Why complain? It's nothing else than the typical bad work of the so called "editors" of slashdot. They also did not notice that a charset conversion error occured. The german phrase is "Größter anzunehmender Unfall", not "GröYter anzunehmender Unfall". But why should we expect that paid editors do actually work?
Why i have such a big problem with this? Because the article makes the reader believe that this is a problem for any GSM user around the world, while it is apparently restricted to countries/networks where such a accessible database exists. The title of the slashdot article also claims "All GSM Phone" which is untrue given this additional information.
Actually it's pretty clear in other articles (and this one) that it's just the CallerID database that they're using to get the Cell numbers and the person associated with the cell number.
Their sensational claim is that they are able to "also find the name of the subscriber associated with virtually any cellular phone number". This is a strong claim and it is a false one. They can find the name of the subscriber if such a CallerID database exists for the network in question and is available for access. This is simply not the case for many many networks around the world, so they are far from beeing able to do this for "virtually any cellular phone number". Also it is not very surprising that you can make a lookup if such a lookup service is available.
So what? The claims are still untrue for at least most GSM networks in the world. This is not FUD but a fact.
The HLR can not be used to lookup the name of a subscriber. Also while the HLR can be queried by operators around the world (as this is needed for roaming), they query it by using the IMSI of the SIM-Card. Wikipedia claims that the MSISDN is another lookup key, but there is no need to make a lookup by MSISDN possible to other operators. When they handle a roaming customer, all they have is their IMSI and they use this to contact the HLR of the operator in charge.
The article does not sound credible but like a lot of Bullshit. For example they claim that they are able to lookup the customer name for a given mobile number ("also find the name of the subscriber associated with virtually any cellular phone number"). But they don't explain how they do this. The article just states: "At the heart of the work the pair did is their ability to access the caller ID database mobile providers use to match the names of subscribers to mobile numbers. Then they claim: "This is the same database that contains the subscriber information for landlines", which is simply untrue for many mobile operators who do not even operate landlines. They somewhat suggest that the database in question is the Home Location Register HLR ("Once they accessed the database, known as the Home Location Register (HLR),"), but as you can easily lookup, the HLR does NOT contain the name of a subscriber: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_switching_subsystem#Home_Location_Register_.28HLR.29 Now there might be networks where you can lookup the name of a customer given the number, but this is not standard, so claiming they can find the subscribe for "virtually any cellular phone number" is just BS on a great scale. The whole article is loads of gibberish making no much sense. I don't believe any of their sensational claims.
So what we need is something which looks like a cigarette, burns like a cigarette, smells like a cigarette, but isn't one and not harmful to your health?
Why on earth would they want to attach an ARM to a sensor
Because it can be done.
What do you gain by lower power requirements? You probably didn't RTFA, but at least take a look a the picture in full resolution (http://ns.umich.edu/Releases/2010/Feb10/MINISENSOR.JPG). The solar panels are already included in that tiny device, and it powers the ARM already. Decent processing power is good, think encrypting the - probably sensitive - data in the sensor.
I spoke with Harald Welte (of OpenBSC etc. fame) on ELC Europe back in October. He told me that he successfully gained root access to one of those Femtocells sold in the UK. As far as i remember he said that it was not very difficult to get access, also that he found some of the builtin features (e.g. check if operated in the correct location) nonworking.
On the other hand: This was bound to happen. Most embedded linux systems which have at least some remote hack-value tend to get opened up some day.
Not sure where you and the summary of this got that the iPad doesn't have 3G??
Because the article was written when neither the price nor the 3G feature were announced yet. Apparently slashdot wanted to be quick to report the iPad, so they did not care to wait for further details.
So, what? Some idiots have abused reserved or otherwise unused netblocks for their internal networks. I honestly couldn't care less. I have seen this before, even with other blocks which were already in use. It is a very bad practice. Unfortunately there is only one way people might stop doing this: Allocate the blocks now. If users won't be able to reach certain sites, the admin might change the internal addresses. Or they might not. Who cares? No, really: Who cares?
The Swiss vendor selling the system never marketed it (even 1992) for security relevant access control, it's just meant as a comfortable access for entertainment parks or similar customers, where comfort and low price are the selling points, not security.
Untrue. Until they changed the webpage yesterday (or so) they claimed that the system has "high security".
Why do OSes use alt-tab to switch between applications, when SysReq is a logical choice?
