One of the original smart card hacks was done by Ben Jun, Paul Kocher, and Joshua Jaffe, the guys at Cryptography Research, using a technique called "Differential Power Analysis" which they did with a $50 HP oscilliscope to extract the private key stored on a smart card. You can find the white paper here.
So does JAP. I use it almost exclusively, and it works wonders. It allows stacking with other proxies, either local or remote (if you use proxomitron or have an institutional web proxy), and while it does slow things down a touch, I find it to be eminently useful.
In short, if this is true, the passwords really, really sucked.
Not really. What it means is that users generally really, really suck at picking good passwords.
In order for Mr. Johansson's idea to be truly effective, three things need to happen: 1) the IT department much choose strong passwords for the users. They must NOT allow the users to choose the passwords themselves. 2) there must be an incredibly explicit policy regarding the protection of the media on which the passwords are stored and accessed. The policy must provide stiff penalties for failure to comply, and periodic checks need to be made to ensure compliance. 3) the users need to be educated on the relevant security practices so they know why it is so important to follow the letter of the policy and not circumvent any part of it.
Failure to do any of these will compromise the success of the strategy.
Are you sure about that? I'd like to see numbers. I'm inclined to think that Sony sees a lot more residual income from the entertainment side, but I would reckon it takes 10+ years before the profit generated from the entertainment produced in a given year beats the electronics produced in that same year.
I don't have time to look up the numbers right now, but I'd bet my SWAG is just as good as yours.
This link shows that The Register is trademarked in the UK.
"The Register" is a UK-based company, and therefore doesn't have to deal with US trademark law (for the most part). The link above is their trademark application with the UK trademark office.
According to the FAQ, the use of "TM" in the UK is acceptable without having registered the trademark with the registrar. And according to the Trade Marks Act 1994, it is illegal to use the "Registered" trade mark symbol (the R with a circle) unless it is, in fact, registered.
So The Register is officially allowed to use the "registered" symbol based on their trademarked status. And of course it makes for a great double entendre when used at the end of an article.
So no, you're not daft. But now you're probably a bit better informed.;-)
in order to save money over legally obtaining music or movies.
Show me where I can get what I want, where I want, legally. Seriously.
iTunes? Nope, have to break the law there just to get music to play on my.mp3 player. (And I don't want a damn iPod, free or otherwise, thank you very much.)
CDs? Nope, can't get a lot of the live shows I can download (legitimately even, in some cases!!) on CD.
If the content owner representatives would get their heads out of their collective assess and stop trying to CONTROL EVERYTHING, we wouldn't have anywhere near the copyright infringement "problem" we have right now. Compulsory licensing has worked for a century now, and the labels are STILL trying to get around it with every new technology that comes out. It's absurd - and the bitter irony is that the artists, who the RIAA and MPAA complain are being so unfairly trampled by 'piracy', are being short-changed. If they were just paid from a compulsory license pool (just like in radio), several dozen proposals of which have been floated in recent years, then this whole argument just goes away. Everybody wins, there is no more piracy, and we get on with our lives.
So before you go blaming those of us who are simply satisfying ourselves IN WAYS WE CANNOT OTHERWISE because the *AAs can't get past their control freak tendencies, look at the whole picture - which I've just outlined for you.
It's not about saving a few measly dollars, let me assure you.
What I was told today is that you have to pay your taxes at least quarterly, otherwise the IRS charges you a huge penalty and the interest they would have collected if they had the money by then.
They actually charge you interest on your own money. How screwed up is that??
I have serious doubts about the possibility of any event short of the presence of a Vogon fleet which would wipe out all life on the planet. We already know of a great many 'extremophiles' which live in places here on Earth which were long thought to be uninhabitable.
Also, the human race is incredibly resilient and adaptive. I think most people (myself included) do not have any real comprehension of just how big the Earth is and how much damage would have to be done to make it uninhabitable even for us, much less for all species on the planet. I really think there will be pockets of humanity which will be able to survive and re-populate the planet. Even a half-life of 500,000 years for radiation only covers 1/4 of the estimated time since humans first appeared... meaning that the human race could almost certainly survive anything short of the complete annihiliation of the entire Earth in preparation for an interstellar bypass.
This is an oxymoron. "Intellectual" property cannot be stolen, by definition. Only physical property can be stolen. IP can be copied, infringed, abused, improperly used, or devalued, but without actual removal or destruction of the original, no "theft" exists.
