Actually, you're wrong. We both were. You don't have to restart networking, because I just tried redirecting my banking URL and it worked. Hmm...now I'm not sure why it didn't happen the first time.
Right. No one could. Because I'm on OS X! Hah! I actually just replaced my banking login URL in my hosts file and it still loaded as normal. OS X must not consult the hosts file.
Maybe they can install a different browser alongside IE for doing anything personal. If not, then they're just screwed I guess.
I doubt many people would be affected anyhow. If I understand correctly, the attacker would have to know the URL you go to for online banking and replace it in your hosts file with a different site. It seems unlikely that it would work on too many people.
There once was a fellow named Kerry
who couldn't sway those that were wary
With less votes than he needed,
the race he conceded,
and W ate, drank, and made merry
...doom and gloom for Hurd...has yet to happen and it's not going to.
More like Hurd has yet to happen and it's not going to. The doom and gloom already happened a long time ago. Sure, they've got a few developers and hangers-on, I even ran it a few times about 3 or 4 years ago. But every time I check in on it, it hasn't progressed a whole lot, they're just catching up to some minimum level of usability that Linux/BSD has had for years. What's the use of all the "advanced" features if they don't actually advance anything?
Interface Builder doesn't generate crappy code for you, instead it generates real objects that are instantiated at runtime then bound to your code.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but can you explain how generating real objects is different from generating code? It seems that in order to generate objects it would have to generate code in some way, but I'm probably just not understanding.
What kind of problems did you have? The only problems I've had with packages is that they seem to look for particular versions of other packages for dependencies rather than looking to see if certain library versions are available on the system, something I'd like to see fixed. But if you use portupgrade to handle it, there shouldn't be any upgrade troubles.
Yes, now you do get airport with the $999 ibook, though still not bluetooth. They're going to need to upgrade that powerbook if they want to make it worthwhile to buy one over the ibook now.
I'm only trying to make the point that the Word format is closed, and because of that no one has been able to completely duplicate it. In other words, it's harder to see into the closed system than an open one. But I'm also not saying all closed systems are secure or that closed systems are the way to attain security. I said all other things being equal, if you pit two security minded programs against each other, the closed one should naturally have less chance of being exploited because it's harder to see what's going on inside. Please note that I'm not arguing against open source or open standards, it's just that I hear that mantra "security through obscurity == bad". I don't see how that's 100% true.
Putting your source code in a pantry alone of course does not equal security. All other things being equal, however, the obscured system will probably be more secure. Say you programmed a closed source web server with security in mind. Don't you think the closed system might be harder to crack than Apache? As an example, look at MS Word format. It's locked up, and all the open source hackers in the world can't come up with a completely compatible implementation.
Right...because you certainly wouldn't want to do anything like obscure your data through encryption. That wouldn't be secure. That's why I insist my bank lets me send my password in the clear.
That's funny, I always thought the optimum shape would be like a disc resembling a large frisbee. With little twinkly lights all over it, you know, to help it fly better. That's what I learned while watching science shows like The Twilight Zone.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, you're wrong. We both were. You don't have to restart networking, because I just tried redirecting my banking URL and it worked. Hmm...now I'm not sure why it didn't happen the first time.
Right. No one could. Because I'm on OS X! Hah! I actually just replaced my banking login URL in my hosts file and it still loaded as normal. OS X must not consult the hosts file.
Maybe they can install a different browser alongside IE for doing anything personal. If not, then they're just screwed I guess.
I doubt many people would be affected anyhow. If I understand correctly, the attacker would have to know the URL you go to for online banking and replace it in your hosts file with a different site. It seems unlikely that it would work on too many people.
There once was a fellow named Kerry
who couldn't sway those that were wary
With less votes than he needed,
the race he conceded,
and W ate, drank, and made merry
...doom and gloom for Hurd...has yet to happen and it's not going to.
More like Hurd has yet to happen and it's not going to. The doom and gloom already happened a long time ago. Sure, they've got a few developers and hangers-on, I even ran it a few times about 3 or 4 years ago. But every time I check in on it, it hasn't progressed a whole lot, they're just catching up to some minimum level of usability that Linux/BSD has had for years. What's the use of all the "advanced" features if they don't actually advance anything?
Since he mentioned Beowulf writers, I'd like to designate this thread as a place for all Beowulf cluster jokes. Just think of it as a public service.
Neato.
In a way though, isn't creating an XML file of an object code generation?
I'm not saying you're wrong, but can you explain how generating real objects is different from generating code? It seems that in order to generate objects it would have to generate code in some way, but I'm probably just not understanding.
What kind of problems did you have? The only problems I've had with packages is that they seem to look for particular versions of other packages for dependencies rather than looking to see if certain library versions are available on the system, something I'd like to see fixed. But if you use portupgrade to handle it, there shouldn't be any upgrade troubles.
Yes, now you do get airport with the $999 ibook, though still not bluetooth. They're going to need to upgrade that powerbook if they want to make it worthwhile to buy one over the ibook now.
They didn't use the word "Saint", they used the abbreviation "St.", which everyone knows means "Street". Duh.
What is this msh you speak of? Perhaps a new innovative shell?
My god, you're right. Just link everything to Google! In fact, why even have any other websites at all? Let's just have Google!
Franklin D. Roo -- was he the inventor of the kangaroo?
OT sig comment:
But PCMCIA isn't an acronym, because it doesn't spell anything.
RMS wasn't in the car, schizophrenic boy. Did you forget your risperdal this morning?
I'm only trying to make the point that the Word format is closed, and because of that no one has been able to completely duplicate it. In other words, it's harder to see into the closed system than an open one. But I'm also not saying all closed systems are secure or that closed systems are the way to attain security. I said all other things being equal, if you pit two security minded programs against each other, the closed one should naturally have less chance of being exploited because it's harder to see what's going on inside. Please note that I'm not arguing against open source or open standards, it's just that I hear that mantra "security through obscurity == bad". I don't see how that's 100% true.
For the Word format? No.
Putting your source code in a pantry alone of course does not equal security. All other things being equal, however, the obscured system will probably be more secure. Say you programmed a closed source web server with security in mind. Don't you think the closed system might be harder to crack than Apache? As an example, look at MS Word format. It's locked up, and all the open source hackers in the world can't come up with a completely compatible implementation.
Right...because you certainly wouldn't want to do anything like obscure your data through encryption. That wouldn't be secure. That's why I insist my bank lets me send my password in the clear.
. . . How do you loose a shuttle?
With a wrench, obviously.
That's funny, I always thought the optimum shape would be like a disc resembling a large frisbee. With little twinkly lights all over it, you know, to help it fly better. That's what I learned while watching science shows like The Twilight Zone.
Yeah, and it's all tied in with 9/11. I recommend you keep your mouth shut too.
ESR, for being a pretentious fop.