That has nothing to do with symmetric multiprocessing. SMP means that all the chips can make memory accesses to all the memory at the same speed. It is the opposite of Non-Uniform Memory Access, or NUMA, in which certain processors (some or all of them) take longer to talk to certain parts of main memory than others or systems in which processors have a faster path to some private off-chip memory in addition to the main shared memory.
Because that would rhyme with dog, cog, and... analog.
It can't be 'roge' because that would suggest a soft 'g', like a 'j'. It can't be 'rogge' because that would have two syllables (as does, for example, Roget). It's an irregular spelling because any regular way to spell it appears even worse.
In the case of 'analog' vs. 'analogue', the pronunciation is already the way the simplified spelling suggests. Such is not the case for 'rogue'.
Don't blame us, we're just trying to make as much sense out of the language we inherited from your country as we can.;-)
Is there any news as to whether he was using a central configuration management system? A PC which logs into the device and uploads the config with a mouse click kinda obviates the need for storing to flash on each individual device.
All that takes is not issuing a command to write the config to flash on Cisco (the brand) equipment. Not issuing that command is hardly an intricate premeditated plot.
If you have a central router management package that telnets or sshes into the router and renews the config from your workstation at a mouse click, then why would you need to write the all the router configs to expensive flash cards in each router? That workstation and its backups are the important part of the network management task. The routers just do what they're configured to do until they reboot. Then, you just reissue the config. No problems, no worries. I don't know that he had this set up, but it's certainly not that exotic of a solution.
It's no longer his responsibility to provide them with answers or documentation after he's been fired. His responsibility to them ended when they chose to end their responsibility to pay him.
If he still has access to the rogue device and the rogue device has physical proximity and unlimited time to try network IDs and encryption keys, consider it back on the network eventually.
Packets might have nothing to do with a terminal server. He could be dialed into it using a modem and controlling the console port of an otherwise legitimate Unixish server.
I wonder if this is something like an ssh-reachable KVM or an old Livingston PortMaster 2e with a modem attached.
The cable tracing scenario (even though I mentioned it in simple terms before as well) should include db25 to rj-45 serial adapters, too. Cat 5e carries serial signals just fine. Searching the racks themselves and tracing any cables that go into drop cealings, raised floors, walls, or closets is probably the only sure bet.
If it's really a terminal server then it has an IP and therefore a MAC address but that's the wrong end to find.
The entire Internet-facing surface area of the organization is a lousy place to search for rogue devices. There's port knocking, tunneling, and potentially specific SYN numbers to consider when someone doesn't want their connection discovered easily. It's even quite possible it doesn't connect to anything through Ethernet at all.
Being a terminal server, it could run a modem for dialing in on one port and could be the console for a workstation or server (or several) through another port or ports. That's what terminal servers do.
What they need to do is locate and catalog the phone lines and serial cables throughout the facilities in which he had access to install equipment or the equipment in those locations by ability. Many routers have terminal server functionality, and most terminal servers have some routing capability, too. I suspect an older device that allows single modems to be hooked up, but something that requires a primary rate ISDN or a DS-1 hooked up to DSPs to take outside calls isn't out of the question.
If they were willing to spend just a little bit of cash on outside help, any number of companies, agencies, or high school kids could trace cables and write down model numbers of racks of equipment.
Part of the problem is that it was repackaged many different places, as each online "news" site tried to report it to their readers. Unless you pay really close attention to where each source got their information, it appears to be multiple independent sources after that happens.
The market is like Soylent Green. You might not recognize Grandma and Uncle Joe individually, but they and other people are what constitute it.
As long as people have emotions and the market is made up of people, the market will have emotions. They might be in concert sometimes and conflicting others, but the markets are always driven by intellect and emotion.
Even US Treasury bonds and T-bills have some risk. The immediate risk is really small, because it requires that the US Treasury goes broke.
There are also other risks, though.
One is that your conservative investment (other than the instruments tagged correct for inflation) grow more slowly than inflation, leaving you with more money in absolute dollars but less buying power.