You(pl) cannot recreate the definition of stealing to make copyright infringment sound more destructive or immoral. I won't let you.
EZTree certainly committed a crime.
I wouldn't be so sure of this if I were you. IIRC, the legality of bittorrent (among other P2P applications) is being contested in the Supreme Court right now. AFAICT, there is no evidence that EZTree was even seeding the torrents - in which case, they were not even infringing on anyone's copyright - they were simply contributing to infringement, which may or may not be considered a crime (in the U.S., which is where I presume EZT is located) based on the court's decision.
Oh -- and never confuse legality with morality or illegality with immorality. The two concepts are, at best, weakly related.
Oh, how true. It's a knife that cuts both ways - some moral things are illegal, and some legal things are immoral.
I have to second this... The CISSP is becoming the de facto certification for infosec folks to have. I think a large part of the perceived value is the time requirement (3+ years and a B.S./B.A. or 4+ years) for hands-on security work before you can even apply for the certification.
I always thought of the GIAC as the gold standard for security, but when getting a complete credential set costs tens of thousands of dollars just to take the classes, it seems a little extreme compared to the CISSP, which can be done in a single course (or if you're brave, just by taking the test).
I also think the practical part was a good thing for the GIAC, and something the CISSP could benefit from. There are too many people out there with "book smarts" and no practical knowledge, and they dilute the certification and its value to those of us who really know the ins and outs of the subject matter.
My uncle was part of an Air Force contingent that flew Vatican-approved birth control devices to Catholic nuns in a war-torn part of Africa. The nuns refused to leave because of their dedication to the people they served there. Yet constant rapes from the militant fighting groups in the region were getting some of the nuns pregnant. So the USAF, with the approval of the Vatican, flew missions to deliver contraceptives to them.
Second, the only contraceptive device that can be used to counteract AIDS is the condom. But in most parts of Africa, using condoms is not socially acceptable due to old pagan customs. Most African men will not wear condoms, and prefer "dry" sex, so most women will swab the moisture out of the their vaginas before having sex. This makes bleeding much more prevalent, increasing the risk of AIDS transmission even more. So the Catholic stance on condom use in Africa has absolutely no bearing on the state of AIDS there.
Anybody who tells you that the Catholic Church is even remotely responsible for the state of AIDS in Africa is full of shit.
I think there should be a radical restructuring of the entire U.S. tax code. There are several things I would put as highest priority:
- You cannot be taxed twice on the same income - all services, goods, and fees which are mandated by any government entitiy are counted as taxes - total taxes paid, including all income taxes, fees, sales taxes, etc., cannot exceed a certain percentage of your income. Anything in excess of, say 40% (though I think 20% would be more reasonable) of gross income gets refunded. - a flat tax rate instead of the ridiculous graduated tax rates. (Where I can actually make more money and end up with less because my tax percentage jumps.) - taxes are subject to jurisdictional delineations; if you are not using the services provided by a jurisdiction, you cannot be taxed by that jurisdiction (including the Federal government if you live outside the U.S. (except a small stipend to help support the Embassy/Consul in your country of residence)). - The inheritance tax should be abolished altogether. It is simply unconscionable.
Don't know about NJ, but if living in CT and working in NY, you pay taxes to both states. I don't know if it's full tax rate to both states, I think it's some sort of formula, but I don't recall.
As far as U.S. tax law is concerned, all U.S. citizens must pay U.S. income taxes regardless of country of residence, country of origin of funds, or country of destination of funds. There is a tax credit for up to $70,000 for money paid to foreign governments, but only those which the United States recognizes as legitimate tax authorities.
I.e., even if you pay 90% of your income to some countries, the U.S. would still expect you to come up with the full U.S. tax burden. Also, any money you make over $70,000 is subject to the full U.S. tax rate regardless of your tax obligation to ANY other country.
AT&T had a monopoly too, but they were (relatively) quick to wire up buildings and enable service, and prices were reasonable.
That speed was really the only thing that kept Ma Bell from being split up long before it did. For decades, it was illegal to connect any non-AT&T equipment to the phone network because it could potentially "damage" the phone infrastructure. There are probably few here (and I'm not one of them) who remember that it was at one time nearly impossible to buy telephones, that they had to be leased from the phone company if you wanted to have one.
