Basically: it's about Krayon, which used to be
part of the KOffice suite. The program is not
actually on the SuSE CD, but there is a leftover
entry in the KDE menu, labeled Krayon.
Krayon is supposed to conflict with the "Crayon"
trademark, which is held by Seidel Softwareservice .
Gravenreuth the "lawyer" who wrote this Abmahnung
stated that he's prepared to settle with SuSE.
> Wouldn't Crayola (sp?) have issues with that lawsuit.
They probably wouldn't be able to sue, since they are in a different industry. Crayon is in the same industry (they sell computer graphic stuff) so their case is much stronger.
Looking at the web site, though - the design is so plain, that it looks like the company has been setup solely for the purpose of this lawsuit.
There is not a single decent graphic on their site - and that's what they claim to be selling...
All their products are CDROMs with image collections. The actual company is "Software Service Seidel", the "Crayon Vertriebs GmbH" which is their subsidiary, was founded last summer. (see: "wir über uns" )
I find it fascinating that people such as yourself can only see evil in the United States and our elected leaders.
Ah - but he doesn't claim that the US is evil,
just that they are hated. This is based on
perception of the US, not necessarily on reality.
For example the Taliban owed the US big time for all the support against the invading Soviet army. Nevertheless they clearly did hate the US.
So if large amounts of people hating you is a threat to your way of life and your saftey, and on the other hand even people who get help from you, hate you - then I'd think you have a PR problem which ought to be addressed.
I'm sorry, but are you *trying* to miss the point? Encrypting the control link to a satelite is not specific to satelites in any way, it's just another application of encryption. The only part where it becomes satelite-specific is on the payload level of the protocol. Ideally you'd not tell anyone about *that*.
Assuming you haven't managed to implement *any* security, you'd probably be better of, using someone else's system, no?
No you don't need to post *your* code and say "hey look at this, if you find the hole in it, you can break my satellite". You can however use a proven technology to secure your link, and yes, for that to be proven it needs to be open.
You can still have your obscurity - you don't need to tell anyone which protocol you are using, even your command structure can stay just as secret as it was before - it's on another protocol layer.
If you were to use (random example) ipsec, and send your SATCOM (made up) protocol over that, and then someone finds a hole in ipsec. Well then you are just as secure, as you are now - the attacker still needs to break SATCOM, as well.
Well, having code up for public review will only do you good, if you have a decent security design as a starting point. If you already know, that all which protects you, is an obscure command set, then you won't get anything new out of this review.
Anyway, there are plenty of secure protocols available, you could take one of them (or even an implementation of them) and use it on your link.
You could even review the code, to make sure there are no implementation errors, and should you find a bug you might even *gasp* give back to the community, and submit a patch.
Which would have the benefit that you'd stay in sync with the other people's code, and will probably at least give you a review of the patch.
The statement most crackers don't have access to a huge radio antenna with which to transmit relies on the applicable
transmitters (all of them) to be secured properly.
I would have assumed that's the case, but then I'd have assumed that control links to satellites would use a secure protocol, too...
Also, if you want to defend yourself against rogue states, you can't count on them not being able to build a suitable transmitter. As we've all learned recently, some terrorists have very considerable resources to command, too.
Re:Simple question..
on
The Euro
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
No disagreements, just want to add something here: One of the results of having not joined the Euro, is that the European Central Bank is now located in Frankfurt, instead of London.
London is the number one financial place in Europe, it would have been pretty hard for another country to get this institution, if Britain had joined right away.
Another of the differences though, lies in document formats. Virtually all MS formats allow for embedding executables, without any security limitations. I think it's fair to say that the general attitude that "features matter a lot more than security" - which MS has displayed in the past, is a big factor, too.
If all we wanted from a gift was flexibility, we would just give each other money, right?
Something like this would rate even lower then a gift certificate, it basically amounts to "I can't be bothered to spend any time thinking about you and what you might want, so instead I give you money - in a nice frame."
The only difference this system will make, is that now you take away the nice frame. If you give this to anyone you like, you shouldn't be surprised of the consequences.:)
Providing a service nobody wants - via the internet - wooohoo - sounds like a future failed business to me.
In fairness though: just because something works the same in Windows as in Linux, doesn't mean the user knows it. What if the user were starting with Linux instead of being a convert?
Besides, I think the original users comment was aiming to illustrate that the style in the Linux community can be quite rude. For a while I was following a user group for Linux newbies, thinking I could help out a little. I was so digusted by the newbie-bashing that I dropped out again.
Example: "Why doesn't Linux have virus scanners?" - Answer: "RTFM".
Fact is, that if you were to look for an article to explain that, you'd be hard pressed to find one, in most distribution manuals.
Do a google search on "Robin Socha" for a seemingly endless supply of examples. (Sorry for singling out just one person, but I think he deserves it.)
