No, just one of the Microsoft astroturfers
that apparently is uncontrollable when the
acronym BSOD appears. That, or mod-ing down
a post with BSOD earns them a larger bonus.
They will change their tune when they get accused
of spamming from their account and they can't
prove that they *didn't* send it. If you make
it your policy to *always* PGP/GPG sign your e-mails,
then any spam alledgedly from you can be refuted.
But the main problem here is that this SIGINT
will most likely *NOT* prevent a terrorist attack.
The terrorists have likely already agreed offline
how they would communicate, and just because
there is some traffic, does not mean that there
would be enough *information* to actually prevent
an actual attack. This SIGINT is only going to
*possibly* be useful *after the fact*.
The money would be better spent on HUMINT.
Exactly. It's a sad state of affairs here that
it is moderated (Score:5, Insightful). Truly,
truly sad. While the GPP (GrandParentPost) is insightful (in an indirect way) and was intended to be 'Funny', what it more insightful is how
the moderators are behaving.
It makes sense that you would have the "dog day" cicada, and the non-composite cycles species.
To keep things in balance, you would tend to find
that it is important that the predators can survive. To make that happen, you need 'dogs'.
It would be interesting to compare the genome of various species. I'll bet you'd find that the
"dog day" cicada is the more primative genetically
(ie, oldest), and the non-composite dudes have
more genetic variation.
I was thinking they should just keep the entire
setup as is, and the kids should pitch in on
the bills. That way, they will have access to
the Internet when they visit mum. The kids
*are* planning on seeing mum again aren't they?
Yes. When it comes to bloated code, you
have the inevitable security holes introduced.
Plus, even when MS is informed about a security hole,
their arrogance prevents them from allowing
that the hole is worse than the want to believe.
Here's an example from 2004-03-09 where they say the hole is not critical.
But then MS admits that the hole actually is
critcal.
Of course, they attempt to spin it:
"This change is based on information concerning a new attack scenario discovered after the bulletin's original release on 9 March," said the company in a statement.
Initially, Microsoft said the flaw could only be exploited if the Outlook Today folder is being used as the homepage. Few people do that; generally, the Outlook Today folder is the default homepage only if no e-mail accounts exist. When an e-mail account is set up, the homepage changes to the inbox.
But, as it turns out, the vulnerability can be exploited even if Outlook Today isn't the homepage. To exploit the flaw, an attacker would need to send two specially crafted mailto URLs. The first would start Outlook and open the Outlook Today page, and the second would inject the exploit code. The exploit code needs to be injected into vulnerable systems either by a malicious Web site set up by the attacker or via an HTML e-mail.
So, was MS warned or not?
From this article, it could be that they
didn't listen in the first place to those
whom discovered the hole:
But the bloke who discovered the vulnerability, Finnish security researcher Jouko Pynnonen, got back in touch and told them hackers could attack vulnerable Outlook installations even if Outlook Today isn't the default home page.
Slashdot Mirror
No, just one of the Microsoft astroturfers that apparently is uncontrollable when the acronym BSOD appears. That, or mod-ing down a post with BSOD earns them a larger bonus.
Then again, that might be her plan.
Linux is still an old car, you can fix it. Microsoft is engineered to be complicated, just like modern cars.
That may work in *your* state, but other states are up for grabs.
They will change their tune when they get accused of spamming from their account and they can't prove that they *didn't* send it. If you make it your policy to *always* PGP/GPG sign your e-mails, then any spam alledgedly from you can be refuted.
But the main problem here is that this SIGINT will most likely *NOT* prevent a terrorist attack. The terrorists have likely already agreed offline how they would communicate, and just because there is some traffic, does not mean that there would be enough *information* to actually prevent an actual attack. This SIGINT is only going to *possibly* be useful *after the fact*. The money would be better spent on HUMINT.
If you vote for Nader, you are voting for Bush.
Exactly. It's a sad state of affairs here that it is moderated (Score:5, Insightful). Truly, truly sad. While the GPP (GrandParentPost) is insightful (in an indirect way) and was intended to be 'Funny', what it more insightful is how the moderators are behaving.
To keep things in balance, you would tend to find that it is important that the predators can survive. To make that happen, you need 'dogs'.
It would be interesting to compare the genome of various species. I'll bet you'd find that the "dog day" cicada is the more primative genetically (ie, oldest), and the non-composite dudes have more genetic variation.
Just a theory, IANAG.
If you have to do more than the 'standard stuff', then I'd say you have bureaucracy lurking waiting to kill your business.
I was thinking they should just keep the entire setup as is, and the kids should pitch in on the bills. That way, they will have access to the Internet when they visit mum. The kids *are* planning on seeing mum again aren't they?
Plus, even when MS is informed about a security hole, their arrogance prevents them from allowing that the hole is worse than the want to believe. Here's an example from 2004-03-09 where they say the hole is not critical.
But then MS admits that the hole actually is critcal.
Of course, they attempt to spin it:
"This change is based on information concerning a new attack scenario discovered after the bulletin's original release on 9 March," said the company in a statement.
Another link.
Initially, Microsoft said the flaw could only be exploited if the Outlook Today folder is being used as the homepage. Few people do that; generally, the Outlook Today folder is the default homepage only if no e-mail accounts exist. When an e-mail account is set up, the homepage changes to the inbox. But, as it turns out, the vulnerability can be exploited even if Outlook Today isn't the homepage. To exploit the flaw, an attacker would need to send two specially crafted mailto URLs. The first would start Outlook and open the Outlook Today page, and the second would inject the exploit code. The exploit code needs to be injected into vulnerable systems either by a malicious Web site set up by the attacker or via an HTML e-mail.
So, was MS warned or not?
From this article, it could be that they didn't listen in the first place to those whom discovered the hole:
But the bloke who discovered the vulnerability, Finnish security researcher Jouko Pynnonen, got back in touch and told them hackers could attack vulnerable Outlook installations even if Outlook Today isn't the default home page.
Thanks, I'm glad I didn't RTFA then.
Perhaps Google needs to only subscribe to Slashdot, set the preferences, and Google will then find anything you ever need.
Doing the man command is probably too much for a true newbie. See 'man ls' or 'man nmap'.
I wouldn't accept a Windows CD for less than $100.
You gotta pay me to keep that coaster safe.
BSD is short-term freedom, GPL is long-term freedom.
No, they never give me a cut of the action.
Later, a future Service Pack will 'break' the competitors products.
Rinse, wash, repeat.
All your recipes are belong to us!
Will they link to this someday?
1 out of 20 is good. Possibly indicates that most of the machines on the network they scanned are *NOT* running MS Windows.
Wow, and you factored a large prime number also!
Bill always said that was important.
It's not near as massive a fraud as the DOJ has already committed with regard to MS.
Yep, heard of him. He's gonna get Bush re-elected. No need to fix the vote.