They have emails from her telling people to take classification markings off. They have found CIA human intelligence on her private server. They have Special Access Program data which everyone with an IQ above 80 outside of the federal government knows is presumed classified. What she did makes Bradley Manning look like a prankster, since she was a cabinet level appointee responsible for overseeing the protection of classified data.
All I see is speculation. Where is the actual proof of her doing these things? That website is the same as a anti-vax website imho.
If the FBI charges Clinton with any sort of crime, it will just serve to further undermine the legitimacy of all law enforcement agencies in the US.
You have that exactly backwards. Letting her walk when it's so obvious that she's committed many more counts of the same crime that Patreus was convicted for would demonstrate that some people can avoid consequences for blatant felonies.
-jcr
If her email server was never compromised then she never committed a single crime.
Of course, if you're a DNC shill, you think she has done nothing wrong, in spite of the ongoing revelations of secret, classified, and beyond classified documents found on an unsecured server. I am sure that if this were an (R) running for President, you'd be calling for his hanging, and not saying "nothing to see here, move along"
Which is why I hate party politics, because people like you only see the Party, and not the crimes.
Of course if you're a republican shill you'll act as if no one noticed the emails weren't addressed to Hilary's whitehouse.gov address. You gotta be a special kind of stupid to do this for 8 years and then act as if you never noticed.
Our company does this. Recently they have been thinking about instituting a policy that you can only have corporate mail on it - no gmail, outlook.com, comcast, yahoo, whatever other email. Add on their 8 digit PIN requirement and it really comes down to "I just bought the company a phone" if you are foolish enough to BYOD...
A lot of companies are going this route because people are so damn negligent with their devices. The company I work for with 140k employees requires any smartphone hooked to our network/email to install an application that encrypts web/email traffic to our domains. If you're browsing to google.com or gmail it doesn't get encrypted. If you don't do this then you're not eligible to receive email on your device.
If it's a corporate purchased phone then the entire device and all traffic is encrypted.
In both circumstances there is also a kill switch in case your phone is stolen. This is how it works when you have intellectual property on your device.
No, it is legal, but it is not fair. Why are companies so obsessed with spying their employees, and why are you Americans so willing to accept it? Just because company is legally allowed to do something, it does not make it meaningful or acceptable. And what they believe that they could find there? Even if I want to harm them by using smartphone, I'd do it with my private phone and they cannot do anything without court order. Spying peoples phones is just waste of time and good way to make their employees hate them.
Because your employer is paying for the phone and the service. If you don't like it then pay for it yourself. It's no simpler than that.
Yet 2 out of my 5 SSDs have failed, and those are reputable brands. The first one developed memory hole that the controller does not see, it is just completely unable to read several sectors (a 64kb piece) and responds with seek error, and has made no attempts at remapping them, the other lost its capacity and is showing like 20mb drive (some kind of firmware update mode), which also has all of it's sectors unreadable.
Some of the 1st generation had issues. But spindle drives still continue to fail far more often than spindle
Of course, there's the very real possibility that Trump is sincere in his brand of crazy, and that this resonates with a lot of people.
You should be afraid of this possibility. Very very afraid.
Of course he's sincere. But he's certifiable nuts. He's so far out of touch with reality and how the world works outside of business that he can't handle any real topics. He can't use intimidation to pass laws or to negotiate with other countries. We saw how well that worked with Bush.
It's been my theory all along that Trump is trolling the Republican party. I am also not much surprised that this has been an effective method for gaining support from some of their followers.
It's Jesse Ventura 2.0. I voted for Jesse. Big mistake. He really had no plan. Now Trump is doing the same thing.
A government agency wants to use, factually, LESS secure phones in its office to make a political statement.
Is the point that government agencies should always use less secure phones so the public can access their salient details? In that case I agree but I don't think that's the point he's trying to make.
Encryption is encryption. Unless you provide the recovery key your phone is safe.
Google said some words of support, but they would still bend over for the govt when requested. They wouldn't actually make a stand like this. and even if they did, it's not clear if the handset oem or if the OS oem would be required to do this.
It doesn't really matter. If you encrypt your phone with 3rd party encryption software the FBI can't get in. So there would be no workaround if a employee like the one in California encrypted their phone. Most criminals don't encrypt their devices and then make the recovery key secret. The only reason we've seen encryption cracked in the past is because they found an exploit in the implementation of the encryption driver itself.
Another much talked about project was the countrywide wifi network, wi-max or something. Google was supposedly trying to completely bypass all the cellular companies, provide free wifi for everyone in exchange for the permission to snoop even more deeply into your email traffic. What happened? It sold out to the cell companies?
It requires infrastructure. Google tends to build and then announce, not announce and then let it become vaporware for years.
