It's not recurring in that you don't have to agree to automatic repeat billing until you cancel or agree a minimum subscription term or indeed every pay it again.
It's hard to practice ASP.NET yourself because who the heck owns a windows server available to them?
Who needs a windows server? You can host ASP.NET apps in Apache. Visual Studio 2005+ comes with a lightweight testing web server that runs ASP.NET. (I expect the free Visual Studio does too but I don't know for sure.) And if you must have IIS then XP Pro comes with IIS (albeit with connection limits) as does Vista Business or better.
No, seriously, off the top of your head, name two (non-Research) applications Microsoft writes that require the.NET framework to run.
SQL Server Reporting Services is almost entirely.NET. SQL Servers 2005+ have.NET components. Visual Studio has.NET components. The newer Microsoft Dynamics apps. PowerShell, if that counts, is also entirely.NET. As the other guy said TFS - I don't know about SharePoint.
Most of Microsoft's stuff is not new products, they continue to develop existing lines like Office or Exchange. There are huge legacy codebases behind those - it doesn't make sense to go back and port them to.NET. New stuff they write in.NET - there just isn't that much high profile that's entirely new.
Install an onboard computer which somehow knows about some non-existent protocol to get a digital stream of music out of my iPhone.
I agree with you on the iPhone connector, though in fairness many recent cars have Bluetooth-capable CD players or a CD player with mp3 support so the onboard computer *is* here.
As an avid "MMOer" I knew of and wanted to try this game. But with no free trial
As well as the $5 preview there were *loads* of sites giving away open beta keys just before the release. There were plenty of chance to try it before it went live - you can't possibly have missed it?
And a few months into live they added 3-day trial accounts. The first wave needed an invite from an existing player but then they made it open to all. Yes, you can try the game for free.
did somebody say "free"??? I like "free".:-) Alright. I'm new to online gaming. What do I need to play this game? Is dialup good enough or do I need broadband? Is the software downloadable?
According to TFA it will be free next year but it isn't yet. Yes, I'm fairly sure you'd need broadband. You can get the client here but the installer is a few versions out-of-date and will need to download patches before you can play - you're looking at about 3.2GB all in.
As I recall, Google Analytics uses Javascript to do the tracking, I don't think it uses the 1x1 pixel image method... though I could be wrong, it's been almost a year since I last played with it.
It uses script which inserts a trivial image into the page. All the data is passed back to Google as query string parameters on the image request.
Usually that means making the LGPL library dynamically-linked, or shipping the source for the program that uses it.
No, it doesn't have to be the source - it could be a single compiled object file that links against the LGPL code to build the final.exe. They don't need to give the source away.
Another point though is that if you link LGPL code you must permit enough reverse engineering of your closed-source code to debugging of the LGPL code.
The gold-standard tool for this is PDF2IMG which uses Adobe's own PDF rendering library but it'll set you back a few thousand dollars.
Ghostscript is good but it isn't perfect: it does choke on some PDFs, misrenders some and won't pick up non-embedded TTF fonts, only external PS fonts. It also doesn't do any anti-aliasing so you probably want to render large and sample down and (IIRC) there's a max image size it can render. But by and large it does just work.
In fact, the only vaguely embedded device I've come across with an x86 chip was using a 486 clone (from Cyrix I think). The Madge MkIII token ring network card was built around a lower-power stripped-down x86-clone core. They chose it, IIRC, for the programming tools available. Alas I can't find any more details:-/ and the chip package just says "K2 Ringrunner".
Note that XP3 won't install on systems running beta IE8 It won't be offered automatically by Windows Update but it *will* install. However you then can't remove IE8 without ininstalling the service pack first.
so to answer your question "does it run on Linux?"; the answer is it runs on Microsoft IIS server and Microsoft SQL Server. Rubbish - IIS doesn't have anything to do with this. It's not even SQL Server's fault either - it's just the exploit SQL is crafted to work on SQL Server, it'll use schema reflection stuff that won't be portable to other databases. There's no reason you couldn't write equivalent code for MySQL or Oracle. There's no reason you couldn't exploit this through an app hosted on Apache running against SQL Server. This all boils down to shoddy applications and database setup. There's nothing really here to blame MS for.
