Movies and Pictures mirrored
on
Apple PDA?
·
· Score: 1
Spymac seems to be holding up under the slashdotting, but if you don't want to "register" with them you can get it from my geocities mirror here.
(hey it's not karma whoring once you hit 50, right?)
Re:There's a good chance it's fake...
on
Apple PDA?
·
· Score: 1, Flamebait
My 4 year old uses my computer but does not understand a keyboard. My 7 year old hasn't fully figured out the keyboard.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the Apple "entire mouse is a button" mouse is the best kid's mouse ever created. The only way it could be better would be for it to have a second optical tracker.
Maybe you should start sending your kids to school on the short bus or something, cause I've seen 5 year olds using two (or even *gasp* THREE) button mice without problems. If your 7 year old can't handle more than one mouse button, the confusion must be overwhelming when he/she tries to use a VIDEO GAME CONTROLLER with their friends. Man, those things have more than TEN buttons!
Seriously, though, I think this whole thread is kind of silly. If you don't like two button mice, don't buy one. Same for one button mice. Just don't try to tell me kids can't figure out the extra buttons, cause thats just insulting to them.
Re:Unless you consider it a plant
on
Apple PDA?
·
· Score: 1
Apple's never been keen on co-branding stuff. It's a fun theory though... Oh well, we can put all our speculation to rest in a few days anyway. (and with the kind of stuff they've written on the front of apple.com they better not let us down this time!)
How many inexperienced people will read that snippet (and other snippets) and forever think of Microsoft as an EVIL EVIL SCUM with no mind for security at all?
See, the facts are that Microsoft actually is "EVIL EVIL SCUM".
So cut the/. editors a break, they're just reporting facts!
The SSDP service also listens on Multicast and Broadcast addresses. Therefore gaining SYSTEM access to an entire network of XP machines is possible with only one anonymous UDP SSDP attack session.
You're right, of course, but I just find it strange (and a little funny) that their Security Chief phrases it like the QA process begins after the product ships.
Microsoft is in the same boat. It won't be until the Blue Screen of Death is really, provably responsible for human fatalities (Think safety control at a power plant, or a crash aboard a military vehicle of some kind) that Microsoft will start being more responsible about their security and program design.
More likely, when there are human fatalities as a result of MS bugs, thats when MS lawyers will remind the grieving families (and anyone else who complains) that they are not responsible for damages caused by their software. They'll insist it was someone else's fault (maybe sacrifice the MCSE who installed the deadly setup), and not change their wats one little bit.
As much as I hate Microsoft, I'd be rooting for them in such a case. The reason is because a ruling against them would set the precedent that software companies are legally liable for misuse of their products. The resulting frivolous lawsuits (certainly people would figure out how to hurt themselves with other software products) would be overwhelming.
Howard Schmidt: I think the position has always been that you check the final product for vulnerabilities. Because there's a whole lot of open source out there that, day after day after day, there's more reports of vulnerabilities. I think it doesn't make any difference whether it is open source or closed source, it's a matter of identifying them once the product is released. (bold added by me)
Shouldn't a company with Microsoft's resources be able to identify security holes before the product is released?
Maybe this "release-and-then-check-for-bugs" strategy explains why there are so many MS explots?
I had a really great piece of perl code I was going to post in celebration of the day, but the slashdot lameness filter won't let me. Considering slashcode is written in perl, you'd think the authors wouldn't have a problem with the occasional perl obfu postings, but my sig is about the best I can get through it seems. Oh well.
In fact, the fix was probably nothing more than making sure that if a 'safe' file (like a jpeg or something) is getting auto-opened that it really is what it says it is (and not just trusting that the mime type is correct).
Yes, you can pick up a prostitute. Yes, you can kill (and rob) her or anyone else. Yes, if you push R2-R2-L1-R2-Left-Down-Right-Up-Left-Down-Right-Up you'll get every weapon possible, including a rocket launcher you can use to take down the police helicopter(s) that will eventually arrive. Yes, you can light people on fire with a flamethrower. Yes, when the national guard comes it is possible to steal their tank and drive around the city crushing things.
