Yes, Red Hat will announce bugs with no patch *IF* the flaw is already publicly being exploited. Just like Microsoft.
Are those critical flaws that give remote or local privilege escalations? Let's take an example. I looked for important security flaws and found this one.
Notice the date on the announcement, it specifically says the word "Public" date. That date is 2012-01-18, however the CVE it references was created on December 7th, 2011.
So here's a critical privilege escalation bug, that was kept secret for almost 6 weeks.
More importantly, how much energy will it take to do this? You are effectively destroying the efficiency of the reactor if you then have to turn around and reprocess it with more energy.
I was responding to the question askers comment about wanting "to make sure that my recent investment in an Acer laptop will last me a good long while"
Virus software will not prolong the lifetime of your laptop.
The CVE was created on July 11th, 2012. However, the existence of the flaw were not announced until August 29th, 2012.
There are many many more, and I will leave it as an exercise for anyone that wants more proof. Just look at the date the CVE was created (the assigned date) and look at the date of the announcement.
Wrong. Mozilla, Red Hat, Canonical and Google embargo the details, including the existence of, critical security bugs until a patch is available... UNLESS the exploit is publicly known already.
It's very easy to prove. Just find any critical security flaw in the CVE database and look at the date the CVE was created. Then look at the date of the official announcement, it's quite frequently weeks to months in between.
It should be pointed out though, Antivirus will have nothing to do with preserving the liftime of your PC. A virus (usually) can't damage the PC, it might destroy the data on it, but you can just reinstall in a worst case scenario.
* There have been some viruses in the ancient past that could damage a PC, such as forcing the hard drive to bash it's heads against the parking zone, or writing to some bizarre register in the bios that could cause some kind of hardware damage, but 99.99999% of viruses today just want to steal your identity and get at your bank account.
Unless of course you're an iranian uranium enrichment facility, then all bets are off.
Everyone embargoes security bug details. Everyone. Mozilla, Red Hat, Canonical, Google... Everyone does it. And many times critical bugs are embargoed for several weeks, sometimes even 6 or more months.
Yes, but you would have to get a prosecutor to take the case. Unlikely they will prosecute a religious organization for perjury when they are in a different country.
ID for alcohol and cigs is rarely enforced, especially in places where people are well known. You are speaking for a large town perspective.
Bubba's gas station has been selling beer and cigs to JoeBob for 20 years, he's not going to start ID'ing him now. I can't even tell you the last time I was carded buying alcohol, and I live in a big city where i'm not known. Even at places that claim they ID everyone.
Hell, even if those were enforced, they just have someone else they know buy it for them. Lots of people live their life that way.
I have an uncle that can't read or write. He doesn't have any ID, because he doesn't have any situation in his life where one is required. He lives in a tiny town in AZ, and his kids do everything for him that requires paperwork or signatures.
I was responding to the question of "Can a judge do this" and that answer is Yes, a judge CAN do it, and I gave various circumstances in which this can happen.
It doesn't matter what this particular case is when the question was more general.
A judge ordering you to delete a facebook account is not violating your free speech. He's not saying you can't say things, just not in that particular forum.
This is akin to a judge ordering someone to whitewash a wall they covered with graffiti.
You're free to say all the things you said on facebook, somewhere else.
I didn't read the article (shocking I know) but if the the person committed a crime in connection with facebook, then the judge has a right to order you not to use it. Much like Kevin Mitnick was ordered to not use a computer for a given period of time.
This is becoming MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). Maybe that's the point. Maybe Motorolla is trying to teach Apple how to play Tic-Tac-Toe. Number of players: 0
Do you suffer from a syndrome in which it's impossible to tell the difference between reality and fiction?
The author of the story is purporting that is tale is real. American Psycho is a work of fiction.
Further, American Psycho was about a guy that imagined everything.
The fact that you think that the story is the same as a guy who thinks he murders people (both men and women) tells a lot more about you than anything else.
I should have known you were an educator. Your world revolves around the 12 week period when students first show up and they go on with the rest of their lives.
Something you may not be aware of... many people rote memorize things to pass a class, then as soon as the class is over, forget everything... because they didn't learn it, they just memorized it. And once the need was gone, so too was the knowledge.
I know.. I know.. Your class is different. You make sure they innately understand the material down to their bones... Yeah, talk about being an egomaniac.
There are all kinds of people that get through life never truly understanding things, but just repeating it. Often times these people are considered smart. But they can't use logic to adapt to a similar problem that isn't exactly what they memorized.
A good programmer is someone that can adapt and solve problems, not simply bluster through things until they get something that works.
They may be learned skills, but some people have greater aptitude for them than others. Further, there is some evidence that our brains develop in the ways they are taught as a child, and that once we reach adulthood the brain is much more difficult to change.