Because it won't work as an adequate replacement. When you use alt+tab, you keep pressing the alt-key between individual presses on tab. The system therefore knows that you are not yet done with selecting the application it should show and e.g. continues to show the list, or at least don't switch yet. You can not have the same functionality with only one key, and alt+sysrq would suck, as you can't do this with only one hand.
Ok, i haven't looked at that, sorry. But still RFC2821 is widely accepted as a standard and has incorporated the changes from RFC1123. And your main claim (about the value of the MAIL FROM command) is still wrong.
rfc1123 removed the relay function whereby your mail server may list other server's names in the return path. The replacement is that only your mailserver is listed in the MAIL FROM entry. The RFC never said anything about adding some other server's address to a MAIL FROM line, that was never allowed by the standard.
This is utter nonsense and a major misunderstanding of the standard on your side. Also RFC821 was deprecated by RFC2821 eight fricking years ago. It is telling that you apparently did not know that, because otherwise you won't argue with RFC821 and RFC1123 which updates RFC821 instead on looking at the later standard which incorporated the changes proposed by RFC1123. It is also important to understand that a RFC is what it names tell: A Request for Comments, not a binding standard. The pure existence of RFC1123 does not mean that everyone has to follow it ideas.
Having said that, and ignoring your misleading statements, the case is very simple. Regarding to RFC2821 - which actually is widely accepted as an standard - the MAIL FROM command specifies " The reverse-path consists of the sender mailbox." It is a no-brainer that a relay is a relay and not the sender of the message and thus does not change the "sender mailbox". So to comply with RFC2821 as relay can NOT change this value and HAS TO use the original address (which is by the way not a server address as you called it). While this is fully standard compliant, the existence of SPF and other spam filtering messages nowadays make it impossible to follow the standard in this, thus mechanism like SRS (sender rewriting scheme) were invented. But while the use of such hacks is widely accepted and understood as a necessity, it is in fact a violation of RFC2821 which mandates to keep the original value.
And for the issue of what a RFC means, you really should read RFC 2026 "The Internet Standards Process". As said, a RFC is not a standard, you might have confused RFC with the BCP (best current practice) and STD (standard) series of documents.
The FAQ clearly states, that the ones who get points, are in the middle. The very old and very new ones dont get points anymore. It also states a half-assed reason for this.
This is incorrect. The FAQ does not say that "very old" accounts are exempt from getting mod points. And i can assure you that does not happen either, my account is obviously "very old" and for quite a while i keep getting 15 mod points every few days or so.
Sorry, disregard my other posting, something went wrong.
I've said it once and I'll say it again: Germany is not a free country.
I'm german and i actually feel that i'm in a very free country, thank you very much. Yes, there are some laws which i disagree with, but overall it is fine.
and then you can't say anything about Nazis or face jail time or some other severe penalty
Complete bullshit. You can say a lot about nazis and the nazi era. You can discuss this, and you are even free to utter dumb sentences like "not everything was bad in nazi germany" (which is technically spoken true, but a dumb statement nethertheless as a german tv personality badly learned a while a ago).
You are only banned from showing symbols like the swastika, play/sing some songs like the "Horst Wessel Lied" (horst wessel song, hymn of the nazi party), deny the holocaust or praise the unlawful nazi regime. But even doing this will most of the time not lead you into jail. A fine will do in most cases.
Now you might argue that this is against freedom of speech, but as a german i feel that given our history there is very good reason to ban said things, especially denying the holocaust. Our ancestors have done enough harm to e.g. jews, there is no need to further harm them by allowing to state that the horror they (the few who were not killed) encountered actually never happened.
I could go on on but in short I put Germany up there with China, not quiet as bad
Yes, you could go on with bullshit claims, but this still puts germany nowhere near china. Not quite as bad? That is the understatement of the year.
but still the fact that free speech is merely an illusion
Still the fact is that free speech is actually provided in germany. But most of us germans (and europeans in general) have a different feeling of the meaning of free speech. Free speech is fine, but the right to it ends where others are harmed. I don't have a problem with that, and most people i know don't have either. This concept might be hard to grasp for a citizen of the United States, but i'm still fine with it and i don't feel that i'm missing some of the banned speech.
there makes me feel that Germany has a ways to go in terms of personal liberties when compared to several other democratic countries in the western world.