By the fact that the game is selling, it's pretty clear that people WANT to play this kind of game. The government is supposedly there to serve the people (according to Jefferson, governments are created to protect our inalienable rights). How does taking something away serve them? The few people who are unable to tell a game from reality, and who go on GTA-style killing sprees in the real world as a result of this game, are probably lunatics anyway who would've eventually snapped anyway. Why shouldn't I (and my reality-and-games distinguishing friends) be allowed to play this game now?
A side note, however: Lets not just focus on.AU here; this game was pulled from stores in America too and it's only back now because they've been forced to tone it down a bit.
From the sound of the AP article, testifying against ElcomSoft isn't really so bad. Whats his testimony going to be? That they produced the program in question? Everybody already knows they did!
The ElComSoft people are pleased with this arangement (quote: ElComSoft's chief executive, Alex Katalov, said he was pleased that the company, not Sklyarov, would bear sole responsibility for the charges), presumably because they are in russia and didn't do anything wrong! (it isn't "wrong" in russia at least)
I think they are asking him for statements "against" ElComSoft so the FBI can pretend to save face and it won't look like they're just letting him go without getting anything in return.
Unless he has some bombshell new info against ElComSoft (which is unlikely), this really is a happy ending after all.
If we knew the answer to that, we'd already have the solution!
And shouldn't this be under Ask Slashdot?
Re:I must be missing something
on
Review: SliMP3
·
· Score: 2
Does it do something more than my computer? You bet. It lets me listen to all my MP3s, playlists, and streams in my living room on my $5,000 stereo, rather than in my home office on my $200 speakers. I even use it via 802.11b, so there's really no problem with wiring.
If you've got a 5,000 stereo and a digital music collection, and your PC isn't plugged into your stereo, I might have to come steal your hardware and burn down your house.
Seriously, go to radioshack (or, if you've got a 5k$ stereo, you'll probably want to go somewhere else...) and buy an adapter for fucks sake!
I must be missing something
on
Review: SliMP3
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
What is the point of controlling it from your computer? Why not use WinAmp? If you're running ethernet to your stereo so you can use this little device, wouldn't it be cheaper to just run audio cable to the stereo? It's a cool product, I guess, but I just couldn't see shelling out that much money for a device that will give me zero extra functionality over a PC with a soundcard, especially when that device still requires the PC.
I, too, was somehwhat uncertain of KPMG's purpose.
But after hearing their theme song (mp3 from the wired article) I understand. "KPMG/We're strong as can be/A dream of power and energy/We go for the goal/Together we hold/On to our vision of global strategy..."
As the articles points out, KPMG has only gotten themselves into this embarrassing situation because they were unhappy about people making fun of another embarrassing situation: The KPMG Theme Song! It explains their power, strength, and global strategy (which must include really bad music).
MS may just be wanting what Apple was doing during the 80s and early 90s: Trying to get people familiarized and hooked young on their platform.
A lot of good it did Apple...
Judging by Windows's current market share, I'm guessing that a lot of those unthankfull little brats in the 80's who's school's got free macs must've gone out and bought PC's upon growing up. Tragic, really.
Most of tihs is coming from leaving directory listing turned on.
Not really.
It's easy to blame directory listing, but having directory listing off and leaving sensitive data laying around is still very very bad. If a file CAN be viewed, you should assume it will be, and having directory listing off won't change that. And once the URL gets sent along to someone else's server in a referer, it's really not so hidden anymore. Security by obscurity is always a bad idea. Directory listing hardly makes a difference.
Slashdot Mirror
Spymac seems to be holding up under the slashdotting, but if you don't want to "register" with them you can get it from my geocities mirror here.
(hey it's not karma whoring once you hit 50, right?)
My 4 year old uses my computer but does not understand a keyboard. My 7 year old hasn't fully figured out the keyboard.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the Apple "entire mouse is a button" mouse is the best kid's mouse ever created. The only way it could be better would be for it to have a second optical tracker.
