...
I suppose google suggest is not to be trusted (EG)
humanity is the devil
humanity is a virus
humanity is overrated
humanity is doomed
humanity is the devil lyrics humanity is a parade of fools
humanity is the devil blogspot
humanity is a cancer
humanity is an ocean
humanity is good
humans are...
humans are dead
humans are dead lyrics
humans are aliens
humans are omnivores
humans are a virus
humans are inherently evil
humans are apes
humans are mammals
humans are carnivores
humans are herbivores
to be human....
to be human is to err
mankind is....
mankind is obsolete
mankind is no island
mankind is your mask
mankind is obsolete lyrics
mankind is obsolete torrent
mankind is your mask achievement
mankind is my business
mankind is doomed
mankind is obsolete myspace
The new PayPal APIs allow developers to engage customers directly within their own applications rather than forcing them to port users off to the actual PayPal site. Users who don't even use PayPal can actually sign up for PayPal within the third-party application and begin making PayPal payments seamlessly from within the third-party application.
So now you're relying on a third party application running on your vendor's website to not secretly cubbyhole a copy of your PayPal password as you use the third-party site to login or register for PP ?
Despite your er, fascination with keys, I don't think they're necessary and represent a point of failure.
I mean.. I've had problems with my key falling out of the ignition on my old car when it's in the on position, and let me tell you that's not fun, then I have to scramble around on the floor looking for the key to turn it off.
It would be rather uncool for that to happen in an emergency.
That doesn't seem very reliable.. a shielded two-position click button or shielded simple up/down switch is much more reliable, if a quality part is used, and won't be activated accidentally by the driver.
They may have the downside that a kid who isn't supposed to touch the button might have an easier time hitting it than the key, but it's so minor, that it's not worth the extra risk of having keys fall out of the ignition.
Actually, i'd rather that manufacturers were required by law to make and use only reliable components in vehicles, test everything to exacting standards, and have multiple failsafes.
For example, the throttle should have a failsafe, that if breaking is being applied at high force, the throttle is forced to be closed.
There should be multiple controls for safely performing a shutdown, but all of them need to be protected in a way to guarantee they can't be accidentally activated by the driver or maliciously/jokingly activated by a passenger, without the driver having warning.
I don't know about what other sites might be offering as NewSID.exe, but I got NewSID from Microsoft's web site a few months ago as part of the "SysInternals Suite" ZIP file, and the Newsid.exe id'ed as version 4.10 had a SHA1 digest of:
Mark Russinovich seems very knowledgeable to me, but I think he has made a mistake. There is general agreement that NewSID is necessary.
There would be some question of.. does it even matter? The general agreement resulted from Microsoft policies and statements regarding SIDs that were taken at face value that they needed to be unique. Microsoft essentially admitting they are wrong all along and SIDs don't need to be unique.
General agreements can be wrong. Following voodoo practices like "Someone ran into a problem once, and running NewSID seemed to fix it", therefore SIDs need to be unique, is faulty reasoning.
Surely Microsoft has done some sort of basic testing before making a revision to their recommendations that could incur support costs to MS customers if inaccurate. It would seem to be make more sense to advise against SID changing, but still provide the tools to do it, in any case.
I don't believe MS ever documented in the platform APIs that a field called Machine SID was available as a unique id.
Someone relying on the SID would be coding by coincidence, and should definitely be prepared to fix the bug in their software, if their assumptions should prove wrong...
Even before Microsoft's changes, many people are not generating new SIDs for cloned systems, or using sysprep to handle cloned systems, for that matter.
Slashdot Mirror
The biggest problem (IMO) is the Linux kernel still uses GPLv2... that's broken and should be fixed. The kernel should move to GPLv3.
That's got to be one of a mariner's worst nightmares...
Hard to top that... capsizing amidst a swarm of hungry sharks, maybe.