IIS has no part in resisting SQL injection attacks - it passes data to the application underneath and that app is responsible for properly escaping it before talking to the database *if* you're going to graft user data into SQL commands. And you shouldn't be - you should really be coding against stored procedures on any platform, particulary MS platforms which have supported them forever and because you get better performance that way, and you can invoke the stored procedures passing parameters directly without having to escape them at all - there's good APIs for all of that. And you should probably revoke the application user's permission to the reflection tables anyway if you can.
And absolutely impossible to finish, even with cheats, if I recall correctly. Granted, it wasn't obvious what the goal of the game even was. No, I think it was (though I never completed it properly).
The goal of the game was to get your ship navigation unit back, the one that Triax teleported in and stole at the very start of the game. I remember having a cheat that let you spawn arbitrary items so I made one of those, plugged it in and my ship flew away with a victory chime. I think that was it for an ending.
(I am not a kernel/gcc developed) This is what it mean in a practical sense: All the userland applications that come precompiled on websites for various distributions (including (binary only).rpm,.deb, and.tar.gz files) will not work with the newer versions of the distributions (once they take up this gcc/kernel patch). This means a cleaning house of a lot of binaries created in the last couple years. No, not at all. Any existing binary compiled with GCC 4.2.x or earlier will never show this issue whether it's running against a kernel without the fix or not.
The issue only occurs when a binary compiled with GCC 4.3 or later is run against a kernel that hasn't been fixed. Even then, things will only go wrong if a signal handler that uses string operations is triggered in the middle of a similar operation in the code that's running with the direction flag set, e.g. an overlapped memmove. It's very rare.
Most experienced assembler programmers know better than to assume the direction flag will be set or cleared unless this is specifically documented. That's the whole point - it *is* explicitly documented but the old GCC used to explicitly clear it anyway. The new GCC assume everyone's following the documentation and doesn't bother with the extra clear.
The rules of the road say that you should check that the car is in drive before setting out on your trip. The older version of GCC used to put the car into drive for you. But the new version lets you leave it in reverse if you don't check making you exit out the rear wall of your garage. That's not quite right. In this case:
the rules of the road say that you can assume you'll find your car in drive
the old version of GCC used to always check anyway and put the car in drive for you; the new version just assumes the car is already in drive, because that's what the rules say.
The problem comes when an affected kernel temporarily hands your car over to a signal handler - let's say "parking valet". The valet now doesn't bother checking the car is in drive when he gets in, because the rules of the road say the kernel should have given him the car in drive. In the past GCC looked over his shoulder to make sure the kernel had really left the car in drive for him. But now no-one bothers checking for him and he might then accidentally crash your car.
now that GCC isn't turning out broken binaries, old kernels will be unable to run them GCC never turned out broken binaries. It turned out overly-conservative binaries that cleared the direction flag even when the ABI spec said it could assume the flag was already clear.
But its a linker flag that gets stamped into the EXE and that's annoying. But it's got to go somewhere, and it has to be processed before you get into main(). So I suppose you could link in different CRT init code instead - but that's more or less equivalent.
Well, there's a lot of bad security things that happen once you set that little flag. Sure, I'd never set it - I was trying to lay out options for the guy I replied to. If you want to write services in C++ then it's fairly straightforward once you've figured it out the first time and there are toolkits that'll help you do it, e.g. ACE has a C++ service template a colleague swears by. That's not to say there aren't nasty gotchas though e.g. the one that burned me most is that the service code runs in a new thread, not the same thread that entered main(), so you need to re-do thread specific init in your service code.
How about they stop differentiating between console/service and GUI apps. In normal OSes there are just applications. Why Windows has to differentiate god knows. WHat if I want to write a console app that also drives a GUI or a service that dumps to the console... etc. The distinction is minimal - there's just a flag "wire up stdin/out/err to a console on start-up". After that there's no distinction. There's no reason a console app can't drive a GUI.
A service dumping to a console is tricker, since services can't assume that an interactive desktop exists or that there is exactly one interactive desktop or that desktop 0 is the user. I don't know if it's possible for a service to use the standard Windows console system but there's certainly a 'interact with the desktop' permission they can be granted which would allow them to create their own windows for output. Or they could use the debug ringbuffer which you can view through a sysinternals tool or through Visual Studio. Or they can log to a file which you tail -f in a console.
