While the debate over allowing anonymous portscans will probably continue as long as computer networks exist, I can see this as a "bad thing" for people at large. If customers are prevented from examining the security of online business, it becomes difficult to make informed decisions regarding who to trust with your money|data|business. With the growing trend towards the ASP model of computing, independant verification of a site's security becomes more important when choosing a vendor. Just like EULA's which ban the unauthorized publishing of benchmarks, the inability to portscan hampers a consumers ability to make an informed choice. The security model of trust will devolve into a "don't worry, trust us" state where you are at the mercy of the claims of security assembled by the marketing department without independent verification.
Put another way; would you trust your money to an online bank with open NFS shares or your business data to an ASP using snmp and "public" community strings? Would you know?
No to nitpick or anything but the TCP/IP protocol suite does only have 4 layers. You are referring to the OSI 7 layer model of network communications which the TCP/IP does not follow. The four layer model roughly maps to the OSI model on several layers but does not actually implement the full definition.
A lot of the problems concerning criminal actions committed by corporations arise from the relative personal immunity granted on the the indiviudals running the corporation. SInce companies by themselves don't make the decision to break the law, the people who make these decisions should face a share of the penalties. I propose that most corporate entities be required to establish a Responsible Party(RP) or Chief Responsible Offices(CFO).
This role would an individual or group of individuals possessing authority in the organization, who agree to take a degree of personal legal and fiscal exposure for the actions of the corporation at large. Thier exposure could be narrowly tailored to a certain subset of situations where the corporation faces risk in regards to its actions. (i.e. They would be exempt for shareholder suits based on say, a one time mistake in an earnings report, but would be exposed to bringing action for willfull or repetive criminal violations). Of course, these positions would pay extremely well.
Obviously, executives would balk at the notion of exposing themselves to any sort of personal fault, but I think society on a whole would benefit if the individuals making these decisions had to worry about putting the own butts in a sling before committing these crimes.
If anyone needs an example of what happens to console makers when the lose market share. Look at Atari. I predict that Sega will for all intense purposes disapeer until the attempt a comeback in several years (a la Jaguar)
A processing fee is required when applicant requests voluntary publication of an application pending on November 29, 3000, when applicant requests publication of a redacted copy of the application and when applicant requests republication of an application that has been previously published.
Or maybe they have a new procedure fo extending patent applications.
I can see that this action will put a great deal of pressure on alternative forms of p2p file sharing, but I do not think they can handle the load or the legal challenges? Each of the existing alternatives has it own drawbacks (central servers, poor scaling, etc.).
My question: Would it be possible to create a module that adds p2p capabiites to apache? The client software could submit the lists of shared songs via standard http POST methods. Dynamic URL rewrites and apache's proxy capability could protect the users' identity. The song indices could be distributed among the servers via the Gnutella model. Since web servers tend to have higher bandwidth than internet users, the scaling problem that Gnutella has with low bandwidth could be alleviated.
Users would only need to connect to the server of their choice (Or specially tailored search engines located convienently outside the US) to access the service. This could open the server operators up to legal action, but with widespread adoption and a lack of logging, prosecution of the actual offenders would be problematic at best.
As an additional bonus, since all the traffic would be through standard web ports and to random servers, firewalling would be impossible.
A technique where the functionalty of existing applications can be extended with out having access to the original source code to include new functions not conceived by the original programmer. By using carefully constructed "Injection Streams" encapsulated in the form of data, the techinque allows end users and interested third parties to interact with the Customer Programming Interface(CPI) rather than the more traditional API. These "Dynamic Code Morphing Data streams" introduce new application code that combines with the original code to to produce new behavior by the existing application through the use of known limits involving memory usage and addressing. By suplementing the executing application code with new code, the application can be used to provide remote access to remote systems or provide other, previously unused functionality or to launch additional applications of the host system. This provides the user of the "Injection Streams" with real-time control over an applications execution and branching behaviour.
Primary users of this patent will be "3l33t haX0r's" and others interested in this technique.
I think that everybody is missing key point. The question isn't "How many frequency bands CAN we use?", it should be "How many frequency bands SHOULD we use?" At this point, very little is known about the long term effects of non-ionizing radiation on people (remember the cell phone-brain cancer scare?), much less on other forms of life. I already have cell phone conversations, radio stations, satellite TV, and who know what else travelling through my body at any given time. I am leery of adding anything else before we have an idea of how it will affect us. Not to mention the several companies recently petitioned the FCC to open frequency range where elemental hydrogen resonates. I can't think of a better way to kill off radio astronomy that this. Just because we can does not me we should. This is the same thinking that people complain about when discussing the problems of genetic profiling or data-mining.
Those BUNNY PEOPLE are REALLY CREEPY
on
Cool PC Cases
·
· Score: 1
Coworker has two of the dolls, but the whole thing with the suits totally spooks me out. How is it that the insanely toxic nature of this industry can become so pop and sexy.
This is the beginning of a time where computers aren't so much machines anymore as much as they are plastic pals that are fun to be with.
Both Linux and Mac OS X (Server release now announced) are being advertised as being POSIX compatible, and support lots of the same development software such as gdb and emacs out of the box. This is so far from what other OS vendors have to offer it seems like the competition will be largely between POSIX compatible systems that work well with state of the art free-source software, and crud like Windows (which must surely loose).