Indeed, quite a racket. Sounds like AT&T and BT were operating from the same playbook.
Except the government guidelines don't differentiate between different types of contractors. The Temp agencies aren't the ones being sued here, only HP. For that reason, it's HP's practices that are being reviewed.
According to Federal guidelines, you are either a contractor or an employee. There is no grey area, no middle ground. According to the Federal and State regulations, if you are an employee of a company: that is you work during required hours, must report to a particular place of work, work with or for company employees, and your work is integral to the company business, then you are entitled to all the benefits other company employees get. It really doesn't matter if you're 1099 or W-2 for another employer or not.
What you're missing is that there's a legal difference between a contractor/temp and an FTE. There are Federal and State guidelines about their differences, and if those differences are not met - i.e., if you treat a contractor the same as an FTE but deny them any of the rights and benefits of FTE in your corporation, you are violating the law. FindLaw has some good basic guidelines here.
Notice that in most places, there is no provision for compensation as a replacement for benefits. These employees were what is called "common law" employees, that is, FTEs without the title or benefits.
This is a contract like any other. And contracts are always negotiable. The question is whether the terms of the contract, once negotiated by both parties, will be acceptable to both parties. Either one has the ability to look at the benefits vs. costs and walk away.
If I were you, I would put the following in the provided spaces: 1) I reserve all rights to all of my ideas, creations, and works created prior to (start date with the company). 2) I reserve all rights to all of my ideas, creations, and works not created using company resources during the course of my employment.
And if I were feeling particularly cheeky, I would add: 3) I reserve all rights to all of my ideas, creations, and works created during my employment but not implemented or used by the company during my employment. 4) I claim all rights to any ideas, creations, and works by others which are rejected or abandoned by the company during the course of my employment.
IANAL and all that, but that's what I would do. And if they refused the first two, I would walk away and not look back, especially if it doesn't stipulate what KINDS of works they claim the rights to. (Because that can mean paintings, drawings, music, even your 2nd-grade homework...)
Hmm, last I checked, gravity discriminates against fat people.
The airlines pay more per individual for people who weigh more (including me at 190cm over my girlfriend at 154cm) in decreased gas mileage (or is it mile gaseage in airplanes?). So why shouldn't a heavier individual pay more?
Well, currently I think they take an average and base their rates on that average. It's just as effective for them, only light people see it as unfair that they have to pay for the "extra" on the other end of the scale (so to speak).
Besides, the cost of the infrastrucure, the bad feelings ("I only weighed 128 pounds this morning, and now your'e telling me I weigh 156?!"), and the increased overhead for the sake of a few pennies saved for a few skinnies would far outweigh any potential benefits.
Unless you consider that the fewer clothes one wears, the less one weighs, and since I only book flights with lots of supermodels... hmmm...
Remember that this is the country that for a LONG time outlawed encryption outright. Businesses couldn't even use it to protect their internal communication... Then they complained when the US NSA got wind of some less-than-honest business practices Airbus was using to get a contract.
They might be vying with the Aussie minister for the "world's biggest luddite" award...
And as for the google debacle... if I were Google, I'd consider pulling out of France altogether. Let them see what a world without Google is like.
It's not that I don't like the French, but geez, they seem to be exceeding the limits of common sense lately.
IIRC, precedent can only be used as a basis for defense if a defendant's legal team can convince the judge that the precedent applies, although the judge can use precedent to justify a ruling if s/he so chooses without the input of the lawyers.
This isn't so much an example of the evils of closed source software - which, IMHO, we lived with very comfortably for many years. This smacks more of the law of unintended consequences, and highlights the amazing complexity and the chaotic progression of software patents.
There will come a time, if the tide is not stemmed, when it will not be possible to write software, closed-source or otherwise, without infringing on someone's patent. We're only a few years into most of the patents' 17 (20?) year lifespan; the skies do look forbidding indeed.
Slashdot Mirror
One of the original smart card hacks was done by Ben Jun, Paul Kocher, and Joshua Jaffe, the guys at Cryptography Research, using a technique called "Differential Power Analysis" which they did with a $50 HP oscilliscope to extract the private key stored on a smart card. You can find the white paper here.
So does JAP. I use it almost exclusively, and it works wonders. It allows stacking with other proxies, either local or remote (if you use proxomitron or have an institutional web proxy), and while it does slow things down a touch, I find it to be eminently useful.
