Easily thwartable. Seriously.... for the WiFi... just modify the encryption protocol so the source cannot influence the size or precise timing of the encrypted payload.
Since BBC control the iPlayer.... why not just put access controls on their website?
Users will be prompted to enter their street address and Television License ID# to link their Browser and IP address, before they can start playing content.
Also, if they don't have one, prompt them to register on the website and pay online Ala Netflix.
If the world is a better place with her dead, and Facebook users are responsible, then why would you want charges brought against them?
Because her life mattered. She was obviously mentally ill or suicidal.
The Facebook users egging her on were either murderers or accomplices, depending on her mental situation at the time.
Either way, It is important that this behavior is deterred: the FB users are a danger to society, and our justice system needs to make sure they do not get away with their actions which directly contributed to the chain of events causing the woman's death.
That lady is alone responsible for her death. Good riddance.
No... that lady was responsible for her actions that lead to her death.
Those Facebook posters are responsible for their actions that lead to the lady's death.
Her death is a consequence of her actions. Her actions were not the actions of a rational person, and they were directly incited by some other people, to stop this from ending peacefully with negotiations.
If it's not 1st degree murder, then it is at least manslaughter, and they should get 10 years a piece for it.
Why not just wait outside the house for a few days? Nobody had to die.
Because she's a danger to the public and an armed combatant resisting arrest. If they wait too long, she's more likely to take unexpected actions.
Also, they'll be tying up more law enforcement resources for a longer period; which can compromise the safety of the public due to reduced resources elsewhere.
Somebody else can die, because the officers are too busy at this scene: response time is increased.
In these situations, the officers are expected to take the steps to best ensure safety of the public, including establishing control of the situation expeditiously.
In a standoff, she is at risk of shooting her kids, shooting herself, or firing off stray bullets that accidentally hit neighbors.
Protecting public safety in the situation entails taking down the offender, using any means necessary, as soon as an opportunity presents itself to minimize the risk to others besides the offender.
After 4 hours worth; it's pretty obvious that the offender is not backing down, and waiting more hours only serves to increase risk and disruption and interference with their neighbors and the rest of the public.
It would count as unauthorized use for purposes of the CFAA.
Only if they implement access control measures on the system, such as warning banners, or access codes: to make it clear that this particular computer is not a system that the public is authorized to use, like an ATM.
I imagine there would have to changes to traffic law to fix that.
Mount red traffic lights on the undercarriage, and on longarms extending out a car-length ahead of the vehicle, so people know they are not allowed to turn while the vehicle is moving over them.
By law you're free to say any thing at anytime to any one. That can never be criminalized.
Go back to civics 101. Speech that results in a death is not legally protected speech.
The people on Facebook who egged her on to be non-compliant can be prosecuted as co-conspirators to her crime and culpably legally responsible for her being killed.
They need to Identify all those users and bring Murder charges against them for the woman's death And counts of attempted Murder against these FB users, because these people acted with intent to incite behavior which resulted in people dying and was calculated to result in dead police officers.
What we need to do is stipulate a rule: If the defendant is proven not-guilty of any one of the charges presented, then they are automatically released of all charges related to their chain actions that some have been deemed criminal.
Afford the defendant the CHOICE regarding which charge or charge(s) will be decided upon first, and in what order for the subsequent ones.
Any further charge for the same chain of actions would be double jeopardy.
So if one of the charges is bogus, the Defendant will have that charge heard first, and once found innocent, be cleared of all the others.
That should encourage prosecutors to only charge the offense for a certain series of actions that they actually have evidence for, And only make the high-quality charges, not specious or dubious ones "To hope something sticks"
Before they invented modern "liberal arts", so that people who couldn't handle the rigors of Mathematic, Philosophy, Physics, or Natural Science could still get a degree and claim to be intelligentsia.
Incorrect. The developer of vJoy, for example, recently acquired one to sign his open source kernel mode driver. Did a little fund-raiser to get $475
This does nothing for you if you're just learning Windows driver development and want to build a simple project. Maybe you don't have a hundred users who have deep pockets and want to help.
I don't know how he pulled it off, because the EV rules say you must supply organization information, and the CAs will require documentation such as your articles of organization. Also, take a look at the Symantec Enrollment form
Note that Organization Name and Job Title are also mandatory for their form.
Also, Submitting drivers to the Dev center now requires EV CODE SIGNING CERTIFICATE. Even though Microsoft will sign the final result, you have to have an EV CERT from a small list of approved CAs to sign your code before their portal will sign it per the new policy.
