If you can by-pass it then it effectively nullifies any security provided, so yes, it does count.
So if I try to rob a house, and I "bypass" the security system by robbing the next house over, does that mean the security system of the first house sucks?
Even aside from that, chip+PIN it no where near as secure as things like Google Wallet that provide single-use card numbers for each transaction.
How is this more secure?
It's also been shown that people can completely clone a chip+PIN card, again rendering the added security null and void.
Agreed. But even with this particular threat, these cards are still way more secure than what we had before. And this particular flaw should hopefully be fixed. Ideally I'd like to see number+expiration date (i.e. only things you know) methods of authentication be completely deprecated, and have even online shopping authenticated with a reader attached to the shoppers home computer.
I apologize for the typographical error. I meant to say that I don't *trust* your account of what actually happened because of your intellectual deficit, sir. Had someone of normal mental capacity made a similar claim, I might at least entertain the possibility that it was correct, but I am certain you just don't understand how anything works, and this general state of misunderstanding is no doubt what has lead to your perception of events.
I think it is the laptop that says "pin ok" to the vendor, and the laptop says "vendor didn't ask for a pin" to the chip in the card. It's like a man in the middle attack.
Well if you want me to change my position to X after hearing your answer, and my position was already X, then you will be making me swear to change my position to something other than X.
It doesn't count as "chip and pin" if the hack involves bypassing the use of the chip and pin. A safe can't protect any items that aren't actually in it.
Well the idea is that once enough there are enough chip readers out there, then banks don't need to accept numbers and expiration dates as valid authentication anymore. People can even get chip readers in their homes for instantly authenticated online purchases.
So a deadbolt on your front door is not going to keep a burglar from going into the back door you left open, but that doesn't mean your deadbolt isn't secure, it just means you need another deadbolt on your back door too.
This hack requires the criminal to physically steal your card. Once stolen, this hack allows the criminal to use your card even if he does not know the pin. Does your stolen cash require a pin number to use it? Unless you have some kind of magical money that can't be physically stolen, cash is actually easier to "hack" than these cards.
I thought the problem was that the recruiters were dumb, and now it's that there were 7 applicants for each job. Recruiters can't give jobs to all seven people even if they are all qualified.
At least this hack requires the criminals to steal the actual card (rather than just skimming information from a real card when the owner lets you borrow it). I think 2-factor authentication is good and it's too bad this system failed, but the original mechanism of preventing unauthorized use without physical access to a real card seems to be working pretty well.
I was responding to creimer who feels it is unethical to remove helpdesk jobs from his resume, even though he feels he is being pigeonholed into helpdesk jobs because he has them on his resume.
MS office doesn't come with windows. And windows is no longer the default OS it once was. If you are starting a new project in 2015, I think the last thing you want is to be locked into Windows or Microsoft office, especially with all the options now available.
Google releases the updates to nexus phones, so it doesn't matter who the manufacturer is. As long as the hardware is good, then that's all that matters for a nexus phone.
I am a software engineer, and at my company software engineers don't use office all that much. We use outlook for email (and for that reason we have a dedicated windows computer). We use linux for development, and our documentation is either doxygen comments in the source code or now some departments are starting to use tex as a way to have documentation that is easy to do version control (like svn or git) on (unlike MS office).
I guess I have to do excel for travel reimbursement, but that's about it.
I think the days of MS office being a mandatory skill are coming to an end.
[The Nexus 5X is] their lower end phone, and most reviews mention that it feels that way in the hand — but battery life is reportedly excellent. The Nexus 6P's battery is capable, but doesn't last as long.
In both battery benchmarks in the article, the Nexus 6P scores better. 631 vs. 548 and 277 vs. 207. It would seem at least from this article that the 6p battery situation is just better than the 5x, contradicting the article summary.
Yes, the terrible effects of a toddler-mother shooting are larger than the accidental death, thus it is more tragic.
1. A toddler-mother shooting *is* accidental. 2. What are the additional "terrible effects" of the toddler mother shooting beyond the death of a human being?
I didn't speculate on your gun position (nice try though! go re-read), I speculated that whatever the position is, this "what's more tragic" canard isn't the basis of it. So for whatever reason you raise it, you do so dishonestly.
I don't see how you can say that I am being dishonest, when you don't even know what my position on guns is. I'll give you a hint though. The premise that the tragedy of a death is not changed by the cause of death is definitely a basis for my position.
I would also like to pile on the generalizing bandwagon, and say that the code that old people *think* is maintainable is not. The fact that they refuse to learn or use any new technologies causes them to think that any code that uses them is unmaintainable (because they don't know how), and that their code is maintainable because it follows best practices from the 80's.
And they have a defeatist attitude and a million excuses for why they can't succeed.
They can't get interviews because of age discrimination.
They won't follow the instructions because they aren't cattle.
They won't learn new technologies because all the new technologies are retarded.
They can't start their own companies, even thought hey are smarter than everyone else.
Slashdot Mirror
If you can by-pass it then it effectively nullifies any security provided, so yes, it does count.
So if I try to rob a house, and I "bypass" the security system by robbing the next house over, does that mean the security system of the first house sucks?
