A button like that on Linux probably wouldn't be that big of a deal as it could just work on all the partitions except for/home.
You mean to say that everything in/var is meaningless in a typical Linux install? Mysql, svn, apache, etc. All to the trash can. Yeah!
While I am all in favor of the separation of concerns and while I also agree that Linux is better than Windows in that regard, it is nowhere as clear cut as you'd like it to be.
Nobody said it was blameless. I just called that 'fair'.
But if in the middle of a game you ask the referee to change the rules in your favor and the referee agrees, whose fault is it really? Sure, you'll win the game. You'll take part of the blame. But the real issue is the referee here, not the player.
They did something wrong - intentionally or not. It leaked. They fixed it immediately and "punished" themselves to try to compensate. That's already more than what 90% of the megacorps out there are able to do.
So that's why I say they are on the positive side of the pack. The pack being where 80% of the companies are. The 10% best are on the positive side, the 10% worse are on the dark side.
I don't think we should be praising Google for doing what they should be doing.
Given how many companies do it, I'd say they're out of the pack. Shouldn't we praise companies that are out of the pack, and on the positive side of it?
Oh please, they were caught and had to have some PR route out of it. This has been going on for months. It only became news now that big sites picked it up.
If you could lobby someone to pass a law that would guarantee you a fat paycheck until the rest of your life you'd do it in a heartbeat. And even if you didn't, most people would.
You can blame the players, it's only fair. But don't forget to blame the system, which is really the party responsible for this entire mess.
Until companies can no longer buy stupid laws and until legislators get a clue of what technology is, this ain't gonna get any better I'm afraid.
Any decent programmer should be able to write a secure program. Read your input, reject it if it's not what you want.
Clearly, this only demonstrates that you're as clueless about web security as the OP. But he has the advantage of recognizing his ignorance and asking for pointers, where you think you know it all.
And if I kill a grandma, I shouldn't go to jail. After all, who knows if she would have died the next minute from a heart attack? If so, I have deprived her of only 1 minute of her life. A very small offense if you ask me. Even more, I have deprived her of the last minute of her life which could have been painful. I should be rewarded.
See? A stupid argument is a stupid argument no matter how you spin it.
Good point. Look at the summary: " operators can be confident that the same type of accident will not reoccur".
Only someone with no fucking clue of how software works can ever write something that stupid...
I wonder if Google will be found liable when someone dies out of their car. After all, if they make the fallacious promise of "bug free", they should be held responsible for bugs. And without the promise, I fail to see how anyone will give them a license to mass produce this thing.
Pretending to be the bank out of the blue is going to raise more eyebrows than pretending to be the store the dude went to the day before, especially when the caller can substantiate his claim by citing what the user bought there.
Then you need to read the summary. It doesn't need to be in any precise direction, and it doesn't need to be between your face and the camera. Otherwise, any piece of crap would work, such as your hand, glass, etc.
Hmmmm. Sure. So, to you, a solution that works 95% of the time and then reduces the risk is worth nothing in your book? Is that the gut of your statement?
Slashdot Mirror
A button like that on Linux probably wouldn't be that big of a deal as it could just work on all the partitions except for /home.
You mean to say that everything in /var is meaningless in a typical Linux install? Mysql, svn, apache, etc. All to the trash can. Yeah!
While I am all in favor of the separation of concerns and while I also agree that Linux is better than Windows in that regard, it is nowhere as clear cut as you'd like it to be.
Nobody said it was blameless. I just called that 'fair'.
But if in the middle of a game you ask the referee to change the rules in your favor and the referee agrees, whose fault is it really? Sure, you'll win the game. You'll take part of the blame. But the real issue is the referee here, not the player.
You need to adjust your humor detector sensitivity, nothing more.
You make it properly secure and then it's too expensive to sell because there's the Diebold alternative which looks as good to a clueless user.
There. FTFY.
I think proper use of encryption
I stopped right there. You know we're talking about Diebold right?
So they've figured out that they should be doing something that anyone with any sense whatsoever would have been doing from Square One?
Yes. That's called progress. For them at least.
Have you seen the documentary where the guy finds out that the "secure database" where they collate votes is a simple Access file?
And so? Are you going to tell me that Access is insecure now?
Sheesh, you find these MS haters around every corner these days...
Thanks for clarifying. I was thinking it was that thing that kicks people off the internet in France
That's Hadopi. Pretty bad. Nobody's been kicked out yet, they're still pondering the sanity of it all I guess. Anyways, the law is in effect.
Of course, it's dead easy to circumvent it since they only monitor the eMule network, on which you can barely find anything anymore anyways.
They did something wrong - intentionally or not. It leaked. They fixed it immediately and "punished" themselves to try to compensate. That's already more than what 90% of the megacorps out there are able to do.
So that's why I say they are on the positive side of the pack. The pack being where 80% of the companies are. The 10% best are on the positive side, the 10% worse are on the dark side.
Happy?
I don't think we should be praising Google for doing what they should be doing.
Given how many companies do it, I'd say they're out of the pack. Shouldn't we praise companies that are out of the pack, and on the positive side of it?
Oh please, they were caught and had to have some PR route out of it. This has been going on for months. It only became news now that big sites picked it up.
So?
Unfortunately, you can't ignore them if someone sues you on their grounds.
If you could lobby someone to pass a law that would guarantee you a fat paycheck until the rest of your life you'd do it in a heartbeat. And even if you didn't, most people would.
You can blame the players, it's only fair. But don't forget to blame the system, which is really the party responsible for this entire mess.
Until companies can no longer buy stupid laws and until legislators get a clue of what technology is, this ain't gonna get any better I'm afraid.
Any decent programmer should be able to write a secure program. Read your input, reject it if it's not what you want.
Clearly, this only demonstrates that you're as clueless about web security as the OP. But he has the advantage of recognizing his ignorance and asking for pointers, where you think you know it all.
And if I kill a grandma, I shouldn't go to jail. After all, who knows if she would have died the next minute from a heart attack? If so, I have deprived her of only 1 minute of her life. A very small offense if you ask me. Even more, I have deprived her of the last minute of her life which could have been painful. I should be rewarded.
See? A stupid argument is a stupid argument no matter how you spin it.
Good point. Look at the summary: " operators can be confident that the same type of accident will not reoccur".
Only someone with no fucking clue of how software works can ever write something that stupid...
I wonder if Google will be found liable when someone dies out of their car. After all, if they make the fallacious promise of "bug free", they should be held responsible for bugs. And without the promise, I fail to see how anyone will give them a license to mass produce this thing.
We already have a porn titled that.
Only one?
Since you did put the link up, you should have read it.
They don't claim that their motto is "don't be evil", they claim that they believe that you can make money without doing evil. It is different.
Pretending to be the bank out of the blue is going to raise more eyebrows than pretending to be the store the dude went to the day before, especially when the caller can substantiate his claim by citing what the user bought there.
Then you need to read the summary. It doesn't need to be in any precise direction, and it doesn't need to be between your face and the camera. Otherwise, any piece of crap would work, such as your hand, glass, etc.
Hmmmm. Sure. So, to you, a solution that works 95% of the time and then reduces the risk is worth nothing in your book? Is that the gut of your statement?
Apple is tough to beat because most of its mistakes are software-based
Apple is tough to beat because most of its mistakes are user based.
Huh? What does that mean?
A SD card slot is also on the missing list ?
Not when compared to the iPad.
This is about the smartest thing HP has done in awhile. About time somebody understands the power of Opensource.
What makes you think they understand it?
Under conditions where you would think security is paramount?
And this is why you don't know what to say. Security is not paramount. Net revenue is. And security costs money.