In case you have not noticed, the cheapest of the EV Certs is $1000 a Year; Only organizations can obtain these certificates, not individual developers.
Also, all EV Code signing certs require Smartcard/Token-Based Storage of your certificate's private key to ensure credentials cannot be shared, and you cannot automate the digital signing process.
Thus is a move to make sure Open Source software developers and individuals cannot produce Kernel mode drivers.
Add Adobe, AutoDesk, Microsoft, Oracle, SAP, IBM, McAfee, Symantec, and VMware to that list.
They're all on the 'software companies most likely to audit you' list.
And for these organizations, Audits are an increasingly important source of revenue.
So most of them are expanding audits, and switching products towards a cloud model; either way, to force customers to pay an additional periodic revenue stream..... especially MS.
> I think I'd be willing to argue in an interview that this does a memmove in 4 lines of C.
C requires you cast objects of type void* before dereferencing such as "*src".....
However, that bit of code crashes with a stack buffer overflow due to too many recursive calls if moving an object larger than approximately 200 Kilobytes. At that point you might as well do this, since it's essentially just using the stack as a temporary buffer anyways; and this can handle objects of a bit more size without crashing.....
void * my_memmove(void * dest, void * source, size_t n ) { char x[n]; for( int i = 0 ; i < n; (x[i] = *(char *)(source + i)) , i++ ); for( int i = 0 ; i < n; (*(char *)(dest + i) = x[i]) , i++ ) ; return dest; }
> If you're talking about the process being slower, ok yeah, by about 10 to 15 seconds or so.
That's kind of a big deal. Swiping used to be instant. Now Insert your Card and sit there waiting 10 extra seconds for the machine might not be a whole lot of time, but it is perceived as taking a lot longer, And compared to instant, it DOES take a lot longer for the machine to finish reading the card and say DONE.
Clever. But it has the complexity of a 10-line solution packed into 4 lines using C tricks that would be disallowed in real-world code by the style guide or code review.
Each use of the ternary operator counts as three additional lines worth.
Each use of a comma or semicolon as an operator counts as one additional line.
Each clause on the righthand side of an assignment operator that contains a relative comparison or boolean op counts as 1 additional line.
Unfortunately there are still some apps that only really run in windows. I have lots of Linux computers, but I still need windows for a few things.
Reply to This
Are you sure? Maybe you haven't really done much to look for a workaround for those things, and it's just convenient, because you know a Windows option......
That's clever, But each clause of a ? : statement, And Each Assignment in the same expression as a comparison or Boolean operator counts as an additional line of code.
Using those tricks is cheating and excessive usage is deprecated by most style guides.
Also, using memmove() in the implementation is clever, But also cheating.
a naïve (acceptable in an interview) implementation of memmove can be achieved in 4 lines of code. This isn't rocket science I'm asking about.
I am going to challenge you right here and now to produce your 4-Line my_memmove() function. This should be a breeze, since you've apparently done it before.
One line per statement. I will write you the test sequence that code has to pass with an identical result to the Linux Glibc2.12 memmove() function.
You would need to implement memmove because, believe it or not, there are people out there who
implement the libraries that memmove is implemented in.
Yes, there are people who have implemented LibC once or twice, then published. It can surely be accomplished; However.....
It is not less than a half day's project for a good C programmer to implement something like Memmove(); There are complications,
and unless you simply have implemented your own memmove several times, even an advanced C programmer is not going
to be able to just bang this out.
boutique car made by a startup company directed by an eccentric tycoon could possibly have had a supplier or design change. Unfathomable!
It is a bid odd, the timing of the supplier change, however. Did MobilEye deliver something substandard or that failed to meet specs? Did Tesla find a better option to replace MobilEye?
Maybe this is just a cost-cutting measure which happens to coincide with the fatal crash by chance alone.
Or... : Is Tesla dissatisfied with the MobilEye components on any rational basis, Or the supplier seemed like a good scapegoat, Or Tesla had unreasonable expectations from MobilEye's components?
"Implement memmov"? WTH would you do that? There's a reason that memmov() is a Library call.
It's rough to implement such subroutines accurately; even if you know what you are doing.
You don't need to be capable of doing low-level coding on a whim to be a competent C programmer.
Sounds like you're expecting the average C programmer to be a low-levell 3-Star or 4-Star pointers expert,
and your standards may be unreasonably high, there.