Some people simply may not have developed the right way of thinking and severely handicap their ability to learn skills such as those.
Speaking of auto mechanics. There's this thing called "Mechanical Aptitude", which good auto mechanics have. They can visualize how the machinery operates in their head. Not everyone can do that.
Having knowledge does not make one good at their job. Having failed 200 times doesn't mean you won't fail on the 201st time. Some people fail to learn from experience.
I'm not saying you need to be a genius. I'm not saying you need to be a genius to be good at programming... But some people do not have an aptitude for logical and critical thinking.
You accuse me of being an egomaniac, but you are guilty of the opposite. You expect everyone to be like you.
I think you will find yourself constantly disappointed in others.
Anyone can become a programmer. Not everyone can become a GOOD programmer, or even a competent one.
Even fewer can become an exceptional programmer.
It's not just practice. I've put far more than the 10,000 hours required to master a skill into learning to play Guitar, but I still suck. The reasons are probably many, but I've also come to understand I'm just not talented in this regard.
Just like some people are natural artists, some people are natural programmers. Some people aren't natural programmers, but can become proficient with a lot of practice. Some people can't get it not matter how much or how long they practice.
Some people think logically. Some people think intuitively. The former can become competent programmers. The latter, not so much.. because computer languages just don't make intuitive sense.
The REALLY good programmers are ones that can both think logically AND intuitively. They can use logic and still intuitively jump to conclusions that would take far longer with logic alone.
Now, whether or not you can change your way of thinking, or whether or not you are born with a certain way of thinking is unclear. Certainly, I think how a child is raised affects the way they will think as an adult, but it also requires aptitude.
If it's so obvious, why has nobody yet done it with more than 5 years of smartphones on the market.
I actually like this idea. If my phone is in my pants and i'm in a movie theater and I forgot to silence it.. just whack my pocket and it stops ringing, rather than fumbling in my pocket to get it out, and find the buttons.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm.. not sure why the link was not there..
https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2012-0056
Yes, Red Hat will announce bugs with no patch *IF* the flaw is already publicly being exploited. Just like Microsoft.
Are those critical flaws that give remote or local privilege escalations? Let's take an example. I looked for important security flaws and found this one.
Notice the date on the announcement, it specifically says the word "Public" date. That date is 2012-01-18, however the CVE it references was created on December 7th, 2011.
So here's a critical privilege escalation bug, that was kept secret for almost 6 weeks.
The public announcement was
More importantly, how much energy will it take to do this? You are effectively destroying the efficiency of the reactor if you then have to turn around and reprocess it with more energy.
I was responding to the question askers comment about wanting "to make sure that my recent investment in an Acer laptop will last me a good long while"
Virus software will not prolong the lifetime of your laptop.
Prove what, specifically? If you're going to be a dick, you should be specific about it. But here's a recent example.
http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2012-3965
The CVE was created on July 11th, 2012. However, the existence of the flaw were not announced until August 29th, 2012.
There are many many more, and I will leave it as an exercise for anyone that wants more proof. Just look at the date the CVE was created (the assigned date) and look at the date of the announcement.
Wrong. Mozilla, Red Hat, Canonical and Google embargo the details, including the existence of, critical security bugs until a patch is available... UNLESS the exploit is publicly known already.
It's very easy to prove. Just find any critical security flaw in the CVE database and look at the date the CVE was created. Then look at the date of the official announcement, it's quite frequently weeks to months in between.
Agreed.
It should be pointed out though, Antivirus will have nothing to do with preserving the liftime of your PC. A virus (usually) can't damage the PC, it might destroy the data on it, but you can just reinstall in a worst case scenario.
* There have been some viruses in the ancient past that could damage a PC, such as forcing the hard drive to bash it's heads against the parking zone, or writing to some bizarre register in the bios that could cause some kind of hardware damage, but 99.99999% of viruses today just want to steal your identity and get at your bank account.
Unless of course you're an iranian uranium enrichment facility, then all bets are off.
Have you analyzed the typical time for Mozilla, or Google to fix such issue?
Everyone embargoes security bug details. Everyone. Mozilla, Red Hat, Canonical, Google... Everyone does it. And many times critical bugs are embargoed for several weeks, sometimes even 6 or more months.
Perhaps you would like to explain why Mozilla regularly embargoes details of critical security bugs for months as well then?
The answer is that it's irresponsible to release details of a bug when no patch yet exists.
Yes, but you would have to get a prosecutor to take the case. Unlikely they will prosecute a religious organization for perjury when they are in a different country.
ID for alcohol and cigs is rarely enforced, especially in places where people are well known. You are speaking for a large town perspective.
Bubba's gas station has been selling beer and cigs to JoeBob for 20 years, he's not going to start ID'ing him now. I can't even tell you the last time I was carded buying alcohol, and I live in a big city where i'm not known. Even at places that claim they ID everyone.