I take it that you are from the US. People like you also have a long way to go until you will finally understand that the us american believes are not the holy grail to which the whole world needs to subscribe.
I've said it once and I'll say it again: Germany is not a free country.
I'm german and i actually feel that i'm in a very free country, thank you very much. Yes, there are some laws which i disagree with, but overall it is fine.
Complete bullshit. You can say a lot about nazis and the nazi areas. You can discuss this, and you are even free to utter dumb sentences like "not everything was bad in nazi germany" (which is technically spoken true, but a dumb statement nethertheless as a german tv personality badly learned a while a ago).
You are only banned from showing symbols like the swastika, play/sing some songs like the "Horst Wessel Lied" (horst wessel song, hymn of the nazi party), deny the holocaust or praise the unlawful nazi regime. But even doing this will most of the time not lead you into jail. A fine will do in most cases.
Now you might argue that this is against freedom of speech, but as a german i feel that given our history there is very good reason to ban said things, especially denying the holocaust. Our ancestors have done enough harm to e.g. jews, there is no need to further harm them by allowing to state that the horror they (the few who were not killed) encountered actually never happened.
I could go on on but in short I put Germany up there with China, not quiet as bad
Yes, you could go on with bullshit claims, but this still puts germany nowhere near china. Not quite as bad? That is the understatement of the year.
but still the fact that free speech is merely an illusion
Still the fact is that free speech is actually provided in germany. But most of us germans (and europeans in general) have a different feeling of the meaning of free speech. Free speech is fine, but the right to it ends where others are harmed. I don't have a problem with that, and most people i know don't have either. This concept might be hard to grasp for a citizen of the United States, but i'm still fine with it and i don't feel that i'm missing some of the banned speech.
there makes me feel that Germany has a ways to go in terms of personal liberties when compared to several other democratic countries in the western world.
I take it that you are from the US. People like you also have a long way to go until you will finally understand that the us american believes are not the holy grail to which the whole world needs to subscribe.
The German police certainly sound more threatening. A friend of mine spent the summer there, and saw lots of police with automatic weapons, grenades, bandoleers, the whole nine yards.
I wonder how your friend managed to see such heavy armed police that often. I actually live in germany and the normal police officer has his normal gun and nothing else. I only see police with automatic weapons at the airport. I have never seen police with grenades and neither with bandoleers. I think your friend is full of shit.
German police: definitely more "threatening." Not necessarily any more dangerous, but definitely more threatening.
Says the guy who does not even have firsthand experience of seeing german police? When talking about mere perceived threat, juding by what i occasionally see on tv news, i would feel much more threatened by the police and other security in the USA, carrying nasty stuff like teasers and so. I've never seen a machine gun outside of a german airport, and the only other weapon beside the normal police gun i have seen with german police was a club. And this is very unusual as well.
I dont believe that you are right with your claim that two pieces of hand luggage are against a general policy. Some airlines officially allow you to carry two pieces, or one piece and a laptop, or... It all depends, and this lady either knows all the various rules of all the various airlines, or she knows nothing.
"Bundestrojaner" is the nickname in germany for the trojan intended to do a "online (house) search" under german law. The article also mentions that. Quote: "You say that while you worked for ERA IT Solutions under consignment of the German Federal Police (Bundeskriminalamt/BKA) you were entrusted with the development of a trojan". Please note that the guy in question does not admit that he worked on the "Bundestrojaner", but mentions that the BKA employed own people to do that. The article reports that he programed a trojan for skype calls for the swiss government, but that one is not what is usually understood to be/should be the "Bundestrojaner".
Slashdot Mirror
Why complain? It's nothing else than the typical bad work of the so called "editors" of slashdot. They also did not notice that a charset conversion error occured. The german phrase is "Größter anzunehmender Unfall", not "GröYter anzunehmender Unfall". But why should we expect that paid editors do actually work?
Why i have such a big problem with this? Because the article makes the reader believe that this is a problem for any GSM user around the world, while it is apparently restricted to countries/networks where such a accessible database exists. The title of the slashdot article also claims "All GSM Phone" which is untrue given this additional information.
Their sensational claim is that they are able to "also find the name of the subscriber associated with virtually any cellular phone number". This is a strong claim and it is a false one. They can find the name of the subscriber if such a CallerID database exists for the network in question and is available for access. This is simply not the case for many many networks around the world, so they are far from beeing able to do this for "virtually any cellular phone number". Also it is not very surprising that you can make a lookup if such a lookup service is available.
