Checking ANI's has been a staple of call center security for a long time now. Dialback verification works rather well at stopping fraud. Overall that is leaving a lot more traces than a carder wants to. Simple SMS verification can lock down voice transactions pretty well it's, up the the banks to actually do it, as long as the losses are on the business they have little incentive to fix it.
So carry cash? Making a small stand alone device that's a tpm (crypto processor whatever) chip, an nfc controller small keypad and lcd display to ack as one or more CC is pretty trivial. Hell you can get a fingerprint reader into that form factor.
NFC and similar removes the form factor of having something that has to swipe or plug in. There are a plethora of authentication protocols to provide a second factor that does not matter if it's compromised and do not require it be sourced from your bank. Maybe you like a nfc watch or want something in a traditional CC form factor. Maybe I use NFC on my phone, a one time pin from a printed card in my wallet (that is generated and authenticated by a server I own or a 3rd party besides my bank), a pin and I have to approve the amount on my phone. Point is to have a framework that allows varying levels of security and devices.
Online I like what some european (probably elsewhere as well) banks have one time CC numbers for online transactions. Want to be secure you generate a one time CC number and use it it's limited to the amount you specify and/or a specific number of transactions. Can also do recurring transactions limited to how many times a month and for how much.
At the end of the day you can not make a system that it's impossible to steal from. You can make it hard and you can limit the exposure.
TPM etc, your secure bits are not on the phone rather a simple stable module with a well defined access method. The TPM only has one part you still need a pin if your realy worried about it your pins can be one time. It's pretty trivial to print out a few pages of business cards and mail them to you, cross off a pin as you use them in order. So yea if you pown the phone you could get access to have the TPM sign a transaction and a PIN that was entered. If you're that worried about it making a stand alone device that is a tpm chip, nfc, a small screen and keypad much like a cheap solar calculator could be made by many vendors and associated to one or more accounts.
I find it hard that anything but a corner case would require hacking to get to records held by third parties. I have decades of working in the hosting and ISP industries, requests for data come in daily get reviewed by council and generally processed, we get paid rather well to do the work. Hacking should require that you have a good reason to think that the third party is actually in collusion with the suspect. If they have a clue about security we dont have much to give them just encrypted data and logs of what connected when. That said a VM is always less secure than a physical and keep your keys separate from your data.
No more secure? The secret of the card nevers leaves the fsking card thats pretty much the point. The pin is a secondary factor.
Now it would be much better if you never typed your pin into anything shared. Phones with NFC come to mind some companies got a keypad and display to a cc size package. Some got a per transaction "cvv" generated on the card.
Really it is a half step should have moved to NFC based transaction how many people are still walking around with dumb phones?
Your absolutly not obliged to do anything of the sort in a criminal case. They are perfectly free to crack the code. It does seem strange that in the highly regulated banking market that the corp phones dont have corp backup.
The best pre computer analogy was accounting books written in code, the mob etc needed records of bets wins/loses loans and the like.
Sure it's not a perfect fix but publishing the signatures of your ssl certs in DNS would care care of a lot of this low hanging fruit. A standard for cosigning your certs and pinning that cert would also help.
The end effect is needing to break multiple vectors not any of a multitude of root level CA's.
So you saying your have never even sat next to an electrical engineer on a bus one time.
Electrical generation is primarily steam, the waste product is primarily heat. Heat can be useful everything from desalinating water, splitting water for hydrogen, growing algae as feedstock for biodiesel, animal feed etc etc. You're correct a typical commercial steam turbine has a max theoretical efficiency of 60% or so according to Carnot's law and about 50% in the real world.
The grid 90+% efficient and getting better.
Charging if a battery were 50% waste heat in charging at charged at the rates they do it would catch on fire/melt etc. Old lead acids were fairly inefficient thus why they were slow to charge or you would boil off the water. Modern batteries are in the mid to upper 90's.
Electric motors in the 125+ HP range tend to be in the 90+% range, again if not they would melt without a lot of cooling.