Of course there is only one Earth, given the extreme odds of Earth developing, what would the added chances be that another planet like ours would develop, AND they would call it Earth, seems kind of slim to me...
Would the Universal Motion Arts Association allow for there to be 2 Earths(tm) without legal action and then send in the Vogons to destroy the infringing planet.
On another track, maybe there is only one earth per universe/dimension ?
Tom Cruise only needs to discover that he's a clone and lead us over the barrier to the next earth.
It's also completely absurd given that even with our knowledge of exoplanets, we barely know anything about this one microscopic area of our own Galaxy... Among billions of galaxies.
What possible data could be meaningful at those scales?
I think the whole point of the article is that if all the computer models they're using to predict whether another exists says that our *current* earth shouldn't exist, then our models are wrong. If our models are wrong then the criteria we're using to search for new earths has no chance of being successful.
"It's crazy we're sitting here in 2016 and still, four billion people in the world don't have access to the Internet," he said.
But hes not helping them get access to the internet. He's only getting them access to facebook and facebook sanctioned sites. So the Indian govt is right.
Also one thing that developing countries dispise is it's citizens getting enslaved to a overseas companies services. So fuck off zuckerfuck. If you really meant what you say about internet access then you would be giving them unrestricted internet to any website including your competitor's.
It's almost as crazy as billions of people having no access to clean water. Which is far more important than Facebook.
And what business is of theirs what software I'm running and how often I'm using it?
It is their business when their business depends on it. The common complaints users have with Windows have led them there. The large amount of hardware, software variations coupled with the different user types makes it difficult to have something universal that just works 100% of the time.
My only beef with them is that they won't tell us what they collect and what are the triggers. I'm all for letting them grab data on my usage and the condition of my system. After all, it's in my best interest to help them improve the OS.
MS in has recently shown interest in listening to the community and it's important we keep prying them for that information so that we can eventually feel at ease about what's happening.
If you don't like it then disable the services that use those ports. I'm sure these ZDNET writer is on a domain so that 100% explains the port 135 requests.
The others are probably applications that are installed. Turn them off.
The sensor does not do the decryption or authentication. The attack vector would be a sensor that has been replaced with a mechanism that replays a snapshot of the phone owner's fingerprint and sends that down the wire to the mainboard. Apple is attempting to curtail that type of attack by authenticating the physical sensor to the mainboard.
So disable the sensor if it's found to be invalid. You don't destroy a $500 phone. What if the sensor goes bad? New phone? Seriously people.
OTOH, this appears to still happen if the phone itself is reset to a factory image. It doesn't seem to be that much of a security risk if instead of refusing to work, the phone, after being reset, would renegotiate encryption with the sensor. There's no data to be stolen in that scenario. And there's other mechanisms to prevent a stolen phone from having resale value.
It's still a security risk. You could imaging intercepting new iPhones, replacing the fingerprint sensor with a compromised one containing a backdoor, then reimaging the phones, putting them back in the box, and selling them to your target. After your target loads their sensitive data on to them, you could then retrieve it using the compromised sensor.
I agree this is somewhat contrived and Apple is likely just looking to block third party repairs, but it still is a valid security risk.
So the solution is to permanently brick the phone? Gimme a break. You generate a warning on the phone to let the user know. Better yet, brick the phone and charge to repair it correctly. You don't screw your customers out of a perfectly good phone.
Computer salesperson: "Hey, it's time to replace your old machines."
Gov buyer: "Fuck off, they work just fine."
Computer salesperson: "But these shiny new Intel models SAVE ENERGY."
Gov buyer: "On second though we've got plenty of taxpayer money to blow on 'energy efficiency' projects. Why don't ya' put us down for half million new laptops and two million of those tablet thingies so people can plug them in next to their desktops - I mean 'replace their energy-sucking desktops' - and see if you can't find a new boat for 'my nephew' and a trip to the Caribbean for 'my travel agent' while you're at it."
Nearly every company is thinking about energy efficiency. Every company that moves to a cloud setup is saving energy/power in exchange for a slice of a datacenter that is energy efficient.
Slashdot Mirror
Please publish the names of the authors, so we know not to ever install anything written by them ever again.
Better yet. Stop trying to police addons we want to use in our browser.
They have emails from her telling people to take classification markings off. They have found CIA human intelligence on her private server. They have Special Access Program data which everyone with an IQ above 80 outside of the federal government knows is presumed classified. What she did makes Bradley Manning look like a prankster, since she was a cabinet level appointee responsible for overseeing the protection of classified data.
All I see is speculation. Where is the actual proof of her doing these things? That website is the same as a anti-vax website imho.
Clinton is not a technical person and probably didn't have any idea that this setup was not secure.
Try again.
She's a lawyer, and she knew full well that she was breaking the law.