Maybe you should start sending your kids to school on the short bus or something, cause I've seen 5 year olds using two (or even *gasp* THREE) button mice without problems. If your 7 year old can't handle more than one mouse button, the confusion must be overwhelming when he/she tries to use a VIDEO GAME CONTROLLER with their friends. Man, those things have more than TEN buttons!
Seriously, though, I think this whole thread is kind of silly. If you don't like two button mice, don't buy one. Same for one button mice. Just don't try to tell me kids can't figure out the extra buttons, cause thats just insulting to them.
Apple's never been keen on co-branding stuff. It's a fun theory though... Oh well, we can put all our speculation to rest in a few days anyway. (and with the kind of stuff they've written on the front of apple.com they better not let us down this time!)
I agree that gaim is an excellent client.
The dual-protocol support is cool, but every time I've tried to connect using oscar (in gaim) the AOL server has kicked me off for being unauthorized.
Oh well, at least it's TOC support has been rock solid so far.
How many inexperienced people will read that snippet (and other snippets) and forever think of Microsoft as an EVIL EVIL SCUM with no mind for security at all?
/. editors a break, they're just reporting facts!
See, the facts are that Microsoft actually is "EVIL EVIL SCUM".
So cut the
According to the eeye coverage:
The SSDP service also listens on Multicast and Broadcast addresses. Therefore gaining SYSTEM access to an entire network of XP machines is possible with only one anonymous UDP SSDP attack session.
Someone's gonna have a lot of fun with this one!
You're right, of course, but I just find it strange (and a little funny) that their Security Chief phrases it like the QA process begins after the product ships.
Microsoft is in the same boat. It won't be until the Blue Screen of Death is really, provably responsible for human fatalities (Think safety control at a power plant, or a crash aboard a military vehicle of some kind) that Microsoft will start being more responsible about their security and program design.
More likely, when there are human fatalities as a result of MS bugs, thats when MS lawyers will remind the grieving families (and anyone else who complains) that they are not responsible for damages caused by their software. They'll insist it was someone else's fault (maybe sacrifice the MCSE who installed the deadly setup), and not change their wats one little bit.
As much as I hate Microsoft, I'd be rooting for them in such a case. The reason is because a ruling against them would set the precedent that software companies are legally liable for misuse of their products. The resulting frivolous lawsuits (certainly people would figure out how to hurt themselves with other software products) would be overwhelming.
Howard Schmidt: I think the position has always been that you check the final product for vulnerabilities. Because there's a whole lot of open source out there that, day after day after day, there's more reports of vulnerabilities. I think it doesn't make any difference whether it is open source or closed source, it's a matter of identifying them once the product is released.
(bold added by me)
Shouldn't a company with Microsoft's resources be able to identify security holes before the product is released?
Maybe this "release-and-then-check-for-bugs" strategy explains why there are so many MS explots?
I had a really great piece of perl code I was going to post in celebration of the day, but the slashdot lameness filter won't let me. Considering slashcode is written in perl, you'd think the authors wouldn't have a problem with the occasional perl obfu postings, but my sig is about the best I can get through it seems. Oh well.
Is this news for nerds and stuff that matters, or just some guy saying "I'm so cool, I've got a home server room!"?
I'm sure there's gotta be something better than this SOMEWHERE in the submission queue.
Where did you get this rumor re: GTA3 in America being "toned down"? It hasn't
;-)
I got it (that rumor) from my buddy who's PS2 I've been playing it on.
After a quick bit of checking online, it appears it is indeed just a rumor.
I stand corrected.
In fact, the fix was probably nothing more than making sure that if a 'safe' file (like a jpeg or something) is getting auto-opened that it really is what it says it is (and not just trusting that the mime type is correct).
Yes, you can pick up a prostitute. Yes, you can kill (and rob) her or anyone else. Yes, if you push R2-R2-L1-R2-Left-Down-Right-Up-Left-Down-Right-Up you'll get every weapon possible, including a rocket launcher you can use to take down the police helicopter(s) that will eventually arrive. Yes, you can light people on fire with a flamethrower. Yes, when the national guard comes it is possible to steal their tank and drive around the city crushing things.