So you have a 50% efficient turbine powering 3 layers of 90+. That 50% efficient is only that bad if no secondary process is in place to utilize the waste heat.
Force != demand, it's perfectly legitimate to say I need more sex or this relationship does not work for me as my needs are not being met. You're assuming a relationship binary. Women are perfectly capable and do demand sex just because on average them seem less likely to does not make it a male misogynistic issue. Since I would never be in a relationship with a guy it would be impossible for a male relationship partner demand sex, but women can and do demand sex and it's part of a healthy relationship to make these wants/needs know and deal with fulfilling them.
You're trying to twist in random strangers making demands of others, what part of in a relationship do you not understand.
Pressure/coercion are not rape, it is perfectly fair to say hey I need more sex or this relationship does not work for me and needs to end. Yes thats is pressure and coercion you're threatening to end a relationship if your needs can not be met within it's confines. Again you're jumping to something entirely different force. It's not 60 years ago women are not dependent on men as they once were. To construe having any repercussion for refusing sex as rape is abusive of men and people in general. Sure there are some nonviolent methods that can and should be considered rape, primarily extortion and abuse of authority.
Please note I've tried very hard to ignore the multiple you statements, it's not about me nor do I care for the personal attack that implies.
Men have the right to sex, everybody has a right to have their needs met. The bigger picture is limiting men's access to sex. You have an entire culture that's based upon artificial scarcity of female sexual partners. Slut shaming is at it's root an attempt to keep other women in line. Monogamy is written into law as far as divorces etc etc etc. Willing prostitution is generally illegal (and been correlated to large reductions in rape and general male violence where is available and reasonably affordable). Social stigma that is associated with open marriages poly relationships etc etc seem to primarily come from women. Divorce is still heavily tilted towards women due to 60+ year old assumptions.
At the end of the day a healthy relationship means everybody's needs are getting met, too many men an active sex life is a need. So that has to happen within the relationship one way or another for the relationship to continue and be healthy.
So I would say men do have a right to sex and women do deny men sex. That right is not to any particular women. Too many times I've heard feminists go on about how it's unfair for a man to pressure/coerce etc etc a woman to have sex especially in relationships. Few couples have the same sex drive at all times. To say that men have no right to press to have their needs met in a relationship is abusive to the core. At the end of the day if your partner is unwilling or unable to meet your needs you have to figure out how to solve the problem, in general that can't happen without negotiations and each side giving. Yes that means some women may have more sex than they want, that's not male oppression rather the effect of societal pressure that's primary from women.
I'm not sure how a suit will be stupid to fight a NSL. This is general asking for third party data after they can not let the actual owner of the data know so they should be act as a good custodian of their data. You think a company suspected of gun running is going to get a NSL letter asking them to divulge that they are?
My basic IT interview question is give them an example task and how often it will happen and see how they document it. The bad have notes that end up like click ok next next do this etc so that it's specific to a particular UI and minor changes invalidate it and do things via the UI. The good tend to make scripts or one liners. It's not even unix centric anymore. Take a basic task of adding a user to AD and assign a primary SMTP address and a couple aliases you can use AD's gui and then pop open ASDIedit or bang out a line or few of powershell. The best figure out that it's a list and bang out a quick loop.
NSL's lack consequence to those that are writing them. If they are going to stay around they need personal consequences to whoever ordered them and attested to anything in them if they are found to be invalid, overreaching etc etc. That needs to be coupled with the government automatically paying all legal costs win or lose. Nobody should have to be out of pocket to defend their basic rights from the government.
They are written to imply getting a judge to agree is a different matter. At worst you need a lawyer with clearance somewhat hard to do but not impossible.
Slashdot Mirror
Synergy and a matrix hdmi switch gets him everything he is looking for.
Checking ANI's has been a staple of call center security for a long time now. Dialback verification works rather well at stopping fraud. Overall that is leaving a lot more traces than a carder wants to. Simple SMS verification can lock down voice transactions pretty well it's, up the the banks to actually do it, as long as the losses are on the business they have little incentive to fix it.
The mag card info is not the secret not even close.