-jcr
IT was not against the law at the time to use a personal email server. She knows the law better than you do.
Those are BORN Classified.
On an unsecured server? Doubtful.
Congratulations! You have just outed yourself as a fucking Hillary Kool Aid drinker and cult member.
As moderate conservative, I'm voting for Hillary. If Donald Trump becomes the Republican nominee, the neocons will vote for Hillary.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/trump-clinton-neoconservatives-220151
The laws forbidding using a 3rd party server for communication were put in place AFTER Hilary's email server was shutdown.
Seriously?
Hillary supporters defend her like Nazis defending Hitler as the Soviets were blasting their way into Berlin.
I'll take the integrity of the FBI over Hillary any day.
So GTFO with your pathetic blustering.
Integrity of the FBI? What?
If the FBI charges Clinton with any sort of crime, it will just serve to further undermine the legitimacy of all law enforcement agencies in the US.
You have that exactly backwards. Letting her walk when it's so obvious that she's committed many more counts of the same crime that Patreus was convicted for would demonstrate that some people can avoid consequences for blatant felonies.
-jcr
If her email server was never compromised then she never committed a single crime.
Of course, if you're a DNC shill, you think she has done nothing wrong, in spite of the ongoing revelations of secret, classified, and beyond classified documents found on an unsecured server. I am sure that if this were an (R) running for President, you'd be calling for his hanging, and not saying "nothing to see here, move along"
Which is why I hate party politics, because people like you only see the Party, and not the crimes.
Of course if you're a republican shill you'll act as if no one noticed the emails weren't addressed to Hilary's whitehouse.gov address. You gotta be a special kind of stupid to do this for 8 years and then act as if you never noticed.
Our company does this. Recently they have been thinking about instituting a policy that you can only have corporate mail on it - no gmail, outlook.com, comcast, yahoo, whatever other email. Add on their 8 digit PIN requirement and it really comes down to "I just bought the company a phone" if you are foolish enough to BYOD...
A lot of companies are going this route because people are so damn negligent with their devices. The company I work for with 140k employees requires any smartphone hooked to our network/email to install an application that encrypts web/email traffic to our domains. If you're browsing to google.com or gmail it doesn't get encrypted. If you don't do this then you're not eligible to receive email on your device. If it's a corporate purchased phone then the entire device and all traffic is encrypted. In both circumstances there is also a kill switch in case your phone is stolen. This is how it works when you have intellectual property on your device.
If you're on their network, it's fair game.
No, it is legal, but it is not fair. Why are companies so obsessed with spying their employees, and why are you Americans so willing to accept it? Just because company is legally allowed to do something, it does not make it meaningful or acceptable. And what they believe that they could find there? Even if I want to harm them by using smartphone, I'd do it with my private phone and they cannot do anything without court order. Spying peoples phones is just waste of time and good way to make their employees hate them.
Because your employer is paying for the phone and the service. If you don't like it then pay for it yourself. It's no simpler than that.
Yet 2 out of my 5 SSDs have failed, and those are reputable brands. The first one developed memory hole that the controller does not see, it is just completely unable to read several sectors (a 64kb piece) and responds with seek error, and has made no attempts at remapping them, the other lost its capacity and is showing like 20mb drive (some kind of firmware update mode), which also has all of it's sectors unreadable.
Some of the 1st generation had issues. But spindle drives still continue to fail far more often than spindle
Of course, there's the very real possibility that Trump is sincere in his brand of crazy, and that this resonates with a lot of people.
You should be afraid of this possibility. Very very afraid.
Of course he's sincere. But he's certifiable nuts. He's so far out of touch with reality and how the world works outside of business that he can't handle any real topics. He can't use intimidation to pass laws or to negotiate with other countries. We saw how well that worked with Bush.
It's been my theory all along that Trump is trolling the Republican party. I am also not much surprised that this has been an effective method for gaining support from some of their followers.
It's Jesse Ventura 2.0. I voted for Jesse. Big mistake. He really had no plan. Now Trump is doing the same thing.
A government agency wants to use, factually, LESS secure phones in its office to make a political statement.
Is the point that government agencies should always use less secure phones so the public can access their salient details? In that case I agree but I don't think that's the point he's trying to make.
Encryption is encryption. Unless you provide the recovery key your phone is safe.
Google said some words of support, but they would still bend over for the govt when requested. They wouldn't actually make a stand like this. and even if they did, it's not clear if the handset oem or if the OS oem would be required to do this.
It doesn't really matter. If you encrypt your phone with 3rd party encryption software the FBI can't get in. So there would be no workaround if a employee like the one in California encrypted their phone. Most criminals don't encrypt their devices and then make the recovery key secret. The only reason we've seen encryption cracked in the past is because they found an exploit in the implementation of the encryption driver itself.