I see Lulu as in a very precarious position here. It's likely just as much a result of new competition in the market, and not just Lulu needing more money to pay the bills.
The self-publishing market is very small. Lulu cannot afford to give up business to competitors, as there may very well be not enough of it to go around.
Lulu sells or used to sell things via retailers Amazon.
However: recently, Amazon is now in direct competition with Lulu through Amazon Publishing Services and CreateSpace.
The new competition from Amazon and others has the potential to cut off Lulu's air supply.
In addition, Amazon has the Kindle, and their own proprietary file format, soon Barnes and Noble will too. They can publish eBooks for authors, and the authors then don't need Lulu.
With Amazon's services, authors can even get their books printed, in addition to making eBooks, so it is likely the authors simply take all their business to Amazon, which means, they no longer have a need to buy anything from Lulu.
If Lulu doesn't get new books, they don't get to take a cut from sales of new books, and then they die.
For many authors: DRM is considered essential or mandatory for eBook publication. Or at least, considered an advantage, extra protection for the author's work.
So.. any publication / distribution channel that doesn't offer an option to utilize DRM technologies could be seen to be at a substantial competitive disadvantage, while they are simply handing customers over to the likes of Amazon, who do offer DRM.
In this case, files get moved to quarantine, maybe, and user gets a nice taste of why they shouldn't tempt fate by doing weird s***.
It's also conceivable, something will possess the user one day to type X5O!P%@AP[4\PZX54(P^)7CC)7}$EICAR-STANDARD-ANTIVIRUS-TEST-FILE!$H+H*
Or some other commonly recognized virus pattern into a text file.
Neither in that case, nor this one, is it a poor design for the AV program to have a false positive in such cases.
It's why AV software quarantines malware instead of outright deleting, and why there is generally an option to whitelist or exclude certain directories from scanning.
But in the case of MalwareBytes, the software is free, so it should definitely be no surprise to you that you don't have something that is currently an Enterprise-grade product when you use it.
Instead i'm going to make lots of recommendations. Cleaning an infection is all about using lots of tools, since no one tool is perfect, every tool has a gap in what it can detect or clean. But when it comes to prevention as few tools as possible should be used, and low-overhead choices should be used, since every tool installed and running slows down the workstation, and big-footprint tools have a big negative effect on users' productivity.
I've also emphasized the need to do the initial cleaning with the infected drive as the secondary in a second machine.
I don't recommend this. Your scanner has no way of knowing the secondary drive is a complete system.
Some malware/viruses make registry and system-level changes, and these registry changes can have serious long-term consequences. Get anti-malware on the system that can fix the registry in the proper removal process.
In the extreme case, running the scan on the medium plugged into another system, can result in you rendering the disk you are scanning an unbootable OS.
For cleaning process, I recommend having a bootable USB stick, with a hardware write-protect switch. Always set the physical write-protect switch to the read-only position when plugging into the system being cleaned.
Then install anti-virus/anti-malware tools, I use:
Avira Antivirus
SUPERAntispyware
Malwarebytes Anti-malware Technician Edition
PC Tools Spyware Doctor
PrevX Enterprise
Lavasoft Adaware Business
ESET NOD.32
ComboFix
HijackThis
Copy tools installers to some innocuous folder on the hard drive, or have them installed to run from USB.
Run a Malwarebytes quick scan first, if possible, since it's fastest. Since the USB stick MBAM is installed on is read-only, malware can't delete or tamper with mbam.exe. Sometimes it doesn't work: some malware detects specific cleaning tools.
In that case, use a different program. Or, actually have various methods of stopping malware from detecting the program: things like hexediting strings in anti-malware executables to make the anti-malware "undetectable" by malware's naive procedures.
Anyways, after the initial pass with some scanner, it will generally require a reboot, then another pass with the scanner to delete locked files. Do that.
After all that, boot from a bootable USB stick, which is either an Avira, ESET, BitDefender, or Kaspersky rescue disk image, and run a full scan from rescue media.