In 1970 they were probably hanging up and calling into the CC company to get an auth. It was insecure.
So carry cash? Making a small stand alone device that's a tpm (crypto processor whatever) chip, an nfc controller small keypad and lcd display to ack as one or more CC is pretty trivial. Hell you can get a fingerprint reader into that form factor.
NFC and similar removes the form factor of having something that has to swipe or plug in. There are a plethora of authentication protocols to provide a second factor that does not matter if it's compromised and do not require it be sourced from your bank. Maybe you like a nfc watch or want something in a traditional CC form factor. Maybe I use NFC on my phone, a one time pin from a printed card in my wallet (that is generated and authenticated by a server I own or a 3rd party besides my bank), a pin and I have to approve the amount on my phone. Point is to have a framework that allows varying levels of security and devices.
Online I like what some european (probably elsewhere as well) banks have one time CC numbers for online transactions. Want to be secure you generate a one time CC number and use it it's limited to the amount you specify and/or a specific number of transactions. Can also do recurring transactions limited to how many times a month and for how much.
At the end of the day you can not make a system that it's impossible to steal from. You can make it hard and you can limit the exposure.
TPM etc, your secure bits are not on the phone rather a simple stable module with a well defined access method. The TPM only has one part you still need a pin if your realy worried about it your pins can be one time. It's pretty trivial to print out a few pages of business cards and mail them to you, cross off a pin as you use them in order. So yea if you pown the phone you could get access to have the TPM sign a transaction and a PIN that was entered. If you're that worried about it making a stand alone device that is a tpm chip, nfc, a small screen and keypad much like a cheap solar calculator could be made by many vendors and associated to one or more accounts.
I find it hard that anything but a corner case would require hacking to get to records held by third parties. I have decades of working in the hosting and ISP industries, requests for data come in daily get reviewed by council and generally processed, we get paid rather well to do the work. Hacking should require that you have a good reason to think that the third party is actually in collusion with the suspect. If they have a clue about security we dont have much to give them just encrypted data and logs of what connected when. That said a VM is always less secure than a physical and keep your keys separate from your data.
No more secure? The secret of the card nevers leaves the fsking card thats pretty much the point. The pin is a secondary factor.
Now it would be much better if you never typed your pin into anything shared. Phones with NFC come to mind some companies got a keypad and display to a cc size package. Some got a per transaction "cvv" generated on the card.
Really it is a half step should have moved to NFC based transaction how many people are still walking around with dumb phones?
Actually most of the DC jobs are hands on. The remote jobs would be remote no matter where it was built.
Shim6 makes this a lot more reliable. It deals with netsplits etc not just ISP A or ISP B.
Sure because nat64 does not exist. You can get along quite well single stack.
Your absolutly not obliged to do anything of the sort in a criminal case. They are perfectly free to crack the code. It does seem strange that in the highly regulated banking market that the corp phones dont have corp backup.
The best pre computer analogy was accounting books written in code, the mob etc needed records of bets wins/loses loans and the like.
Shift, ctrl, and alt can do it on an 8th of the hardware aka slightly less and 2.
I believe their current plan is ignore it and it will go away.
Sure it's not a perfect fix but publishing the signatures of your ssl certs in DNS would care care of a lot of this low hanging fruit. A standard for cosigning your certs and pinning that cert would also help.
The end effect is needing to break multiple vectors not any of a multitude of root level CA's.
So you saying your have never even sat next to an electrical engineer on a bus one time.
Electrical generation is primarily steam, the waste product is primarily heat. Heat can be useful everything from desalinating water, splitting water for hydrogen, growing algae as feedstock for biodiesel, animal feed etc etc. You're correct a typical commercial steam turbine has a max theoretical efficiency of 60% or so according to Carnot's law and about 50% in the real world.
The grid 90+% efficient and getting better.
Charging if a battery were 50% waste heat in charging at charged at the rates they do it would catch on fire/melt etc. Old lead acids were fairly inefficient thus why they were slow to charge or you would boil off the water. Modern batteries are in the mid to upper 90's.