Slashdot Mirror
While the debate over allowing anonymous portscans will probably continue as long as computer networks exist, I can see this as a "bad thing" for people at large. If customers are prevented from examining the security of online business, it becomes difficult to make informed decisions regarding who to trust with your money|data|business. With the growing trend towards the ASP model of computing, independant verification of a site's security becomes more important when choosing a vendor. Just like EULA's which ban the unauthorized publishing of benchmarks, the inability to portscan hampers a consumers ability to make an informed choice. The security model of trust will devolve into a "don't worry, trust us" state where you are at the mercy of the claims of security assembled by the marketing department without independent verification.
Put another way; would you trust your money to an online bank with open NFS shares or your business data to an ASP using snmp and "public" community strings? Would you know?
No to nitpick or anything but the TCP/IP protocol suite does only have 4 layers. You are referring to the OSI 7 layer model of network communications which the TCP/IP does not follow. The four layer model roughly maps to the OSI model on several layers but does not actually implement the full definition.
A lot of the problems concerning criminal actions committed by corporations arise from the relative personal immunity granted on the the indiviudals running the corporation. SInce companies by themselves don't make the decision to break the law, the people who make these decisions should face a share of the penalties. I propose that most corporate entities be required to establish a Responsible Party(RP) or Chief Responsible Offices(CFO).
This role would an individual or group of individuals possessing authority in the organization, who agree to take a degree of personal legal and fiscal exposure for the actions of the corporation at large. Thier exposure could be narrowly tailored to a certain subset of situations where the corporation faces risk in regards to its actions. (i.e. They would be exempt for shareholder suits based on say, a one time mistake in an earnings report, but would be exposed to bringing action for willfull or repetive criminal violations). Of course, these positions would pay extremely well.
Obviously, executives would balk at the notion of exposing themselves to any sort of personal fault, but I think society on a whole would benefit if the individuals making these decisions had to worry about putting the own butts in a sling before committing these crimes.
If anyone needs an example of what happens to console makers when the lose market share. Look at Atari. I predict that Sega will for all intense purposes disapeer until the attempt a comeback in several years (a la Jaguar)
BTW I am actually own a Jaguar.
to hire some proofreaders.
When do I have to pay a processing fee?
A processing fee is required when applicant requests voluntary publication of an application pending on November 29, 3000, when applicant requests publication of a redacted copy of the application and when applicant requests republication of an application that has been previously published.
Or maybe they have a new procedure fo extending patent applications.
I can see that this action will put a great deal of pressure on alternative forms of p2p file sharing, but I do not think they can handle the load or the legal challenges? Each of the existing alternatives has it own drawbacks (central servers, poor scaling, etc.).
My question: Would it be possible to create a module that adds p2p capabiites to apache? The client software could submit the lists of shared songs via standard http POST methods. Dynamic URL rewrites and apache's proxy capability could protect the users' identity. The song indices could be distributed among the servers via the Gnutella model. Since web servers tend to have higher bandwidth than internet users, the scaling problem that Gnutella has with low bandwidth could be alleviated.
Users would only need to connect to the server of their choice (Or specially tailored search engines located convienently outside the US) to access the service. This could open the server operators up to legal action, but with widespread adoption and a lack of logging, prosecution of the actual offenders would be problematic at best.
As an additional bonus, since all the traffic would be through standard web ports and to random servers, firewalling would be impossible.
Just a random thought I had.
Maybe I should have just said "Buffer Overflow" in the first place.
This might actually get approved....?
Dynamic Code Morphing Injection
A technique where the functionalty of existing applications can be extended with out having access to the original source code to include new functions not conceived by the original programmer. By using carefully constructed "Injection Streams" encapsulated in the form of data, the techinque allows end users and interested third parties to interact with the Customer Programming Interface(CPI) rather than the more traditional API. These "Dynamic Code Morphing Data streams" introduce new application code that combines with the original code to to produce new behavior by the existing application through the use of known limits involving memory usage and addressing. By suplementing the executing application code with new code, the application can be used to provide remote access to remote systems or provide other, previously unused functionality or to launch additional applications of the host system. This provides the user of the "Injection Streams" with real-time control over an applications execution and branching behaviour.
Primary users of this patent will be "3l33t haX0r's" and others interested in this technique.
I think that everybody is missing key point. The question isn't "How many frequency bands CAN we use?", it should be "How many frequency bands SHOULD we use?" At this point, very little is known about the long term effects of non-ionizing radiation on people (remember the cell phone-brain cancer scare?), much less on other forms of life. I already have cell phone conversations, radio stations, satellite TV, and who know what else travelling through my body at any given time. I am leery of adding anything else before we have an idea of how it will affect us. Not to mention the several companies recently petitioned the FCC to open frequency range where elemental hydrogen resonates. I can't think of a better way to kill off radio astronomy that this. Just because we can does not me we should. This is the same thinking that people complain about when discussing the problems of genetic profiling or data-mining.
Coworker has two of the dolls, but the whole
thing with the suits totally spooks me out.
How is it that the insanely toxic nature of
this industry can become so pop and sexy.
This is the beginning of a time where computers
aren't so much machines anymore as much as they
are plastic pals that are fun to be with.
Both Linux and Mac OS X (Server release now
announced) are being advertised as being
POSIX compatible, and support lots of the
same development software such as gdb and
emacs out of the box. This is so far from
what other OS vendors have to offer it seems
like the competition will be largely between
POSIX compatible systems that work well with
state of the art free-source software, and
crud like Windows (which must surely loose).