In short, if this is true, the passwords really, really sucked.
Not really. What it means is that users generally really, really suck at picking good passwords.
In order for Mr. Johansson's idea to be truly effective, three things need to happen:
1) the IT department much choose strong passwords for the users. They must NOT allow the users to choose the passwords themselves.
2) there must be an incredibly explicit policy regarding the protection of the media on which the passwords are stored and accessed. The policy must provide stiff penalties for failure to comply, and periodic checks need to be made to ensure compliance.
3) the users need to be educated on the relevant security practices so they know why it is so important to follow the letter of the policy and not circumvent any part of it.
Failure to do any of these will compromise the success of the strategy.
Except the only thing that ever gets lost around here is the point.
Are you sure about that? I'd like to see numbers. I'm inclined to think that Sony sees a lot more residual income from the entertainment side, but I would reckon it takes 10+ years before the profit generated from the entertainment produced in a given year beats the electronics produced in that same year.
I don't have time to look up the numbers right now, but I'd bet my SWAG is just as good as yours.
This link shows that The Register is trademarked in the UK.
;-)
"The Register" is a UK-based company, and therefore doesn't have to deal with US trademark law (for the most part). The link above is their trademark application with the UK trademark office.
According to the FAQ, the use of "TM" in the UK is acceptable without having registered the trademark with the registrar. And according to the Trade Marks Act 1994, it is illegal to use the "Registered" trade mark symbol (the R with a circle) unless it is, in fact, registered.
So The Register is officially allowed to use the "registered" symbol based on their trademarked status. And of course it makes for a great double entendre when used at the end of an article.
So no, you're not daft. But now you're probably a bit better informed.
in order to save money over legally obtaining music or movies.
.mp3 player. (And I don't want a damn iPod, free or otherwise, thank you very much.)
Show me where I can get what I want, where I want, legally. Seriously.
iTunes? Nope, have to break the law there just to get music to play on my
CDs? Nope, can't get a lot of the live shows I can download (legitimately even, in some cases!!) on CD.
DVDs? Oh wait, the studios don't offer my favorite TV show on DVD.
If the content owner representatives would get their heads out of their collective assess and stop trying to CONTROL EVERYTHING, we wouldn't have anywhere near the copyright infringement "problem" we have right now. Compulsory licensing has worked for a century now, and the labels are STILL trying to get around it with every new technology that comes out. It's absurd - and the bitter irony is that the artists, who the RIAA and MPAA complain are being so unfairly trampled by 'piracy', are being short-changed. If they were just paid from a compulsory license pool (just like in radio), several dozen proposals of which have been floated in recent years, then this whole argument just goes away. Everybody wins, there is no more piracy, and we get on with our lives.
So before you go blaming those of us who are simply satisfying ourselves IN WAYS WE CANNOT OTHERWISE because the *AAs can't get past their control freak tendencies, look at the whole picture - which I've just outlined for you.
It's not about saving a few measly dollars, let me assure you.
What I was told today is that you have to pay your taxes at least quarterly, otherwise the IRS charges you a huge penalty and the interest they would have collected if they had the money by then.
They actually charge you interest on your own money. How screwed up is that??
Well there's a difference between people who drink good beer and people who drink "anything but budweiser".
:-)
You'll never find me confusing my Guinness or Yuengling with Budweiser. (No matter how many I've already had.
Oh, and the canoe people truly are right - Budweiser really is fucking close to water. And Bud Light? Well, I think they removed the canoe...
I have serious doubts about the possibility of any event short of the presence of a Vogon fleet which would wipe out all life on the planet. We already know of a great many 'extremophiles' which live in places here on Earth which were long thought to be uninhabitable.
Also, the human race is incredibly resilient and adaptive. I think most people (myself included) do not have any real comprehension of just how big the Earth is and how much damage would have to be done to make it uninhabitable even for us, much less for all species on the planet. I really think there will be pockets of humanity which will be able to survive and re-populate the planet. Even a half-life of 500,000 years for radiation only covers 1/4 of the estimated time since humans first appeared... meaning that the human race could almost certainly survive anything short of the complete annihiliation of the entire Earth in preparation for an interstellar bypass.
EZTree stole that intellectual property
This is an oxymoron. "Intellectual" property cannot be stolen, by definition. Only physical property can be stolen. IP can be copied, infringed, abused, improperly used, or devalued, but without actual removal or destruction of the original, no "theft" exists.