.AU here; this game was pulled from stores in America too and it's only back now because they've been forced to tone it down a bit.
By the fact that the game is selling, it's pretty clear that people WANT to play this kind of game. The government is supposedly there to serve the people (according to Jefferson, governments are created to protect our inalienable rights). How does taking something away serve them? The few people who are unable to tell a game from reality, and who go on GTA-style killing sprees in the real world as a result of this game, are probably lunatics anyway who would've eventually snapped anyway. Why shouldn't I (and my reality-and-games distinguishing friends) be allowed to play this game now?
A side note, however: Lets not just focus on
From the sound of the AP article, testifying against ElcomSoft isn't really so bad. Whats his testimony going to be? That they produced the program in question? Everybody already knows they did!
The ElComSoft people are pleased with this arangement (quote: ElComSoft's chief executive, Alex Katalov, said he was pleased that the company, not Sklyarov, would bear sole responsibility for the charges), presumably because they are in russia and didn't do anything wrong! (it isn't "wrong" in russia at least)
I think they are asking him for statements "against" ElComSoft so the FBI can pretend to save face and it won't look like they're just letting him go without getting anything in return.
Unless he has some bombshell new info against ElComSoft (which is unlikely), this really is a happy ending after all.
If we knew the answer to that, we'd already have the solution!
And shouldn't this be under Ask Slashdot?
Does it do something more than my computer? You bet. It lets me listen to all my MP3s, playlists, and streams in my living room on my $5,000 stereo, rather than in my home office on my $200 speakers. I even use it via 802.11b, so there's really no problem with wiring.
If you've got a 5,000 stereo and a digital music collection, and your PC isn't plugged into your stereo, I might have to come steal your hardware and burn down your house.
Seriously, go to radioshack (or, if you've got a 5k$ stereo, you'll probably want to go somewhere else...) and buy an adapter for fucks sake!
What is the point of controlling it from your computer? Why not use WinAmp? If you're running ethernet to your stereo so you can use this little device, wouldn't it be cheaper to just run audio cable to the stereo? It's a cool product, I guess, but I just couldn't see shelling out that much money for a device that will give me zero extra functionality over a PC with a soundcard, especially when that device still requires the PC.
Okay, the Robot pet site is slashdotted. But no problem, since the Google cache [google.com] version is there. Hope this helps.
The above post links to the google cache of some white pride website (not the robotic pet sex site I was looking for).
Please mod it down, not up. And don't mod this up. And read the moderator guidelines for fucks sake. (seriously!)
(A bougus link to some redneck crap wouldn't get 2, Informative if there wern't so many crack smokers with mod points these days)
I, too, was somehwhat uncertain of KPMG's purpose.
But after hearing their theme song (mp3 from the wired article) I understand. "KPMG/We're strong as can be/A dream of power and energy/We go for the goal/Together we hold/On to our vision of global strategy..."
As the articles points out, KPMG has only gotten themselves into this embarrassing situation because they were unhappy about people making fun of another embarrassing situation: The KPMG Theme Song! It explains their power, strength, and global strategy (which must include really bad music).
(heres the akamai link to the mp3)
But what if a Judge says something on a message board?!
MS may just be wanting what Apple was doing during the 80s and early 90s: Trying to get people familiarized and hooked young on their platform.
A lot of good it did Apple...
Judging by Windows's current market share, I'm guessing that a lot of those unthankfull little brats in the 80's who's school's got free macs must've gone out and bought PC's upon growing up. Tragic, really.
Or, as the original poster sugested, you could use a compression format that is optimized for audio!
.zip for audio?
Why would you use
Most of tihs is coming from leaving directory listing turned on.
Not really.
It's easy to blame directory listing, but having directory listing off and leaving sensitive data laying around is still very very bad. If a file CAN be viewed, you should assume it will be, and having directory listing off won't change that. And once the URL gets sent along to someone else's server in a referer, it's really not so hidden anymore. Security by obscurity is always a bad idea. Directory listing hardly makes a difference.