Another is the risk that by choosing conservatively your opportunity cost pays much higher even adjusted for loss risk than your safer, more stable investment.
Everything you do with money is a bet, even holding it in your hand. Some bets are far safer than others, but in an active market there's no real way not to play.
I imagine lots of systems triggered on "Holy shit, this stock lost 10%... 20%... 30% of its value in just a few minutes, better sell before it's worthless". The initial sell-off would have caused a feedback loop influencing later decisions. If you were tied just to price trends and not the news stories, it'd be easy to follow the sales when they happen so fast. This is true whether you're a computer or a person.
You only sell short if you expect a stock to go down. If it goes down unexpectedly, most of the price pressure is from panic selling and loss limitation.
Let's see... The CEO can die in a few seconds. A competitor can patent a new, cheaper and more effective way to do something. A company can win or lose an important court case, and even if the case goes on for years te ruling could take less than a week. A car company could recall nearly 1 million vehicles for washer fluid pump motors that can start fires in a 30-second press release (like Ford just did). A drug could be approved or rejected by a regulating body like the FDA. A food company could recall millions of pounds of contaminated product they didn't even process, but bought and sold.
No, but there are likely plenty of programmers with 20+ years of experience who have learned.Net at some point in the last 5 years. The language experience isn't as important as the programming experience, despite what the headhunters think.
You make a good point, but this is the same company that a few years ago touted how many millions of dollars companies were saving by "switching" to Server 2003. All they were doing to save money was buying fewer faster, newer computers with 2003 on them instead of NT 4 or 2000. MS is not above "it just works" at all. They just didn't use it in this ad.
Slashdot Mirror
That has nothing to do with symmetric multiprocessing. SMP means that all the chips can make memory accesses to all the memory at the same speed. It is the opposite of Non-Uniform Memory Access, or NUMA, in which certain processors (some or all of them) take longer to talk to certain parts of main memory than others or systems in which processors have a faster path to some private off-chip memory in addition to the main shared memory.
Is this mostly a plan to get the Hubbardite sites labeled as expensive and dangerous bullshit?
Unfortunately I think Knol has that covered.
Because that would rhyme with dog, cog, and... analog.
It can't be 'roge' because that would suggest a soft 'g', like a 'j'. It can't be 'rogge' because that would have two syllables (as does, for example, Roget). It's an irregular spelling because any regular way to spell it appears even worse.
In the case of 'analog' vs. 'analogue', the pronunciation is already the way the simplified spelling suggests. Such is not the case for 'rogue'.
Don't blame us, we're just trying to make as much sense out of the language we inherited from your country as we can. ;-)
if not 3...
Is there any news as to whether he was using a central configuration management system? A PC which logs into the device and uploads the config with a mouse click kinda obviates the need for storing to flash on each individual device.
So the netsec team is the blue team? Do they have fun little Flash animation comedy sketches?
All that takes is not issuing a command to write the config to flash on Cisco (the brand) equipment. Not issuing that command is hardly an intricate premeditated plot.
If you have a central router management package that telnets or sshes into the router and renews the config from your workstation at a mouse click, then why would you need to write the all the router configs to expensive flash cards in each router? That workstation and its backups are the important part of the network management task. The routers just do what they're configured to do until they reboot. Then, you just reissue the config. No problems, no worries. I don't know that he had this set up, but it's certainly not that exotic of a solution.
It's no longer his responsibility to provide them with answers or documentation after he's been fired. His responsibility to them ended when they chose to end their responsibility to pay him.
If he still has access to the rogue device and the rogue device has physical proximity and unlimited time to try network IDs and encryption keys, consider it back on the network eventually.
Packets might have nothing to do with a terminal server. He could be dialed into it using a modem and controlling the console port of an otherwise legitimate Unixish server.
But then how does it serve a terminal? A terminal is not a WiFi device, hence the need for a server to manage it over the network.