Electric motors in the 125+ HP range tend to be in the 90+% range, again if not they would melt without a lot of cooling.
So you have a 50% efficient turbine powering 3 layers of 90+. That 50% efficient is only that bad if no secondary process is in place to utilize the waste heat.
A company suspected of gunrunning should be getting a subpoena not a NSL.
The silk road had no company to send a NSL to it was a dark web operation pure and simple.
Force != demand, it's perfectly legitimate to say I need more sex or this relationship does not work for me as my needs are not being met. You're assuming a relationship binary. Women are perfectly capable and do demand sex just because on average them seem less likely to does not make it a male misogynistic issue. Since I would never be in a relationship with a guy it would be impossible for a male relationship partner demand sex, but women can and do demand sex and it's part of a healthy relationship to make these wants/needs know and deal with fulfilling them.
You're trying to twist in random strangers making demands of others, what part of in a relationship do you not understand.
Pressure/coercion are not rape, it is perfectly fair to say hey I need more sex or this relationship does not work for me and needs to end. Yes thats is pressure and coercion you're threatening to end a relationship if your needs can not be met within it's confines. Again you're jumping to something entirely different force. It's not 60 years ago women are not dependent on men as they once were. To construe having any repercussion for refusing sex as rape is abusive of men and people in general. Sure there are some nonviolent methods that can and should be considered rape, primarily extortion and abuse of authority.
Please note I've tried very hard to ignore the multiple you statements, it's not about me nor do I care for the personal attack that implies.
Men have the right to sex, everybody has a right to have their needs met. The bigger picture is limiting men's access to sex. You have an entire culture that's based upon artificial scarcity of female sexual partners. Slut shaming is at it's root an attempt to keep other women in line. Monogamy is written into law as far as divorces etc etc etc. Willing prostitution is generally illegal (and been correlated to large reductions in rape and general male violence where is available and reasonably affordable). Social stigma that is associated with open marriages poly relationships etc etc seem to primarily come from women. Divorce is still heavily tilted towards women due to 60+ year old assumptions.
At the end of the day a healthy relationship means everybody's needs are getting met, too many men an active sex life is a need. So that has to happen within the relationship one way or another for the relationship to continue and be healthy.
So I would say men do have a right to sex and women do deny men sex. That right is not to any particular women. Too many times I've heard feminists go on about how it's unfair for a man to pressure/coerce etc etc a woman to have sex especially in relationships. Few couples have the same sex drive at all times. To say that men have no right to press to have their needs met in a relationship is abusive to the core. At the end of the day if your partner is unwilling or unable to meet your needs you have to figure out how to solve the problem, in general that can't happen without negotiations and each side giving. Yes that means some women may have more sex than they want, that's not male oppression rather the effect of societal pressure that's primary from women.
I'm not sure how a suit will be stupid to fight a NSL. This is general asking for third party data after they can not let the actual owner of the data know so they should be act as a good custodian of their data. You think a company suspected of gun running is going to get a NSL letter asking them to divulge that they are?
My basic IT interview question is give them an example task and how often it will happen and see how they document it. The bad have notes that end up like click ok next next do this etc so that it's specific to a particular UI and minor changes invalidate it and do things via the UI. The good tend to make scripts or one liners. It's not even unix centric anymore. Take a basic task of adding a user to AD and assign a primary SMTP address and a couple aliases you can use AD's gui and then pop open ASDIedit or bang out a line or few of powershell. The best figure out that it's a list and bang out a quick loop.
NSL's lack consequence to those that are writing them. If they are going to stay around they need personal consequences to whoever ordered them and attested to anything in them if they are found to be invalid, overreaching etc etc. That needs to be coupled with the government automatically paying all legal costs win or lose. Nobody should have to be out of pocket to defend their basic rights from the government.
They are written to imply getting a judge to agree is a different matter. At worst you need a lawyer with clearance somewhat hard to do but not impossible.
Consider a modern 4.5 person family. 4 1080p streams at 20mbs fills that quite nicely.
Yea because google has no function to store an encrypted blob?