Even aside from that, chip+PIN it no where near as secure as things like Google Wallet that provide single-use card numbers for each transaction.
How is this more secure?
It's also been shown that people can completely clone a chip+PIN card, again rendering the added security null and void.
Do you have a citation?
Agreed. But even with this particular threat, these cards are still way more secure than what we had before. And this particular flaw should hopefully be fixed. Ideally I'd like to see number+expiration date (i.e. only things you know) methods of authentication be completely deprecated, and have even online shopping authenticated with a reader attached to the shoppers home computer.
I apologize for the typographical error. I meant to say that I don't *trust* your account of what actually happened because of your intellectual deficit, sir. Had someone of normal mental capacity made a similar claim, I might at least entertain the possibility that it was correct, but I am certain you just don't understand how anything works, and this general state of misunderstanding is no doubt what has lead to your perception of events.
I think it is the laptop that says "pin ok" to the vendor, and the laptop says "vendor didn't ask for a pin" to the chip in the card. It's like a man in the middle attack.
Well if you want me to change my position to X after hearing your answer, and my position was already X, then you will be making me swear to change my position to something other than X.
But sure I swear.
I don't your account of what actually happened can be trusted because you are a fucking moron.
It doesn't count as "chip and pin" if the hack involves bypassing the use of the chip and pin. A safe can't protect any items that aren't actually in it.
Well the idea is that once enough there are enough chip readers out there, then banks don't need to accept numbers and expiration dates as valid authentication anymore. People can even get chip readers in their homes for instantly authenticated online purchases.
So a deadbolt on your front door is not going to keep a burglar from going into the back door you left open, but that doesn't mean your deadbolt isn't secure, it just means you need another deadbolt on your back door too.
This hack requires the criminal to physically steal your card. Once stolen, this hack allows the criminal to use your card even if he does not know the pin. Does your stolen cash require a pin number to use it? Unless you have some kind of magical money that can't be physically stolen, cash is actually easier to "hack" than these cards.
So now the problem isn't recruiters, it's hiring managers?
I thought the problem was that the recruiters were dumb, and now it's that there were 7 applicants for each job. Recruiters can't give jobs to all seven people even if they are all qualified.
At least this hack requires the criminals to steal the actual card (rather than just skimming information from a real card when the owner lets you borrow it). I think 2-factor authentication is good and it's too bad this system failed, but the original mechanism of preventing unauthorized use without physical access to a real card seems to be working pretty well.
So every recruiter did this same thing, and you didn't do anything to adapt?
Can you give an example?
I was responding to creimer who feels it is unethical to remove helpdesk jobs from his resume, even though he feels he is being pigeonholed into helpdesk jobs because he has them on his resume.
MS office doesn't come with windows. And windows is no longer the default OS it once was. If you are starting a new project in 2015, I think the last thing you want is to be locked into Windows or Microsoft office, especially with all the options now available.
Google releases the updates to nexus phones, so it doesn't matter who the manufacturer is. As long as the hardware is good, then that's all that matters for a nexus phone.
The software on a nexus phone is is stock android *and* it's easy to replace.
I am a software engineer, and at my company software engineers don't use office all that much. We use outlook for email (and for that reason we have a dedicated windows computer). We use linux for development, and our documentation is either doxygen comments in the source code or now some departments are starting to use tex as a way to have documentation that is easy to do version control (like svn or git) on (unlike MS office).
I guess I have to do excel for travel reimbursement, but that's about it.
I think the days of MS office being a mandatory skill are coming to an end.
[The Nexus 5X is] their lower end phone, and most reviews mention that it feels that way in the hand — but battery life is reportedly excellent. The Nexus 6P's battery is capable, but doesn't last as long.
In both battery benchmarks in the article, the Nexus 6P scores better. 631 vs. 548 and 277 vs. 207. It would seem at least from this article that the 6p battery situation is just better than the 5x, contradicting the article summary.
Yes, the terrible effects of a toddler-mother shooting are larger than the accidental death, thus it is more tragic.
1. A toddler-mother shooting *is* accidental. 2. What are the additional "terrible effects" of the toddler mother shooting beyond the death of a human being?
I didn't speculate on your gun position (nice try though! go re-read), I speculated that whatever the position is, this "what's more tragic" canard isn't the basis of it. So for whatever reason you raise it, you do so dishonestly.
I don't see how you can say that I am being dishonest, when you don't even know what my position on guns is. I'll give you a hint though. The premise that the tragedy of a death is not changed by the cause of death is definitely a basis for my position.
I would also like to pile on the generalizing bandwagon, and say that the code that old people *think* is maintainable is not. The fact that they refuse to learn or use any new technologies causes them to think that any code that uses them is unmaintainable (because they don't know how), and that their code is maintainable because it follows best practices from the 80's.
The problem is that you look like Julian Assange, and they are worried you are going to post all their source code and internal emails on wikileaks.
And they have a defeatist attitude and a million excuses for why they can't succeed.
They can't get interviews because of age discrimination.
They won't follow the instructions because they aren't cattle.
They won't learn new technologies because all the new technologies are retarded.
They can't start their own companies, even thought hey are smarter than everyone else.
No, it's people born before 1975. There's a difference.