My understanding is that the Ctrl-Alt-Del is baked in to the hardware at a low level. Lower level than keyboard drivers. The reason Windows can react to it is because it is an OS, and can install an interrupt handler for the non maskable interrupt. But that has nothing to do with keyboard drivers. If an OS does not install an interrupt handler into the slot in the interrupt table for the NMI interrupt, then the default interrupt handler address in that slot leads to a routing that reboots.
Those programs and protocols have provisions to simulate a Ctrl-Alt-Del. A VM will actually simulate the non maskable interrupt. If you are remoted in to a GUI that is not on the physical console, then there is no keyboard to generate an NMI and the GUI you are connected to simply reacts to the simulated NMI (aka Ctrl-Alt-Del).
But try 'simulating' a Ctrl-Alt-Del for the GUI session attached to the physical display/keyboard. I'll wait.
> Child abuse is machine recognizable; piracy is not.
A human can recognize something is child pr0n.
Neither man nor machine can tell whether something is copyright infringement.
Even if you can recognize something as a bit of a popular song or video clip, how can you know whether it is authorized (therefore not piracy) or whether it is fair use under the law?
A human can instantly recognize something is child pr0n.
Neither man nor machine can tell whether something is copyright infringement.
Even if you can recognize something as a bit of a popular song or video clip, how can you know whether it is authorized (therefore not piracy) or whether it is fair use under the law?
> Come on self-entitled brats. Lets hear why you should be allowed to have all the stuff you want for free.
A human can instantly recognize something is child pr0n.
Neither man nor machine can tell whether something is copyright infringement.
Even if you can recognize something as a bit of a popular song or video clip, how can you know whether it is authorized (therefore not piracy) or whether it is fair use under the law?
The self entitled brats are the copyright owners thinking Google and everyone else should do their job for them and owe them a living forever and ever for doing something creative one time.
> Ctrl+Alt+Delete is, or was at least, a so called "non maskeable interrupt".
> This makes it harder for Trojan viruses to take over the login screen and steal your password.
There is an even more important reason to use Ctrl-Alt-Del for login.
By first pressing Ctrl-Alt-Del, the user logging on can be quite sure that they are giving their login credentials to a genuine Windows (or whatever OS) login screen, and not some malware that merely resembles the login screen. Because Ctrl-Alt-Del triggers a low level non maskable interrupt, the OS had to install an interrupt handler in order to react to Ctrl-Alt-Del. Handling Ctrl-Alt-Del is much different than ordinary keystrokes. The firing of the non maskable interrupt happens at a lower level than friendly userspace programs or unfriendly malware programs.
Ctrl-Alt-Del generates a non maskable interrupt. Yes it was there before Windows, and even before DOS. If an OS wants to react to it other than instantly rebooting, said OS needs to install an interrupt handler for it. That interrupt handler is fired at a way lower level than ordinary keystrokes, malware, or friendly userspace applications.
Using Ctrl-Alt-Del to trigger login gives you two kinds of security:
1. Software cannot simulate a Ctrl-Alt-Del in order to play games with the login screen.
2. By first pressing Ctrl-Alt-Del, the user logging on can be quite sure that they are giving their login credentials to a genuine Windows (or whatever OS) login screen, and not some malware that merely resembles the login screen.
> I'm just glad we didn't have to do something like Ctrl + Alt + Del + F6 + Esc + (number pad) Enter for the same functionality.
As long as you would need to use both hands, your nose, and your, uh, um... other appendage in order to generate that non-maskable interrupt signal from the keyboard, you are unlikely to accidentally reboot.
You say it correctly: encryption is not a magic spell. But you then proceed to treat cryptanalysis as if it were a magic spell.
Just because intercepting signals is part of the NSA's job doesn't mean they can magically crack any kind of cryptography by waving some kind of magic wand. They have human minds like other cryptanalysts. They have more computing resources, but that only shortens brute force time, by insignificant amounts. (One thousand times faster than one trillion years doesn't matter.)
If you can show me internal NSA documents that prove otherwise, I'll believe you. (Clearly, while that argument works both ways, it doesn't mean anything when used either way.)