Except political assassinations do happen, unlike being put in a Moon-bound boxcar,
Calling for someone to be given the death penalty by the state and calling for them to be murdered with no due process are two different things.
I believe what Trump people were saying can only reasonably be held to imply the former, not the latter.
If Trump actually went to ask his supporters or others to commit the latter, then Trump himself could be committing a crime by attempting to
incite people to do so, and Trump himself could even go to jail if one of his supporters attempted a political assassination after he "called on" people to do that.
So I'm 80% sure Trump is smart enough to not call on people to Kill non-combatant Americans outside a sentence handed down by the legal system, now or in the future.....
Many law enforcement leaders are acting as if no crimes can be solved unless all cell phones are made more vulnerable.
Before Telephones; you could tell who someone was communicating with by monitoring their physical movements on foot.
Telephones would have made that harder..... Until wiretapping became a thing that was allowed.
Ubiquitous technology, And "Ease of Snooping" made law enforcers' lives easier at investigating crimes than it ever was before Telephones were invented.
At this point they are "used to it", attached to it, and probably feeling almost entitled to the right to eavesdrop on demand.
Millenial-style entitlement.
Instead of merely opposing them; however..... I propose that we as technologists should put together a list of "Recommended Alternative investigatory techniques"
For example: Communications may be encrypted, BUT service providers can still tell you Which Cell phone is Talking with which Cell phone.
And if you can get a court order, then require service provider and phone manufacturer to cooperate with planting a "Hardware snooping device" on the phone itself.
For example, a special hardware chip that can be covertly installed in the phone for info. gathering after a warrant is issued on a suspect.
Or a capability to clone their phone... E.g. Restore a backup from the cloud, and replace the suspect's original phone with a specially modified replica that will log the suspect's passphrase.
In either case, law enforcement covertly gain physical access to hardware, for at least a few minutes.
Slashdot Mirror
Easily thwartable.
Seriously.... for the WiFi... just modify the encryption protocol so the source cannot influence the size or precise timing of the encrypted payload.
Since BBC control the iPlayer.... why not just put access controls on their website?
Users will be prompted to enter their street address and Television License ID# to link their Browser and IP address, before they can start playing content.
Also, if they don't have one, prompt them to register on the website and pay online Ala Netflix.
If the world is a better place with her dead, and Facebook users are responsible, then why would you want charges brought against them?
Because her life mattered. She was obviously mentally ill or suicidal.
The Facebook users egging her on were either murderers or accomplices, depending on her mental situation at the time.
Either way, It is important that this behavior is deterred: the FB users are a danger to society, and our justice system needs to make sure they do not get away with their actions which directly contributed to the chain of events causing the woman's death.
That lady is alone responsible for her death. Good riddance.
No... that lady was responsible for her actions that lead to her death.
Those Facebook posters are responsible for their actions that lead to the lady's death.
Her death is a consequence of her actions.
Her actions were not the actions of a rational person, and they were directly incited by some other people,
to stop this from ending peacefully with negotiations.
If it's not 1st degree murder, then it is at least manslaughter, and they should get 10 years a piece for it.
Why not just wait outside the house for a few days? Nobody had to die.
Because she's a danger to the public and an armed combatant resisting arrest.
If they wait too long, she's more likely to take unexpected actions.
Also, they'll be tying up more law enforcement resources for a longer period; which can compromise the
safety of the public due to reduced resources elsewhere.
Somebody else can die, because the officers are too busy at this scene: response time is increased.
In these situations, the officers are expected to take the steps to best ensure safety of the public,
including establishing control of the situation expeditiously.
In a standoff, she is at risk of shooting her kids, shooting herself, or firing off stray bullets that accidentally hit
neighbors.
Protecting public safety in the situation entails taking down the offender, using any means necessary,
as soon as an opportunity presents itself to minimize the risk to others besides the offender.
After 4 hours worth; it's pretty obvious that the offender is not backing down, and waiting more hours only serves
to increase risk and disruption and interference with their neighbors and the rest of the public.
It would count as unauthorized use for purposes of the CFAA.
Only if they implement access control measures on the system, such as warning banners, or access codes: to make it clear that this particular computer is not a system that the public is authorized to use, like an ATM.
I imagine there would have to changes to traffic law to fix that.
Mount red traffic lights on the undercarriage, and on longarms extending out a car-length ahead of the vehicle, so people know they are not allowed to turn while the vehicle is moving over them.
Also, speed limit the busses to 5 to 10mph.