Then boot back into the system... and run a complete scan with all 6 anti-spyware tools (except HijackThis and Combofix, only use use once, pick only one AV tool to use. Only remove things with HijackThis if you understand what is not safe to remove).
Otherwise: any time that a tool reports something found, I clean it, reboot, and note that when finished this round of scanning with the next tools, the spyware scans need to be done over again with all tools.
Only after running a complete scan with all the anti-spyware tools and successfully getting "0 results found successively with each tool, can one reliably say "I think it's clean".
Once you get that, uninstall all anti-spyware and AV tools that were installed on the system, and install the preferred End-Point preventative security tools.
Many of the tools that are great for scanning aren't the ones good for prevention.
HijackThis and Spybot can make for reasonable cleaning in some cases. But for prevention of malware, it's gotta be something like PrevX or Spyware Doctor.
And virus prevention should be eEye Blink, or ESET + Trend Micro, with some sort of IDS and network-wide patch management in place, e.g. Shavlik NetChk.
The major consideration with prevention of AV on user workstations, is that: realtime protection should be available, enabled, and configured properly. The footprint should be minimal. Users shouldn't notice any slowdown,
How many average windows users do you see taking important files and renaming them to Personal_AV.exe ?
For most windows users, 'hide file extensions' is checked, so it would already have to be a .EXE file that they are renaming.
I won't doubt the possibility of a false positive; however, it seems quite unlikely in actual practice to see that.
Simple methods can be quite effective sometimes, as long as they are quite careful about what filenames they single out as possibly bad.
I would expect they have to use the more complicated methods for malware that randomizes its filenames, anyways.....
Agreed...
They should have instead tested:
And then maybe considered testing some of the lesser-known or that I believe to be outdated and/or quite ineffective:
This is typical of AV-comparatives. They don't test every single product in every single comparative, see their testing methodology and conditions for participation; they test a select list of products that have passed certain criteria, generally no more than 16 per test, and their board chooses which products.
Note, they didn't test other popular AV software such as Trend Micro, CA Antivirus, F-Prot, Fortinet, Panda, ZoneAlarm, DriveSentry, Cisco Security Agent, nProtect, eSafe, in this test, either.
Also, the vendor has to choose to participate and have applied for inclusion. AV comparitives won't just take any AV products they see off the street and test them, the vendor participates in this, and signed an application and agreement with the vendor's seal. The vendor gets to provide software and license keys, pay some fees for using AV Comparitives logos, etc, and make some agreements regarding the exchange of missed virus/malware samples.
Also, see here
:
Yes, but malware is a product.
AV/Anti-malware software should be a product that can expunge/protect against one type of security threat: rogue/malicious software.
Nothing beyond the product should be required for expunging malware. If you are updating and the software maker is doing their job, that security threat is permanently dispensed with, and you can move on to other threat categories, if they ever become important to you.
If not, you are secure, and done.
Security is a process, not a product, refers to security in general, which is a lot harder than security against specific types of threats.
Anti-malware won't stop an insider from offloading sensitive customer records to their USB stick and selling them off to some ID thief living in india.
Well, you use another security tool for that: group policy. Configure all workstations so that removable media is allowed, and you no longer need to worry about USB sticks.
Group policy won't protect against a hacker guessing your admin password, FTP'ing into your server, and pulling the files.
There's a product for that too: A firewall. Which you install, and configure properly. Voila: hacker FTP'ing in is no longer a threat.
Security is not just a process, but a bunch of products and proper configuration of those products.
Probably one of the most important products is proper training and education of your staff, and proper configuration and choice of what issues to educate them about, and how you configure your organization's HUMAN security policies, for example, how you prevent random untrusted outsiders from pretending to be "maintenance" and gaining unescorted/unapproved access to your server room, from an employee @ front desk who knows where the key is.
OpenDNS does by default, but you can turn it off.