I wonder if this is something like an ssh-reachable KVM or an old Livingston PortMaster 2e with a modem attached.
The cable tracing scenario (even though I mentioned it in simple terms before as well) should include db25 to rj-45 serial adapters, too. Cat 5e carries serial signals just fine. Searching the racks themselves and tracing any cables that go into drop cealings, raised floors, walls, or closets is probably the only sure bet.
If it's really a terminal server then it has an IP and therefore a MAC address but that's the wrong end to find.
The entire Internet-facing surface area of the organization is a lousy place to search for rogue devices. There's port knocking, tunneling, and potentially specific SYN numbers to consider when someone doesn't want their connection discovered easily. It's even quite possible it doesn't connect to anything through Ethernet at all.
Being a terminal server, it could run a modem for dialing in on one port and could be the console for a workstation or server (or several) through another port or ports. That's what terminal servers do.
What they need to do is locate and catalog the phone lines and serial cables throughout the facilities in which he had access to install equipment or the equipment in those locations by ability. Many routers have terminal server functionality, and most terminal servers have some routing capability, too. I suspect an older device that allows single modems to be hooked up, but something that requires a primary rate ISDN or a DS-1 hooked up to DSPs to take outside calls isn't out of the question.
If they were willing to spend just a little bit of cash on outside help, any number of companies, agencies, or high school kids could trace cables and write down model numbers of racks of equipment.
Part of the problem is that it was repackaged many different places, as each online "news" site tried to report it to their readers. Unless you pay really close attention to where each source got their information, it appears to be multiple independent sources after that happens.
Damn. I already posted in this topic. Consider yourself an honorary +1 Insightful.
The market is like Soylent Green. You might not recognize Grandma and Uncle Joe individually, but they and other people are what constitute it.
As long as people have emotions and the market is made up of people, the market will have emotions. They might be in concert sometimes and conflicting others, but the markets are always driven by intellect and emotion.
Even US Treasury bonds and T-bills have some risk. The immediate risk is really small, because it requires that the US Treasury goes broke.
There are also other risks, though.
One is that your conservative investment (other than the instruments tagged correct for inflation) grow more slowly than inflation, leaving you with more money in absolute dollars but less buying power.
Another is the risk that by choosing conservatively your opportunity cost pays much higher even adjusted for loss risk than your safer, more stable investment.
Everything you do with money is a bet, even holding it in your hand. Some bets are far safer than others, but in an active market there's no real way not to play.
I imagine lots of systems triggered on "Holy shit, this stock lost 10% ... 20% ... 30% of its value in just a few minutes, better sell before it's worthless". The initial sell-off would have caused a feedback loop influencing later decisions. If you were tied just to price trends and not the news stories, it'd be easy to follow the sales when they happen so fast. This is true whether you're a computer or a person.
The guy with a million in holdings for a single stock likely has a better deal with his broker than that, too.
You only sell short if you expect a stock to go down. If it goes down unexpectedly, most of the price pressure is from panic selling and loss limitation.
Let's see... The CEO can die in a few seconds. A competitor can patent a new, cheaper and more effective way to do something. A company can win or lose an important court case, and even if the case goes on for years te ruling could take less than a week. A car company could recall nearly 1 million vehicles for washer fluid pump motors that can start fires in a 30-second press release (like Ford just did). A drug could be approved or rejected by a regulating body like the FDA. A food company could recall millions of pounds of contaminated product they didn't even process, but bought and sold.
How's that for disproof by counterexample?
Oddly enough, she's a Canadian.
No, but there are likely plenty of programmers with 20+ years of experience who have learned .Net at some point in the last 5 years. The language experience isn't as important as the programming experience, despite what the headhunters think.
You make a good point, but this is the same company that a few years ago touted how many millions of dollars companies were saving by "switching" to Server 2003. All they were doing to save money was buying fewer faster, newer computers with 2003 on them instead of NT 4 or 2000. MS is not above "it just works" at all. They just didn't use it in this ad.