This sort of behaviour also impacts the usability of e.g. google searches, since a lot of posts have a flame response, instead of an answer.
I imagine that an IT manager is not willing to put up with a response like "you are not willing to learn" even if he might realize a question was stupid. Many people would rather pay money (especially company money) instead of being treated disrespectfully.
So anyway, I'm not saying that Linux support in public forums is bad, but I feel that showing respect to new users would go a long way to attract people to Linux.
Wow - I thought about it again, and I convinced myself that you're right. I tried to look at it from countable quantities (you could count the molecules in the
liquid, after all).
Take two empty cups, one (A) with 100 dollar coins [1], one (B) with 100 cent coins. Move 10 dollars from cup A into the cent cup (B). "Mix". Take 1 dollar and 9 cents back from cup B into cup A. [2]
Now cup A contains 91 dollars 9 cents, cup B contains 9 dollars 91 cents. So each are 9/91 pure.
A more concise view of the problem is: any coin taken from cup A get's replaced by a coin from cup B. If it's the same coin, then nothing changes (they retain the purity they had before) if it's a different coin, then it dilutes both sets in the same way.
My problem with this sort of test is, that you can think too little, and come up with the right answer, too.:)
[1] Finding the coins is left as an excercise for the reader.
[2] You wouldn't necessarily get that mix, but it's very close to the average - try with 1000 coins each, if that worries you. (And you have enough money.)
I haven't tried it yet, but it's possible
that this is still not fixed. Don't know why,
it should be simple to make that configurable.
Apparently one workaround would be to create a
page in the format you like, then save it as
a template. Now when you start koffice it should fgive you the option to choose that template.
Ok, there have been a lot of comments like "if it's not broken, don't fix it". There is something to be said for that, and maybe it's a good decision in this case.
However an argument can be made to update stuff regularly. Technology moves along at a rapid pace, and supporting old products can be a challenge. In this particular case support could mean spare parts, training etc. There might be certain elements which were standard when the plane was designed, but are hard to get today.
Let's say you had a computer still using tubes - difficult to get today, maybe there's only one
company left which makes them, so you might end up with something which is more expensive today then when the computer was designed.
Similarly you'd find it hard to get people who still want to learn how to maintain or operate a tube-based computer, they'd know that they'd learn skills which would have little market value.
The aeroplane industry moves a lot slower now than it did, and certainly a lot slower than IT. So probably their decision was correct. I do think though that sometimes there are reasons to fix things, even if they aren't broken (yet).:)
I'm not sure whether an open source virus scanner would help much. Yes, you can avoid having a company build in a backdoor, but you first need
to find the virus before you can scan for it.
Any attacker - be it FBI or anyone else, can first run the scanner on their latest creation, then
modify it, till it passes. I don't think it's possible to build the perfect virus scanner, be it open source, or proprietary.
Despite the moderation, mocm is absolutely right,
the article states:
During the night, a constantly growing number of animations can be seen. But there is an interactive component as well:
you can play the old arcade classic pong on the house using your mobile phone and you can place your own loveletters on the screen
Probably not, since apparently the data was pasword protected, just with extremely stupid
passwords like "passwd". So I don't think it would have been cached.
Well, the interesting part, is that they support
Linux on it, and ship it with it.
Now you can probably get Linux to run on any other compact PCI card, but this way you can be sure that it's supported, no missing drivers etc. Nice to know if you want to use Linux on a cPCI board.
Now as a Linux zealot, I find it interesting, anyway, especially the statement below is rather unusal, and may merit mentioning:
HP blade server products will initially run on the
Linux operating system distributions of Red Hat, Debian andSuSE. HP-UX and Microsoft® Windows® are expected to be available on the blade server in the first half of 2002
They really seem to give Linux a high priority
there - getting it to run even before their own OS.
I guess this shows that Windows is not ready for
the desktop. Sure, playing games, maybe
coordinating meetings and using a calendar, work - but email? Leave that to serious systems.
I know, I know, other email clients, etc.
However there is one thing I don't understand,
why are flaws which convert your office network
into a disaster area, somehow acceptable, whereas
some esoteric calendar tool is so vitally
necessary that people straight-faced claim that Linux isn't ready for the desktop?
It's not just Outlook either - every damn document format that MS produces is an attack
waiting to happen. Apart from being susceptible
to bit-rott and bloated.
The average user does simply not have the competence to operate a Windows system safely in an office environment. It's not enough to consider training costs when switching to Linux, you also need to consider TCO. That means your downtime, additional maintenance to repair user machines and lost or corrupted data, when using Windows systems.
I figured it out when I read "I'm in a harry".
I know the person whose Outlook distributed the virus my way, quite well, and I immediately thought - nah that can't be genuine, Peggy
can spell.;)
My thought is: if you are willing to accept the consequences, known and unknown, of genetic modification - then by all means, modify away.