So what? The claims are still untrue for at least most GSM networks in the world. This is not FUD but a fact.
The HLR can not be used to lookup the name of a subscriber. Also while the HLR can be queried by operators around the world (as this is needed for roaming), they query it by using the IMSI of the SIM-Card. Wikipedia claims that the MSISDN is another lookup key, but there is no need to make a lookup by MSISDN possible to other operators. When they handle a roaming customer, all they have is their IMSI and they use this to contact the HLR of the operator in charge.
So STFU.
The article does not sound credible but like a lot of Bullshit. For example they claim that they are able to lookup the customer name for a given mobile number ("also find the name of the subscriber associated with virtually any cellular phone number"). But they don't explain how they do this. The article just states: "At the heart of the work the pair did is their ability to access the caller ID database mobile providers use to match the names of subscribers to mobile numbers. Then they claim: "This is the same database that contains the subscriber information for landlines", which is simply untrue for many mobile operators who do not even operate landlines. They somewhat suggest that the database in question is the Home Location Register HLR ("Once they accessed the database, known as the Home Location Register (HLR),"), but as you can easily lookup, the HLR does NOT contain the name of a subscriber: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_switching_subsystem#Home_Location_Register_.28HLR.29 Now there might be networks where you can lookup the name of a customer given the number, but this is not standard, so claiming they can find the subscribe for "virtually any cellular phone number" is just BS on a great scale. The whole article is loads of gibberish making no much sense. I don't believe any of their sensational claims.
BS. There are many reasons for which it is allowed to show a picture of a swastika. You might check german wikipedia, which also shows such pictures.
So what we need is something which looks like a cigarette, burns like a cigarette, smells like a cigarette, but isn't one and not harmful to your health?
Might be lot faster.
Because it can be done.
What do you gain by lower power requirements? You probably didn't RTFA, but at least take a look a the picture in full resolution (http://ns.umich.edu/Releases/2010/Feb10/MINISENSOR.JPG). The solar panels are already included in that tiny device, and it powers the ARM already. Decent processing power is good, think encrypting the - probably sensitive - data in the sensor.
I spoke with Harald Welte (of OpenBSC etc. fame) on ELC Europe back in October. He told me that he successfully gained root access to one of those Femtocells sold in the UK. As far as i remember he said that it was not very difficult to get access, also that he found some of the builtin features (e.g. check if operated in the correct location) nonworking.
On the other hand: This was bound to happen. Most embedded linux systems which have at least some remote hack-value tend to get opened up some day.
Because the article was written when neither the price nor the 3G feature were announced yet. Apparently slashdot wanted to be quick to report the iPad, so they did not care to wait for further details.
So, what? Some idiots have abused reserved or otherwise unused netblocks for their internal networks. I honestly couldn't care less. I have seen this before, even with other blocks which were already in use. It is a very bad practice. Unfortunately there is only one way people might stop doing this: Allocate the blocks now. If users won't be able to reach certain sites, the admin might change the internal addresses. Or they might not. Who cares? No, really: Who cares?
Untrue. Until they changed the webpage yesterday (or so) they claimed that the system has "high security".
Because it won't work as an adequate replacement. When you use alt+tab, you keep pressing the alt-key between individual presses on tab. The system therefore knows that you are not yet done with selecting the application it should show and e.g. continues to show the list, or at least don't switch yet. You can not have the same functionality with only one key, and alt+sysrq would suck, as you can't do this with only one hand.
It's a Y2K10-Bug. The Y2K-Bug was not titled Y1900-Bug (to name one of the bug types) as well.
Ok, i haven't looked at that, sorry. But still RFC2821 is widely accepted as a standard and has incorporated the changes from RFC1123. And your main claim (about the value of the MAIL FROM command) is still wrong.
This is utter nonsense and a major misunderstanding of the standard on your side. Also RFC821 was deprecated by RFC2821 eight fricking years ago. It is telling that you apparently did not know that, because otherwise you won't argue with RFC821 and RFC1123 which updates RFC821 instead on looking at the later standard which incorporated the changes proposed by RFC1123. It is also important to understand that a RFC is what it names tell: A Request for Comments, not a binding standard. The pure existence of RFC1123 does not mean that everyone has to follow it ideas.