By law you're free to say any thing at anytime to any one. That can never be criminalized.
Go back to civics 101. Speech that results in a death is not legally protected speech.
The people on Facebook who egged her on to be non-compliant can be prosecuted as co-conspirators to her crime and culpably legally responsible for her being killed.
They need to Identify all those users and bring Murder charges against them for the woman's death And counts of attempted Murder against these FB users, because these people acted with intent to incite behavior which resulted in people dying and was calculated to result in dead police officers.
So if I, as a customer, sneaked into the store and printed thousand lottery tickets without paying, _that_ would be theft _and_ computer hacking
Breaking and Entering, And Theft.
I don't know about computer hacking; depends on what you had to do to get the machine to print tickets for you....
What we need to do is stipulate a rule: If the defendant is proven not-guilty of any one of the charges presented,
then they are automatically released of all charges related to their chain actions that some have been deemed criminal.
Afford the defendant the CHOICE regarding which charge or charge(s) will be decided upon first, and in what order for the subsequent ones.
Any further charge for the same chain of actions would be double jeopardy.
So if one of the charges is bogus, the Defendant will have that charge heard first, and once found innocent, be cleared of all the others.
That should encourage prosecutors to only charge the offense for a certain series of actions that they actually have evidence for, And only make the high-quality charges, not specious or dubious ones "To hope something sticks"
Before they invented modern "liberal arts", so that people who couldn't handle the rigors of Mathematic, Philosophy, Physics, or Natural Science could still get a degree and claim to be intelligentsia.
exposure to most new pathogens is likely what keeps our immune systems training
Does you no good if you are exposed to multiple potentially serious pathogens at the same time, and the results can be fatal.
Seriously though, I imagine those going to the Olympics will have received their respective vaccinations well in advance.
This may be shocking for you to learn: But there are life-threatening diseases you can get from contaminated water which there is no vaccine against.
Available vaccines mostly only mitigate diseases which spread from person to person.
Incorrect. The developer of vJoy, for example, recently acquired one to sign his open source kernel mode driver. Did a little fund-raiser to get $475
This does nothing for you if you're just learning Windows driver development and want to build a simple project.
Maybe you don't have a hundred users who have deep pockets and want to help.
I don't know how he pulled it off, because the EV rules say you must supply organization information, and the CAs will require documentation such as your articles of organization.
Also, take a look at the Symantec Enrollment form
Note that Organization Name and Job Title are also mandatory for their form.
Also, Submitting drivers to the Dev center now requires EV CODE SIGNING CERTIFICATE.
Even though Microsoft will sign the final result, you have to have an EV CERT from a small list of approved CAs to
sign your code before their portal will sign it per the new policy.
In case you have not noticed, the cheapest of the EV Certs is $1000 a Year; Only organizations can obtain these certificates, not individual developers.
Also, all EV Code signing certs require Smartcard/Token-Based Storage of your certificate's private key to ensure credentials cannot be shared, and you cannot automate the digital signing process.
Thus is a move to make sure Open Source software developers and individuals cannot produce Kernel mode drivers.
Add Adobe, AutoDesk, Microsoft, Oracle, SAP, IBM, McAfee, Symantec, and VMware to that list.
They're all on the 'software companies most likely to audit you' list.
And for these organizations, Audits are an increasingly important source of revenue.
So most of them are expanding audits, and switching products towards a cloud model; either way, to
force customers to pay an additional periodic revenue stream..... especially MS.
> I think I'd be willing to argue in an interview that this does a memmove in 4 lines of C.
; (x[i] = *(char *)(source + i)) , i++ ) ; ; (*(char *)(dest + i) = x[i]) , i++ ) ;
C requires you cast objects of type void* before dereferencing such as "*src".....
However, that bit of code crashes with a stack buffer overflow due to too many recursive calls if moving an object larger than approximately 200 Kilobytes.
At that point you might as well do this, since it's essentially just using the stack as a temporary buffer anyways; and this can handle objects of a bit more size without crashing.....
void * my_memmove(void * dest, void * source, size_t n ) {
char x[n];
for( int i = 0 ; i < n
for( int i = 0 ; i < n
return dest; }
> If you're talking about the process being slower, ok yeah, by about 10 to 15 seconds or so.
That's kind of a big deal. Swiping used to be instant. Now Insert your Card and sit there waiting 10 extra seconds for the machine might not be a whole lot of time, but it is perceived as taking a lot longer, And compared to instant, it DOES take a lot longer for the machine to finish reading the card and say DONE.