Another much talked about project was the countrywide wifi network, wi-max or something. Google was supposedly trying to completely bypass all the cellular companies, provide free wifi for everyone in exchange for the permission to snoop even more deeply into your email traffic. What happened? It sold out to the cell companies?
It requires infrastructure. Google tends to build and then announce, not announce and then let it become vaporware for years.
Of course there is only one Earth, given the extreme odds of Earth developing, what would the added chances be that another planet like ours would develop, AND they would call it Earth, seems kind of slim to me...
Would the Universal Motion Arts Association allow for there to be 2 Earths(tm) without legal action and then send in the Vogons to destroy the infringing planet.
On another track, maybe there is only one earth per universe/dimension ?
Tom Cruise only needs to discover that he's a clone and lead us over the barrier to the next earth.
It's also completely absurd given that even with our knowledge of exoplanets, we barely know anything about this one microscopic area of our own Galaxy... Among billions of galaxies.
What possible data could be meaningful at those scales?
I think the whole point of the article is that if all the computer models they're using to predict whether another exists says that our *current* earth shouldn't exist, then our models are wrong. If our models are wrong then the criteria we're using to search for new earths has no chance of being successful.
"It's crazy we're sitting here in 2016 and still, four billion people in the world don't have access to the Internet," he said.
But hes not helping them get access to the internet. He's only getting them access to facebook and facebook sanctioned sites. So the Indian govt is right.
Also one thing that developing countries dispise is it's citizens getting enslaved to a overseas companies services. So fuck off zuckerfuck. If you really meant what you say about internet access then you would be giving them unrestricted internet to any website including your competitor's.
It's almost as crazy as billions of people having no access to clean water. Which is far more important than Facebook.
And what business is of theirs what software I'm running and how often I'm using it?
It is their business when their business depends on it. The common complaints users have with Windows have led them there. The large amount of hardware, software variations coupled with the different user types makes it difficult to have something universal that just works 100% of the time.
My only beef with them is that they won't tell us what they collect and what are the triggers. I'm all for letting them grab data on my usage and the condition of my system. After all, it's in my best interest to help them improve the OS.
MS in has recently shown interest in listening to the community and it's important we keep prying them for that information so that we can eventually feel at ease about what's happening.
If you don't like it then disable the services that use those ports. I'm sure these ZDNET writer is on a domain so that 100% explains the port 135 requests. The others are probably applications that are installed. Turn them off.
The sensor does not do the decryption or authentication. The attack vector would be a sensor that has been replaced with a mechanism that replays a snapshot of the phone owner's fingerprint and sends that down the wire to the mainboard. Apple is attempting to curtail that type of attack by authenticating the physical sensor to the mainboard.
So disable the sensor if it's found to be invalid. You don't destroy a $500 phone. What if the sensor goes bad? New phone? Seriously people.
Good luck decrypting it without the keys from the secure enclave, skippy.
Ding Ding. All the new phones come encrypted.
OTOH, this appears to still happen if the phone itself is reset to a factory image. It doesn't seem to be that much of a security risk if instead of refusing to work, the phone, after being reset, would renegotiate encryption with the sensor. There's no data to be stolen in that scenario. And there's other mechanisms to prevent a stolen phone from having resale value.
It's still a security risk. You could imaging intercepting new iPhones, replacing the fingerprint sensor with a compromised one containing a backdoor, then reimaging the phones, putting them back in the box, and selling them to your target. After your target loads their sensitive data on to them, you could then retrieve it using the compromised sensor.
I agree this is somewhat contrived and Apple is likely just looking to block third party repairs, but it still is a valid security risk.
So the solution is to permanently brick the phone? Gimme a break. You generate a warning on the phone to let the user know. Better yet, brick the phone and charge to repair it correctly. You don't screw your customers out of a perfectly good phone.
Computer salesperson: "Hey, it's time to replace your old machines." Gov buyer: "Fuck off, they work just fine." Computer salesperson: "But these shiny new Intel models SAVE ENERGY." Gov buyer: "On second though we've got plenty of taxpayer money to blow on 'energy efficiency' projects. Why don't ya' put us down for half million new laptops and two million of those tablet thingies so people can plug them in next to their desktops - I mean 'replace their energy-sucking desktops' - and see if you can't find a new boat for 'my nephew' and a trip to the Caribbean for 'my travel agent' while you're at it."
Nearly every company is thinking about energy efficiency. Every company that moves to a cloud setup is saving energy/power in exchange for a slice of a datacenter that is energy efficient.
No, a lot of applications don't scale well across multiple cores / CPUs.
In 2016 they don't. But as chips evolve the applications will as well.
Just shoot the damn journalist and Snowden in the face and be done with it. This guy is so tiresome.