There aren't many good recursive DNS servers that will run on Windows XP.. unless you're a power user and have a 2003 or 2008 server on your LAN that can run MS DNS Service...
They haven't ruled out punishments like sending someone to pwn kids' level 80 Rogue in PK. Imposing cash fines/property seizure type penalties.
Or (oh no) use firewalls to block access from their network to World of Warcraft, Facebook, Wikipedia, Youtube, etc, while instead forcing kids to watch the chinese equivalent to Don't copy that floppy II and similar propaganda.
Some pretty severe punishments can be non-physical in nature.
Realistically.. what can be done about prison rape.. throw the perpetrator in jail? oh wait...
Personally, I think prisons should be required to monitor 24/7 for such activities, video surveillance over every nook and cranny, and isolate prisoners at all times when not directly supervised: no 'visiting' other prisoners' cells, no case at any time whatsoever that multiple prisoners are in the same cell: no unsupervised groups, period.
Criminals by the very definition require that isolation and supervision, they are an unstable lot and cannot be trusted
C) Are mentally stable and can make their own decisions
Without an objective criteria for mental stability, that's a real hard one to avoid the ''captors'' satisfying.
They can claim that someone demonstrated to have an internet addition is unstable and can't make good decisions.
For example, if they choose to leave, they will be satisfying their addiction in a way that harms them, negatively impacts their social life, etc.
Further, their mental stability may be questioned on the basis of them spending 30 hours a week online, instead of going out with RL friends.
Toddlers are not mentally stable and can't make their own rational decisions, which is exactly what he was referring to.
Some toddlers would pass for mentally stable, and some can make their own rational decisions.
Most toddlers make some irrational decisions, but almost everyone makes some irrational decisions. For example: type of food to eat, is often an irrational decision many people make based on arbitrary preference.
A toddler definitely knows if they want to walk about for a while to relieve some boredom.
Better analogy...
China: You were shot in the head 20 years ago... every few years, the doctor is working on the bullet a little more, taking another piece out safely. You can't leave the bed until every bit is removed.
The US: You haven't quite been shot yet.. you are strapped down to a table, fully restrained, the gun is above your head, at the other end of a tube also strapped to your head, the trigger was pulled 20 years ago.
The bullet is inching down a few centimeters every year.
It's only a matter of time before it hits you... one year was the Sonny Bono copyright extension act... next year was the DMCA... pirate act of 2004... next year was the broadcast flag......
The bullet is coming towards you.. they've put you on just enough tranquilizers to keep you from moving, you're fully conscious of your fate, and there are lots of people in the room, but they've all got iPod earbuds or plugs in their ears, so they can't hear your screams..
So which one's worse?
cnet is ....
Google suggests: cnet is down
google is.....
google is going to takeover the world
google is skynet
google is your friend
google is watching you
google is hiring at home workers
google is making us stupid
google is a number
google is broken
Other fun things to try: windows is... (Hint: the first suggestion is an error message)
vista is.... (first suggestion is slow)
windows 7 is ...
linux is.....
...
linux is better than windows
linux is distributed by several different companies whose versions of linux are sometimes called
linux is illegal
I suppose google suggest is not to be trusted (EG)
humanity is...
humanity is the devil
humanity is a virus
humanity is overrated
humanity is doomed
humanity is the devil lyrics
humanity is a parade of fools
humanity is the devil blogspot
humanity is a cancer
humanity is an ocean
humanity is good
humans are ...
humans are dead
humans are dead lyrics
humans are aliens
humans are omnivores
humans are a virus
humans are inherently evil
humans are apes
humans are mammals
humans are carnivores
humans are herbivores
to be human ....
to be human is to err
mankind is ....
mankind is obsolete
mankind is no island
mankind is your mask
mankind is obsolete lyrics
mankind is obsolete torrent
mankind is your mask achievement
mankind is my business
mankind is doomed
mankind is obsolete myspace
The company should be allowed to explain what type of encryption the data was protected with when informing customers of the breach
But should not be relieved of the notification. Mere data encryption does not assure the info has not been exposed and won't be, based on the breach.