The question really is: why? I mean these competitions operate within some arbitrary rules - why not allow marathon runners to take shortcuts?
So if the organization which makes up these rules (IOC and others) want to change them: what's the particular benefit of allowing genetic mods? If you allow them, why not allow engines?
Do any of these methods actually make the sport more interesting? If you have a group of runners which are closely matched, then you might find the race exciting, but I doubt you'd notice a few 1/100 s in the winners time, without a stop watch.
Sorry but some people want to win more than other people and that kin d of thing always shows through, its what the idea of competition is all
about after all. Its why people take drugs now and continue to do so.
I think all these athletic competitions make no sense once you allow *all* technology. You just couldn't have a 2000 meter run anymore, everybody would just use a car. So now it turned into another car race. So assuming you allow it: what's the point?
Slashdot Mirror
Basically: it's about Krayon, which used to be part of the KOffice suite. The program is not actually on the SuSE CD, but there is a leftover entry in the KDE menu, labeled Krayon.
Krayon is supposed to conflict with the "Crayon" trademark, which is held by Seidel Softwareservice .
Gravenreuth the "lawyer" who wrote this Abmahnung stated that he's prepared to settle with SuSE.
It's presumed that SuSE will want to settle, too.
He's a German lawyer, using an obscure German law, and SuSE is a German company.
They probably wouldn't be able to sue, since they are in a different industry. Crayon is in the same industry (they sell computer graphic stuff) so their case is much stronger.
Looking at the web site, though - the design is so plain, that it looks like the company has been setup solely for the purpose of this lawsuit. There is not a single decent graphic on their site - and that's what they claim to be selling...
All their products are CDROMs with image collections. The actual company is "Software Service Seidel", the "Crayon Vertriebs GmbH" which is their subsidiary, was founded last summer. (see: "wir über uns" )
Ah - but he doesn't claim that the US is evil, just that they are hated. This is based on perception of the US, not necessarily on reality.
For example the Taliban owed the US big time for all the support against the invading Soviet army. Nevertheless they clearly did hate the US.
So if large amounts of people hating you is a threat to your way of life and your saftey, and on the other hand even people who get help from you, hate you - then I'd think you have a PR problem which ought to be addressed.
I'm sorry, but are you *trying* to miss the point? Encrypting the control link to a satelite is not specific to satelites in any way, it's just another application of encryption. The only part where it becomes satelite-specific is on the payload level of the protocol. Ideally you'd not tell anyone about *that*.
No you don't need to post *your* code and say "hey look at this, if you find the hole in it, you can break my satellite". You can however use a proven technology to secure your link, and yes, for that to be proven it needs to be open.
You can still have your obscurity - you don't need to tell anyone which protocol you are using, even your command structure can stay just as secret as it was before - it's on another protocol layer.
If you were to use (random example) ipsec, and send your SATCOM (made up) protocol over that, and then someone finds a hole in ipsec. Well then you are just as secure, as you are now - the attacker still needs to break SATCOM, as well.
Anyway, there are plenty of secure protocols available, you could take one of them (or even an implementation of them) and use it on your link. You could even review the code, to make sure there are no implementation errors, and should you find a bug you might even *gasp* give back to the community, and submit a patch.
Which would have the benefit that you'd stay in sync with the other people's code, and will probably at least give you a review of the patch.
I would have assumed that's the case, but then I'd have assumed that control links to satellites would use a secure protocol, too...
Also, if you want to defend yourself against rogue states, you can't count on them not being able to build a suitable transmitter. As we've all learned recently, some terrorists have very considerable resources to command, too.
London is the number one financial place in Europe, it would have been pretty hard for another country to get this institution, if Britain had joined right away.
I think you have some good points, though.
Something like this would rate even lower then a gift certificate, it basically amounts to "I can't be bothered to spend any time thinking about you and what you might want, so instead I give you money - in a nice frame."
The only difference this system will make, is that now you take away the nice frame. If you give this to anyone you like, you shouldn't be surprised of the consequences. :)
Providing a service nobody wants - via the internet - wooohoo - sounds like a future failed business to me.
Besides, I think the original users comment was aiming to illustrate that the style in the Linux community can be quite rude. For a while I was following a user group for Linux newbies, thinking I could help out a little. I was so digusted by the newbie-bashing that I dropped out again.
Example: "Why doesn't Linux have virus scanners?" - Answer: "RTFM".
Fact is, that if you were to look for an article to explain that, you'd be hard pressed to find one, in most distribution manuals.
Do a google search on "Robin Socha" for a seemingly endless supply of examples. (Sorry for singling out just one person, but I think he deserves it.)
This sort of behaviour also impacts the usability of e.g. google searches, since a lot of posts have a flame response, instead of an answer.