In the meantime I'll put my faith in various algorithms based on how well they have withstood the test of significant attack efforts, over a long time, by brilliant people.
> Jobs was kicked out just because the Mac sales were initially a bit slower than expected.
Uh, No.
As I seem to remember it, Jobs was holding back the Mac. He insisted that the Mac never have everything that the Mac II was. No slots. No color. No external monitor. No large memory..
In Steve Jobs world the computer, monitor and floppy drive must be a single appliance like component.
That idea didn't make economic sense then, and it doesn't make economic sense now. That computer becomes obsolete quite fast. But once it is, there is still a lot of economic value left in the other integrated components (monitor, floppy/CD drives, etc).
These are the reasons Steve Jobs was let go. He was too stubborn. It is ironic that his NeXT computer was everything that he denied to the Mac.
Let me set you straight:-) about the founding fathers. Michele Bachmann described how the founding fathers worked tirelessly to end slavery. So it must be true!:-)
Hey now, Obama did promise to bring more transparency to government.
And he did just that!
New definition of transparency in government: when the government is doing something right in your field of view, but you cannot see it because it is not opaque.
The reason American's don't do something about it is because the Lesters (aka, the puppeteer) only offer puppets in the general election that the Lesters have pre-approved. A candidate not meeting with the Lesters' approval never makes it to the ballot of a general election. Thus making the farce of a general election seem meaningful when in fact it is not.
As long as the population can be approximately 50/50 split over two parties (that both are attached to the puppeteer's strings) and political party fighting and mudslinging can be kept to a maximum over issues the Lesters don't care about, the populace will contentedly remain asleep and feel that they still have some actual power through the ballot box.
The founding fathers never foresaw global megacorporations with concentrations of wealth and power that exceeds that of some actual countries.
I hope that answers your question. Sorry for not linking the Lesterland TED Talk video, but I'm sure you can google it.
The questions are indeed redundant, but you don't explain how.
If the first question is answered Yes (you need to ask), then obviously the answer to the second question can only be No (not playing stupid, but really are stupid).
If the first question is answered No (no need to ask), then obviously the answer to the second question can only be Yes (playing stupid, because I am smart enough to already know the answer and didn't need to ask).
Even if you are signed in with an account, no need to trust SSL.
The NSA could be getting unencrypted traffic from within Google/Microsoft/AmericanCompanies, with their cooperation, whether willingly or unwillingly.
The NSA could also be getting duplicate copies of customer certs issued by CAs in order to play MITM. Or the NSA might get their own signing cert from the CA. Remember when Mozilla revoked a CA for giving a signing cert to a company that made border firewalls to play MITM?
The NSA can also get their own piece of equipment located within an ISP with a secret warrant that the ISP cannot talk about. That equipment might do more than is represented by the warrant shown to the ISP. The first step would be for such devices to manipulate network switches and their management.
> Go back to 2007 when there really wasn't anything like pinch and zoom....wouldn't you patent it.?
But there was anything like it. That's why the patent was rejected. Prior art. I seem to recall from Groklaw recently, there was a book written in the 1990's about all sorts of UI gestures for touch interfaces -- even though touch interfaces were not popular.
There is nothing so permanent as:
1. A temporary injunction to prevent publication of an embarrassing and/or expensive security vulnerability
2. A temporary hack to be fixed later so we can ship the product now
Both are designed to protect profit from having to do the right thing.
> Wasn't the reason to go with Microsoft that you could customize more
It's hard to imagine how you could customize any more than on Android. So far, every brand of Android has a different front UI. I doubt that is going to happen with Windows Phone.
> in Finland we have this saying
I seem to recall Elop saying that using Android would be like peeing in your pants in the winter to keep warm.
Slashdot Mirror
My understanding is that the Ctrl-Alt-Del is baked in to the hardware at a low level. Lower level than keyboard drivers. The reason Windows can react to it is because it is an OS, and can install an interrupt handler for the non maskable interrupt. But that has nothing to do with keyboard drivers. If an OS does not install an interrupt handler into the slot in the interrupt table for the NMI interrupt, then the default interrupt handler address in that slot leads to a routing that reboots.