Hell, even if those were enforced, they just have someone else they know buy it for them. Lots of people live their life that way.
I have an uncle that can't read or write. He doesn't have any ID, because he doesn't have any situation in his life where one is required. He lives in a tiny town in AZ, and his kids do everything for him that requires paperwork or signatures.
If a judge can order Kevin Mitnick to never touch a computer for a given period of time, a judge can order you to delete your facebook page.
I was responding to the question of "Can a judge do this" and that answer is Yes, a judge CAN do it, and I gave various circumstances in which this can happen.
It doesn't matter what this particular case is when the question was more general.
No it's not. The court isn't ordering you that you can't express yourself, just that you can't do it in conjunction with facebook.
A judge ordering you to delete a facebook account is not violating your free speech. He's not saying you can't say things, just not in that particular forum.
This is akin to a judge ordering someone to whitewash a wall they covered with graffiti.
You're free to say all the things you said on facebook, somewhere else.
I didn't read the article (shocking I know) but if the the person committed a crime in connection with facebook, then the judge has a right to order you not to use it. Much like Kevin Mitnick was ordered to not use a computer for a given period of time.
This is becoming MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). Maybe that's the point. Maybe Motorolla is trying to teach Apple how to play Tic-Tac-Toe. Number of players: 0
Do you suffer from a syndrome in which it's impossible to tell the difference between reality and fiction?
The author of the story is purporting that is tale is real. American Psycho is a work of fiction.
Further, American Psycho was about a guy that imagined everything.
The fact that you think that the story is the same as a guy who thinks he murders people (both men and women) tells a lot more about you than anything else.
What it ACTUALLY is, is a misogynistic and discriminatory story that's trying to paint women in the workplace as instigators and troublemakers.
Here, Adam... just take a bit of this apple.
The evil attractive woman is added to the team, but "gets by" on her looks and seduces everyone around her. Whatever.
I should have known you were an educator. Your world revolves around the 12 week period when students first show up and they go on with the rest of their lives.
Something you may not be aware of... many people rote memorize things to pass a class, then as soon as the class is over, forget everything... because they didn't learn it, they just memorized it. And once the need was gone, so too was the knowledge.
I know.. I know.. Your class is different. You make sure they innately understand the material down to their bones... Yeah, talk about being an egomaniac.
There are all kinds of people that get through life never truly understanding things, but just repeating it. Often times these people are considered smart. But they can't use logic to adapt to a similar problem that isn't exactly what they memorized.
A good programmer is someone that can adapt and solve problems, not simply bluster through things until they get something that works.
They may be learned skills, but some people have greater aptitude for them than others. Further, there is some evidence that our brains develop in the ways they are taught as a child, and that once we reach adulthood the brain is much more difficult to change.
Some people simply may not have developed the right way of thinking and severely handicap their ability to learn skills such as those.
That's simply not true.
Speaking of auto mechanics. There's this thing called "Mechanical Aptitude", which good auto mechanics have. They can visualize how the machinery operates in their head. Not everyone can do that.
Having knowledge does not make one good at their job. Having failed 200 times doesn't mean you won't fail on the 201st time. Some people fail to learn from experience.
I'm not saying you need to be a genius. I'm not saying you need to be a genius to be good at programming... But some people do not have an aptitude for logical and critical thinking.
You accuse me of being an egomaniac, but you are guilty of the opposite. You expect everyone to be like you.
I think you will find yourself constantly disappointed in others.
Anyone can become a programmer. Not everyone can become a GOOD programmer, or even a competent one.
Even fewer can become an exceptional programmer.
It's not just practice. I've put far more than the 10,000 hours required to master a skill into learning to play Guitar, but I still suck. The reasons are probably many, but I've also come to understand I'm just not talented in this regard.
Just like some people are natural artists, some people are natural programmers. Some people aren't natural programmers, but can become proficient with a lot of practice. Some people can't get it not matter how much or how long they practice.
Some people think logically. Some people think intuitively. The former can become competent programmers. The latter, not so much.. because computer languages just don't make intuitive sense.
The REALLY good programmers are ones that can both think logically AND intuitively. They can use logic and still intuitively jump to conclusions that would take far longer with logic alone.
Now, whether or not you can change your way of thinking, or whether or not you are born with a certain way of thinking is unclear. Certainly, I think how a child is raised affects the way they will think as an adult, but it also requires aptitude.
If it's so obvious, why has nobody yet done it with more than 5 years of smartphones on the market.
I actually like this idea. If my phone is in my pants and i'm in a movie theater and I forgot to silence it.. just whack my pocket and it stops ringing, rather than fumbling in my pocket to get it out, and find the buttons.
The OJ trial was not typical of wrongful death trials. More often, someone gets a 50k award or less.