I imagine that an IT manager is not willing to put up with a response like "you are not willing to learn" even if he might realize a question was stupid. Many people would rather pay money (especially company money) instead of being treated disrespectfully.
So anyway, I'm not saying that Linux support in public forums is bad, but I feel that showing respect to new users would go a long way to attract people to Linux.
Wow - I thought about it again, and I convinced myself that you're right. I tried to look at it from countable quantities (you could count the molecules in the liquid, after all).
Take two empty cups, one (A) with 100 dollar coins [1], one (B) with 100 cent coins. Move 10 dollars from cup A into the cent cup (B). "Mix". Take 1 dollar and 9 cents back from cup B into cup A. [2]
Now cup A contains 91 dollars 9 cents, cup B contains 9 dollars 91 cents. So each are 9/91 pure.
A more concise view of the problem is: any coin taken from cup A get's replaced by a coin from cup B. If it's the same coin, then nothing changes (they retain the purity they had before) if it's a different coin, then it dilutes both sets in the same way.
My problem with this sort of test is, that you can think too little, and come up with the right answer, too. :)
[1] Finding the coins is left as an excercise for the reader.
[2] You wouldn't necessarily get that mix, but it's very close to the average - try with 1000 coins each, if that worries you. (And you have enough money.)
Apparently one workaround would be to create a page in the format you like, then save it as a template. Now when you start koffice it should fgive you the option to choose that template.
However an argument can be made to update stuff regularly. Technology moves along at a rapid pace, and supporting old products can be a challenge. In this particular case support could mean spare parts, training etc. There might be certain elements which were standard when the plane was designed, but are hard to get today.
Let's say you had a computer still using tubes - difficult to get today, maybe there's only one company left which makes them, so you might end up with something which is more expensive today then when the computer was designed.
Similarly you'd find it hard to get people who still want to learn how to maintain or operate a tube-based computer, they'd know that they'd learn skills which would have little market value.
The aeroplane industry moves a lot slower now than it did, and certainly a lot slower than IT. So probably their decision was correct. I do think though that sometimes there are reasons to fix things, even if they aren't broken (yet). :)
Any attacker - be it FBI or anyone else, can first run the scanner on their latest creation, then modify it, till it passes. I don't think it's possible to build the perfect virus scanner, be it open source, or proprietary.
During the night, a constantly growing number of animations can be seen. But there is an interactive component as well: you can play the old arcade classic pong on the house using your mobile phone and you can place your own loveletters on the screen
Probably not, since apparently the data was pasword protected, just with extremely stupid passwords like "passwd". So I don't think it would have been cached.
What does KPMG do? I have still no idea. I mean their ploy could have been good, but they messed i up by extremely incompetent web design. :)
Now you can probably get Linux to run on any other compact PCI card, but this way you can be sure that it's supported, no missing drivers etc. Nice to know if you want to use Linux on a cPCI board.
Now as a Linux zealot, I find it interesting, anyway, especially the statement below is rather unusal, and may merit mentioning:
HP blade server products will initially run on the Linux operating system distributions of Red Hat, Debian andSuSE. HP-UX and Microsoft® Windows® are expected to be available on the blade server in the first half of 2002
They really seem to give Linux a high priority there - getting it to run even before their own OS.
I know, I know, other email clients, etc.
However there is one thing I don't understand, why are flaws which convert your office network into a disaster area, somehow acceptable, whereas some esoteric calendar tool is so vitally necessary that people straight-faced claim that Linux isn't ready for the desktop?
It's not just Outlook either - every damn document format that MS produces is an attack waiting to happen. Apart from being susceptible to bit-rott and bloated.
The average user does simply not have the competence to operate a Windows system safely in an office environment. It's not enough to consider training costs when switching to Linux, you also need to consider TCO. That means your downtime, additional maintenance to repair user machines and lost or corrupted data, when using Windows systems.
I figured it out when I read "I'm in a harry". I know the person whose Outlook distributed the virus my way, quite well, and I immediately thought - nah that can't be genuine, Peggy can spell. ;)
Once you have two people editing the same file you're probably in trouble, no matter how good your permission system is.
If you use CVS you can restore previous versions easily, too.
The question really is: why? I mean these competitions operate within some arbitrary rules - why not allow marathon runners to take shortcuts? So if the organization which makes up these rules (IOC and others) want to change them: what's the particular benefit of allowing genetic mods? If you allow them, why not allow engines?
Do any of these methods actually make the sport more interesting? If you have a group of runners which are closely matched, then you might find the race exciting, but I doubt you'd notice a few 1/100 s in the winners time, without a stop watch.
I think all these athletic competitions make no sense once you allow *all* technology. You just couldn't have a 2000 meter run anymore, everybody would just use a car. So now it turned into another car race. So assuming you allow it: what's the point?