Those programs and protocols have provisions to simulate a Ctrl-Alt-Del. A VM will actually simulate the non maskable interrupt. If you are remoted in to a GUI that is not on the physical console, then there is no keyboard to generate an NMI and the GUI you are connected to simply reacts to the simulated NMI (aka Ctrl-Alt-Del).
But try 'simulating' a Ctrl-Alt-Del for the GUI session attached to the physical display/keyboard. I'll wait.
> You're forgetting the magic words that summon Venture Capitalists:
:-)
> "It's Demoware... IN THE CLOUD"
I thought the magic words were "dot com". Am I behind or something?
> Child abuse is machine recognizable; piracy is not.
A human can recognize something is child pr0n.
Neither man nor machine can tell whether something is copyright infringement.
Even if you can recognize something as a bit of a popular song or video clip, how can you know whether it is authorized (therefore not piracy) or whether it is fair use under the law?
> Child abuse and piracy are not comparable.
A human can instantly recognize something is child pr0n.
Neither man nor machine can tell whether something is copyright infringement.
Even if you can recognize something as a bit of a popular song or video clip, how can you know whether it is authorized (therefore not piracy) or whether it is fair use under the law?
> Come on self-entitled brats. Lets hear why you should be allowed to have all the stuff you want for free.
A human can instantly recognize something is child pr0n.
Neither man nor machine can tell whether something is copyright infringement.
Even if you can recognize something as a bit of a popular song or video clip, how can you know whether it is authorized (therefore not piracy) or whether it is fair use under the law?
The self entitled brats are the copyright owners thinking Google and everyone else should do their job for them and owe them a living forever and ever for doing something creative one time.
> Ctrl+Alt+Delete is, or was at least, a so called "non maskeable interrupt".
> This makes it harder for Trojan viruses to take over the login screen and steal your password.
There is an even more important reason to use Ctrl-Alt-Del for login.
By first pressing Ctrl-Alt-Del, the user logging on can be quite sure that they are giving their login credentials to a genuine Windows (or whatever OS) login screen, and not some malware that merely resembles the login screen. Because Ctrl-Alt-Del triggers a low level non maskable interrupt, the OS had to install an interrupt handler in order to react to Ctrl-Alt-Del. Handling Ctrl-Alt-Del is much different than ordinary keystrokes. The firing of the non maskable interrupt happens at a lower level than friendly userspace programs or unfriendly malware programs.
Ctrl-Alt-Del generates a non maskable interrupt. Yes it was there before Windows, and even before DOS. If an OS wants to react to it other than instantly rebooting, said OS needs to install an interrupt handler for it. That interrupt handler is fired at a way lower level than ordinary keystrokes, malware, or friendly userspace applications.
Using Ctrl-Alt-Del to trigger login gives you two kinds of security:
1. Software cannot simulate a Ctrl-Alt-Del in order to play games with the login screen.
2. By first pressing Ctrl-Alt-Del, the user logging on can be quite sure that they are giving their login credentials to a genuine Windows (or whatever OS) login screen, and not some malware that merely resembles the login screen.
> I'm just glad we didn't have to do something like Ctrl + Alt + Del + F6 + Esc + (number pad) Enter for the same functionality.
As long as you would need to use both hands, your nose, and your, uh, um... other appendage in order to generate that non-maskable interrupt signal from the keyboard, you are unlikely to accidentally reboot.
You say it correctly: encryption is not a magic spell. But you then proceed to treat cryptanalysis as if it were a magic spell.
Just because intercepting signals is part of the NSA's job doesn't mean they can magically crack any kind of cryptography by waving some kind of magic wand. They have human minds like other cryptanalysts. They have more computing resources, but that only shortens brute force time, by insignificant amounts. (One thousand times faster than one trillion years doesn't matter.)
If you can show me internal NSA documents that prove otherwise, I'll believe you. (Clearly, while that argument works both ways, it doesn't mean anything when used either way.)
In the meantime I'll put my faith in various algorithms based on how well they have withstood the test of significant attack efforts, over a long time, by brilliant people.
> Jobs was kicked out just because the Mac sales were initially a bit slower than expected.