Having said that, and ignoring your misleading statements, the case is very simple. Regarding to RFC2821 - which actually is widely accepted as an standard - the MAIL FROM command specifies " The reverse-path consists of the sender mailbox." It is a no-brainer that a relay is a relay and not the sender of the message and thus does not change the "sender mailbox". So to comply with RFC2821 as relay can NOT change this value and HAS TO use the original address (which is by the way not a server address as you called it). While this is fully standard compliant, the existence of SPF and other spam filtering messages nowadays make it impossible to follow the standard in this, thus mechanism like SRS (sender rewriting scheme) were invented. But while the use of such hacks is widely accepted and understood as a necessity, it is in fact a violation of RFC2821 which mandates to keep the original value.
And for the issue of what a RFC means, you really should read RFC 2026 "The Internet Standards Process". As said, a RFC is not a standard, you might have confused RFC with the BCP (best current practice) and STD (standard) series of documents.
This is incorrect. The FAQ does not say that "very old" accounts are exempt from getting mod points. And i can assure you that does not happen either, my account is obviously "very old" and for quite a while i keep getting 15 mod points every few days or so.
Sorry, disregard my other posting, something went wrong.
I'm german and i actually feel that i'm in a very free country, thank you very much. Yes, there are some laws which i disagree with, but overall it is fine.
Complete bullshit. You can say a lot about nazis and the nazi era. You can discuss this, and you are even free to utter dumb sentences like "not everything was bad in nazi germany" (which is technically spoken true, but a dumb statement nethertheless as a german tv personality badly learned a while a ago).
You are only banned from showing symbols like the swastika, play/sing some songs like the "Horst Wessel Lied" (horst wessel song, hymn of the nazi party), deny the holocaust or praise the unlawful nazi regime. But even doing this will most of the time not lead you into jail. A fine will do in most cases.
Now you might argue that this is against freedom of speech, but as a german i feel that given our history there is very good reason to ban said things, especially denying the holocaust. Our ancestors have done enough harm to e.g. jews, there is no need to further harm them by allowing to state that the horror they (the few who were not killed) encountered actually never happened.
Yes, you could go on with bullshit claims, but this still puts germany nowhere near china. Not quite as bad? That is the understatement of the year.
Still the fact is that free speech is actually provided in germany. But most of us germans (and europeans in general) have a different feeling of the meaning of free speech. Free speech is fine, but the right to it ends where others are harmed. I don't have a problem with that, and most people i know don't have either. This concept might be hard to grasp for a citizen of the United States, but i'm still fine with it and i don't feel that i'm missing some of the banned speech.
I take it that you are from the US. People like you also have a long way to go until you will finally understand that the us american believes are not the holy grail to which the whole world needs to subscribe.
I'm german and i actually feel that i'm in a very free country, thank you very much. Yes, there are some laws which i disagree with, but overall it is fine.
I wonder how your friend managed to see such heavy armed police that often. I actually live in germany and the normal police officer has his normal gun and nothing else. I only see police with automatic weapons at the airport. I have never seen police with grenades and neither with bandoleers. I think your friend is full of shit.
Says the guy who does not even have firsthand experience of seeing german police? When talking about mere perceived threat, juding by what i occasionally see on tv news, i would feel much more threatened by the police and other security in the USA, carrying nasty stuff like teasers and so. I've never seen a machine gun outside of a german airport, and the only other weapon beside the normal police gun i have seen with german police was a club. And this is very unusual as well.
So stop spreading second hand bullshit.
Apparently you have never heard of the simple concept of suspend to disk.
Wouldn't Go! be pronounced Go(bang)?
Maybe we should use "Gang!" as the name, then.
I dont believe that you are right with your claim that two pieces of hand luggage are against a general policy. Some airlines officially allow you to carry two pieces, or one piece and a laptop, or ... It all depends, and this lady either knows all the various rules of all the various airlines, or she knows nothing.
"Bundestrojaner" is the nickname in germany for the trojan intended to do a "online (house) search" under german law. The article also mentions that. Quote: "You say that while you worked for ERA IT Solutions under consignment of the German Federal Police (Bundeskriminalamt/BKA) you were entrusted with the development of a trojan". Please note that the guy in question does not admit that he worked on the "Bundestrojaner", but mentions that the BKA employed own people to do that. The article reports that he programed a trojan for skype calls for the swiss government, but that one is not what is usually understood to be/should be the "Bundestrojaner".