Clever. But it has the complexity of a 10-line solution packed into 4 lines using C tricks that would be disallowed in real-world code by the style guide or code review.
Each use of the ternary operator counts as three additional lines worth.
Each use of a comma or semicolon as an operator counts as one additional line.
Each clause on the righthand side of an assignment operator that contains a relative comparison or boolean op counts as 1 additional line.
Unfortunately there are still some apps that only really run in windows. I have lots of Linux computers, but I still need windows for a few things. Reply to This
Are you sure? Maybe you haven't really done much to look for a workaround for those things, and it's just convenient, because you know a Windows option......
That's clever, But each clause of a ? : statement, And Each Assignment in the same expression as a comparison or Boolean operator counts as an additional line of code.
Using those tricks is cheating and excessive usage is deprecated by most style guides.
Also, using memmove() in the implementation is clever, But also cheating.
a naïve (acceptable in an interview) implementation of memmove can be achieved in 4 lines of code. This isn't rocket science I'm asking about.
I am going to challenge you right here and now to produce your 4-Line my_memmove() function. This should be a breeze, since you've apparently done it before.
One line per statement.
I will write you the test sequence that code has to pass with an identical result to the Linux Glibc2.12 memmove() function.
Here's the test sequence: http://pastebin.com/Bix6mvqv
You would need to implement memmove because, believe it or not, there are people out there who implement the libraries that memmove is implemented in.
Yes, there are people who have implemented LibC once or twice, then published. It can surely be accomplished; However..... It is not less than a half day's project for a good C programmer to implement something like Memmove(); There are complications, and unless you simply have implemented your own memmove several times, even an advanced C programmer is not going to be able to just bang this out.
boutique car made by a startup company directed by an eccentric tycoon could possibly have had a supplier or design change. Unfathomable!
It is a bid odd, the timing of the supplier change, however. Did MobilEye deliver something substandard or that failed to meet specs? Did Tesla find a better option to replace MobilEye?
Maybe this is just a cost-cutting measure which happens to coincide with the fatal crash by chance alone.
Or... : Is Tesla dissatisfied with the MobilEye components on any rational basis, Or the supplier seemed like a good scapegoat, Or Tesla had unreasonable expectations from MobilEye's components?
"Implement memmov"? WTH would you do that? There's a reason that memmov() is a Library call.
It's rough to implement such subroutines accurately; even if you know what you are doing.
You don't need to be capable of doing low-level coding on a whim to be a competent C programmer.
Sounds like you're expecting the average C programmer to be a low-levell 3-Star or 4-Star pointers expert, and your standards may be unreasonably high, there.
Except political assassinations do happen, unlike being put in a Moon-bound boxcar,
Calling for someone to be given the death penalty by the state and calling for them to be murdered with no due process are two different things.
I believe what Trump people were saying can only reasonably be held to imply the former, not the latter.
If Trump actually went to ask his supporters or others to commit the latter, then Trump himself could be committing a crime by attempting to incite people to do so, and Trump himself could even go to jail if one of his supporters attempted a political assassination after he "called on" people to do that.
So I'm 80% sure Trump is smart enough to not call on people to Kill non-combatant Americans outside a sentence handed down by the legal system, now or in the future.....
Many law enforcement leaders are acting as if no crimes can be solved unless all cell phones are made more vulnerable.
Before Telephones; you could tell who someone was communicating with by monitoring their physical movements on foot. Telephones would have made that harder..... Until wiretapping became a thing that was allowed.
Ubiquitous technology, And "Ease of Snooping" made law enforcers' lives easier at investigating crimes than it ever was before Telephones were invented.
At this point they are "used to it", attached to it, and probably feeling almost entitled to the right to eavesdrop on demand. Millenial-style entitlement.
Instead of merely opposing them; however..... I propose that we as technologists should put together a list of "Recommended Alternative investigatory techniques"
For example: Communications may be encrypted, BUT service providers can still tell you Which Cell phone is Talking with which Cell phone.
And if you can get a court order, then require service provider and phone manufacturer to cooperate with planting a "Hardware snooping device" on the phone itself.
For example, a special hardware chip that can be covertly installed in the phone for info. gathering after a warrant is issued on a suspect.
Or a capability to clone their phone... E.g. Restore a backup from the cloud, and replace the suspect's original phone with a specially modified replica that will log the suspect's passphrase.
In either case, law enforcement covertly gain physical access to hardware, for at least a few minutes.