Uh, No.
As I seem to remember it, Jobs was holding back the Mac. He insisted that the Mac never have everything that the Mac II was. No slots. No color. No external monitor. No large memory..
In Steve Jobs world the computer, monitor and floppy drive must be a single appliance like component.
That idea didn't make economic sense then, and it doesn't make economic sense now. That computer becomes obsolete quite fast. But once it is, there is still a lot of economic value left in the other integrated components (monitor, floppy/CD drives, etc).
These are the reasons Steve Jobs was let go. He was too stubborn. It is ironic that his NeXT computer was everything that he denied to the Mac.
Are you trying to suggest that an OS from Microsoft would have debug identifiers called NSAKey? Surely such a thing would never happen.
> Wait, how is Apple a competitor to Oracle?
There is only so much money in the world. Oracle wants it all. Apple wants it all. Ergo, competitors.
They could be the important issues as you say. But not newsworthy. Err..... sorry, I meant not info-tainment worthy.
Eeeeew. Who would put something like uncooked garlic in their mouth?
Let me set you straight :-) about the founding fathers. Michele Bachmann described how the founding fathers worked tirelessly to end slavery. So it must be true! :-)
You forgot fractured skulls.
Stop resisting! Stop resisting!
Hey now, Obama did promise to bring more transparency to government.
And he did just that!
New definition of transparency in government: when the government is doing something right in your field of view, but you cannot see it because it is not opaque.
See Lawrence Lessig's TED Talk about Lesterland.
The reason American's don't do something about it is because the Lesters (aka, the puppeteer) only offer puppets in the general election that the Lesters have pre-approved. A candidate not meeting with the Lesters' approval never makes it to the ballot of a general election. Thus making the farce of a general election seem meaningful when in fact it is not.
As long as the population can be approximately 50/50 split over two parties (that both are attached to the puppeteer's strings) and political party fighting and mudslinging can be kept to a maximum over issues the Lesters don't care about, the populace will contentedly remain asleep and feel that they still have some actual power through the ballot box.
The founding fathers never foresaw global megacorporations with concentrations of wealth and power that exceeds that of some actual countries.
I hope that answers your question. Sorry for not linking the Lesterland TED Talk video, but I'm sure you can google it.
The questions are indeed redundant, but you don't explain how.
If the first question is answered Yes (you need to ask), then obviously the answer to the second question can only be No (not playing stupid, but really are stupid).
If the first question is answered No (no need to ask), then obviously the answer to the second question can only be Yes (playing stupid, because I am smart enough to already know the answer and didn't need to ask).
Forget WireShark.
Even if you are signed in with an account, no need to trust SSL.
The NSA could be getting unencrypted traffic from within Google/Microsoft/AmericanCompanies, with their cooperation, whether willingly or unwillingly.
The NSA could also be getting duplicate copies of customer certs issued by CAs in order to play MITM. Or the NSA might get their own signing cert from the CA. Remember when Mozilla revoked a CA for giving a signing cert to a company that made border firewalls to play MITM?
The NSA can also get their own piece of equipment located within an ISP with a secret warrant that the ISP cannot talk about. That equipment might do more than is represented by the warrant shown to the ISP. The first step would be for such devices to manipulate network switches and their management.
> Go back to 2007 when there really wasn't anything like pinch and zoom....wouldn't you patent it.?
But there was anything like it. That's why the patent was rejected. Prior art. I seem to recall from Groklaw recently, there was a book written in the 1990's about all sorts of UI gestures for touch interfaces -- even though touch interfaces were not popular.
Who could put something as disgusting as an insect into their mouth?
There is nothing so permanent as:
1. A temporary injunction to prevent publication of an embarrassing and/or expensive security vulnerability
2. A temporary hack to be fixed later so we can ship the product now
Both are designed to protect profit from having to do the right thing.
> Wasn't the reason to go with Microsoft that you could customize more
It's hard to imagine how you could customize any more than on Android. So far, every brand of Android has a different front UI. I doubt that is going to happen with Windows Phone.
> in Finland we have this saying
I seem to recall Elop saying that using Android would be like peeing in your pants in the winter to keep warm.