You(pl) cannot recreate the definition of stealing to make copyright infringment sound more destructive or immoral. I won't let you.
EZTree certainly committed a crime.
I wouldn't be so sure of this if I were you. IIRC, the legality of bittorrent (among other P2P applications) is being contested in the Supreme Court right now. AFAICT, there is no evidence that EZTree was even seeding the torrents - in which case, they were not even infringing on anyone's copyright - they were simply contributing to infringement, which may or may not be considered a crime (in the U.S., which is where I presume EZT is located) based on the court's decision.
Oh -- and never confuse legality with morality or illegality with immorality. The two concepts are, at best, weakly related.
Oh, how true. It's a knife that cuts both ways - some moral things are illegal, and some legal things are immoral.
I have to second this... The CISSP is becoming the de facto certification for infosec folks to have. I think a large part of the perceived value is the time requirement (3+ years and a B.S./B.A. or 4+ years) for hands-on security work before you can even apply for the certification.
I always thought of the GIAC as the gold standard for security, but when getting a complete credential set costs tens of thousands of dollars just to take the classes, it seems a little extreme compared to the CISSP, which can be done in a single course (or if you're brave, just by taking the test).
I also think the practical part was a good thing for the GIAC, and something the CISSP could benefit from. There are too many people out there with "book smarts" and no practical knowledge, and they dilute the certification and its value to those of us who really know the ins and outs of the subject matter.
Yes, he is a troll, and no, he is not right.
My uncle was part of an Air Force contingent that flew Vatican-approved birth control devices to Catholic nuns in a war-torn part of Africa. The nuns refused to leave because of their dedication to the people they served there. Yet constant rapes from the militant fighting groups in the region were getting some of the nuns pregnant. So the USAF, with the approval of the Vatican, flew missions to deliver contraceptives to them.
Second, the only contraceptive device that can be used to counteract AIDS is the condom. But in most parts of Africa, using condoms is not socially acceptable due to old pagan customs. Most African men will not wear condoms, and prefer "dry" sex, so most women will swab the moisture out of the their vaginas before having sex. This makes bleeding much more prevalent, increasing the risk of AIDS transmission even more. So the Catholic stance on condom use in Africa has absolutely no bearing on the state of AIDS there.
Anybody who tells you that the Catholic Church is even remotely responsible for the state of AIDS in Africa is full of shit.
I think there should be a radical restructuring of the entire U.S. tax code. There are several things I would put as highest priority:
- You cannot be taxed twice on the same income
- all services, goods, and fees which are mandated by any government entitiy are counted as taxes
- total taxes paid, including all income taxes, fees, sales taxes, etc., cannot exceed a certain percentage of your income. Anything in excess of, say 40% (though I think 20% would be more reasonable) of gross income gets refunded.
- a flat tax rate instead of the ridiculous graduated tax rates. (Where I can actually make more money and end up with less because my tax percentage jumps.)
- taxes are subject to jurisdictional delineations; if you are not using the services provided by a jurisdiction, you cannot be taxed by that jurisdiction (including the Federal government if you live outside the U.S. (except a small stipend to help support the Embassy/Consul in your country of residence)).
- The inheritance tax should be abolished altogether. It is simply unconscionable.
Don't know about NJ, but if living in CT and working in NY, you pay taxes to both states. I don't know if it's full tax rate to both states, I think it's some sort of formula, but I don't recall.
As far as U.S. tax law is concerned, all U.S. citizens must pay U.S. income taxes regardless of country of residence, country of origin of funds, or country of destination of funds. There is a tax credit for up to $70,000 for money paid to foreign governments, but only those which the United States recognizes as legitimate tax authorities.
I.e., even if you pay 90% of your income to some countries, the U.S. would still expect you to come up with the full U.S. tax burden. Also, any money you make over $70,000 is subject to the full U.S. tax rate regardless of your tax obligation to ANY other country.
The system sucks.
AT&T had a monopoly too, but they were (relatively) quick to wire up buildings and enable service, and prices were reasonable.
That speed was really the only thing that kept Ma Bell from being split up long before it did. For decades, it was illegal to connect any non-AT&T equipment to the phone network because it could potentially "damage" the phone infrastructure. There are probably few here (and I'm not one of them) who remember that it was at one time nearly impossible to buy telephones, that they had to be leased from the phone company if you wanted to have one.