What makes it simpler is automatic selection by the kernel of which binary to execute, which makes the binaries interoperable with more systems.
Without developers needing to distribute multiple packages or ad-hoc scripts to try and detect CPU arch.
Instead developers can distribute a simple 'Linux' binary for all libraries and programs.
Scripts are not as robust. Fat binaries are more useful and more convenient.
You can get the source Here
The new PayPal APIs allow developers to engage customers directly within their own applications rather than forcing them to port users off to the actual PayPal site. Users who don't even use PayPal can actually sign up for PayPal within the third-party application and begin making PayPal payments seamlessly from within the third-party application.
So now you're relying on a third party application running on your vendor's website to not secretly cubbyhole a copy of your PayPal password as you use the third-party site to login or register for PP ?
well you do not have to use the service they offer. The great thing about America baring taxes and death, is that you have a choice.
You don't have a choice, because they advertised it was X. And gave you Y instead.
You chose X, but they gave you Y. And in this case, Y < 70% * X.
In many areas, big cable companies have a monopoly. You can't go get your Cable internet service from company B instead of company A.
DSL might not be available, or the speed may be piss poor.
You don't really have a choice at all, in most cases. You can buy their service, or go without decent speed internet.
Despite your er, fascination with keys, I don't think they're necessary and represent a point of failure.
I mean.. I've had problems with my key falling out of the ignition on my old car when it's in the on position, and let me tell you that's not fun, then I have to scramble around on the floor looking for the key to turn it off.
It would be rather uncool for that to happen in an emergency.
That doesn't seem very reliable.. a shielded two-position click button or shielded simple up/down switch is much more reliable, if a quality part is used, and won't be activated accidentally by the driver.
They may have the downside that a kid who isn't supposed to touch the button might have an easier time hitting it than the key, but it's so minor, that it's not worth the extra risk of having keys fall out of the ignition.
Actually, i'd rather that manufacturers were required by law to make and use only reliable components in vehicles, test everything to exacting standards, and have multiple failsafes.
For example, the throttle should have a failsafe, that if breaking is being applied at high force, the throttle is forced to be closed.
There should be multiple controls for safely performing a shutdown, but all of them need to be protected in a way to guarantee they can't be accidentally activated by the driver or maliciously/jokingly activated by a passenger, without the driver having warning.
I don't know about what other sites might be offering as NewSID.exe, but I got NewSID from Microsoft's web site a few months ago as part of the "SysInternals Suite" ZIP file, and the Newsid.exe id'ed as version 4.10 had a SHA1 digest of:
4c64df34ef8f8faa757e1d4482486453d7425752 newsid.exe
Mark Russinovich seems very knowledgeable to me, but I think he has made a mistake. There is general agreement that NewSID is necessary.
There would be some question of.. does it even matter? The general agreement resulted from Microsoft policies and statements regarding SIDs that were taken at face value that they needed to be unique. Microsoft essentially admitting they are wrong all along and SIDs don't need to be unique.
General agreements can be wrong. Following voodoo practices like "Someone ran into a problem once, and running NewSID seemed to fix it", therefore SIDs need to be unique, is faulty reasoning.
Surely Microsoft has done some sort of basic testing before making a revision to their recommendations that could incur support costs to MS customers if inaccurate. It would seem to be make more sense to advise against SID changing, but still provide the tools to do it, in any case.
I don't believe MS ever documented in the platform APIs that a field called Machine SID was available as a unique id. Someone relying on the SID would be coding by coincidence, and should definitely be prepared to fix the bug in their software, if their assumptions should prove wrong...
Even before Microsoft's changes, many people are not generating new SIDs for cloned systems, or using sysprep to handle cloned systems, for that matter.