Indeed, quite a racket. Sounds like AT&T and BT were operating from the same playbook.
Except the government guidelines don't differentiate between different types of contractors. The Temp agencies aren't the ones being sued here, only HP. For that reason, it's HP's practices that are being reviewed.
According to Federal guidelines, you are either a contractor or an employee. There is no grey area, no middle ground. According to the Federal and State regulations, if you are an employee of a company: that is you work during required hours, must report to a particular place of work, work with or for company employees, and your work is integral to the company business, then you are entitled to all the benefits other company employees get. It really doesn't matter if you're 1099 or W-2 for another employer or not.
What you're missing is that there's a legal difference between a contractor/temp and an FTE. There are Federal and State guidelines about their differences, and if those differences are not met - i.e., if you treat a contractor the same as an FTE but deny them any of the rights and benefits of FTE in your corporation, you are violating the law. FindLaw has some good basic guidelines here.
Notice that in most places, there is no provision for compensation as a replacement for benefits. These employees were what is called "common law" employees, that is, FTEs without the title or benefits.
This is a contract like any other. And contracts are always negotiable. The question is whether the terms of the contract, once negotiated by both parties, will be acceptable to both parties. Either one has the ability to look at the benefits vs. costs and walk away.
If I were you, I would put the following in the provided spaces:
1) I reserve all rights to all of my ideas, creations, and works created prior to (start date with the company).
2) I reserve all rights to all of my ideas, creations, and works not created using company resources during the course of my employment.
And if I were feeling particularly cheeky, I would add:
3) I reserve all rights to all of my ideas, creations, and works created during my employment but not implemented or used by the company during my employment.
4) I claim all rights to any ideas, creations, and works by others which are rejected or abandoned by the company during the course of my employment.
IANAL and all that, but that's what I would do. And if they refused the first two, I would walk away and not look back, especially if it doesn't stipulate what KINDS of works they claim the rights to. (Because that can mean paintings, drawings, music, even your 2nd-grade homework...)
Hmm, last I checked, gravity discriminates against fat people.
The airlines pay more per individual for people who weigh more (including me at 190cm over my girlfriend at 154cm) in decreased gas mileage (or is it mile gaseage in airplanes?). So why shouldn't a heavier individual pay more?
Well, currently I think they take an average and base their rates on that average. It's just as effective for them, only light people see it as unfair that they have to pay for the "extra" on the other end of the scale (so to speak).
Besides, the cost of the infrastrucure, the bad feelings ("I only weighed 128 pounds this morning, and now your'e telling me I weigh 156?!"), and the increased overhead for the sake of a few pennies saved for a few skinnies would far outweigh any potential benefits.
Unless you consider that the fewer clothes one wears, the less one weighs, and since I only book flights with lots of supermodels... hmmm...
Remember that this is the country that for a LONG time outlawed encryption outright. Businesses couldn't even use it to protect their internal communication... Then they complained when the US NSA got wind of some less-than-honest business practices Airbus was using to get a contract.
They might be vying with the Aussie minister for the "world's biggest luddite" award...
And as for the google debacle... if I were Google, I'd consider pulling out of France altogether. Let them see what a world without Google is like.
It's not that I don't like the French, but geez, they seem to be exceeding the limits of common sense lately.
Well, they can try. Here's a good short explanation of U.S. precent law.
IIRC, precedent can only be used as a basis for defense if a defendant's legal team can convince the judge that the precedent applies, although the judge can use precedent to justify a ruling if s/he so chooses without the input of the lawyers.
Here's the link so you don't have to put your name into the Yahoo/Baskin Robbins mailing list...
Get your anonymous coupon here.
Should print a coupon with the words "Yahoo Fan".
This isn't so much an example of the evils of closed source software - which, IMHO, we lived with very comfortably for many years. This smacks more of the law of unintended consequences, and highlights the amazing complexity and the chaotic progression of software patents.
There will come a time, if the tide is not stemmed, when it will not be possible to write software, closed-source or otherwise, without infringing on someone's patent. We're only a few years into most of the patents' 17 (20?) year lifespan; the skies do look forbidding indeed.
Sou-East-Walesian
Sou-East Welsh.
or
De-Dwyrain Cymru
(Cymru or Gymru? I can never remember... I think it's De Cymru and i Gymru...?)