If it did let you seek to an arbitrary point, then wouldn't it be a block cipher rather than a stream cipher, by definition? I'm not sure what you're getting at - by what definition?
As I understand it, a block cipher is a transform of clear text X to some ciphertext Y. X will always encrypt to Y for a given key value. You use tricks like CBC with a random IV to make sure that attackers can't exploit that identity.
A stream cipher is a pseudorandom function that you combine with your cleartext in some way, e.g. xor, to encrypt it. X will encrypt to Y1=X+C1 at a given point in the stream and at Y2=X+C2 to a different point in the stream for random values C1 and C2 generated from a given key value.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not recurring in that you don't have to agree to automatic repeat billing until you cancel or agree a minimum subscription term or indeed every pay it again.
It's hard to practice ASP.NET yourself because who the heck owns a windows server available to them?
Who needs a windows server? You can host ASP.NET apps in Apache. Visual Studio 2005+ comes with a lightweight testing web server that runs ASP.NET. (I expect the free Visual Studio does too but I don't know for sure.) And if you must have IIS then XP Pro comes with IIS (albeit with connection limits) as does Vista Business or better.
No, seriously, off the top of your head, name two (non-Research) applications Microsoft writes that require the .NET framework to run.
SQL Server Reporting Services is almost entirely .NET. SQL Servers 2005+ have .NET components. Visual Studio has .NET components. The newer Microsoft Dynamics apps. PowerShell, if that counts, is also entirely .NET. As the other guy said TFS - I don't know about SharePoint.
Most of Microsoft's stuff is not new products, they continue to develop existing lines like Office or Exchange. There are huge legacy codebases behind those - it doesn't make sense to go back and port them to .NET. New stuff they write in .NET - there just isn't that much high profile that's entirely new.
Install an onboard computer which somehow knows about some non-existent protocol to get a digital stream of music out of my iPhone.
I agree with you on the iPhone connector, though in fairness many recent cars have Bluetooth-capable CD players or a CD player with mp3 support so the onboard computer *is* here.
Referrals from slashdot are automatically dropped. It's their protection against slashdottings.
No, that's bugzilla.mozilla.org. The linked bugzilla.kernel.org appears to be down to all traffic.
As an avid "MMOer" I knew of and wanted to try this game. But with no free trial
As well as the $5 preview there were *loads* of sites giving away open beta keys just before the release. There were plenty of chance to try it before it went live - you can't possibly have missed it?
And a few months into live they added 3-day trial accounts. The first wave needed an invite from an existing player but then they made it open to all. Yes, you can try the game for free.
did somebody say "free"??? I like "free". :-) Alright. I'm new to online gaming. What do I need to play this game? Is dialup good enough or do I need broadband? Is the software downloadable?
According to TFA it will be free next year but it isn't yet. Yes, I'm fairly sure you'd need broadband. You can get the client here but the installer is a few versions out-of-date and will need to download patches before you can play - you're looking at about 3.2GB all in.
I played the game on a Linux computer, and then moved the game to my wife's Linux laptop. I didn't notice any weird DRM.
There's a three install limit with the usual contact-them-for-more. It's an install time only check so it's hardly intrusive.
As I recall, Google Analytics uses Javascript to do the tracking, I don't think it uses the 1x1 pixel image method... though I could be wrong, it's been almost a year since I last played with it.
It uses script which inserts a trivial image into the page. All the data is passed back to Google as query string parameters on the image request.
These are the file attributes FAT knows:
- Read
- Write
- System
No, it's
FUD and lies. The Apache license requires you share the code that is under the Apache license.
No it doesn't. It says 'Source or Object form'.
Usually that means making the LGPL library dynamically-linked, or shipping the source for the program that uses it.
No, it doesn't have to be the source - it could be a single compiled object file that links against the LGPL code to build the final .exe. They don't need to give the source away.
Another point though is that if you link LGPL code you must permit enough reverse engineering of your closed-source code to debugging of the LGPL code.
The gold-standard tool for this is PDF2IMG which uses Adobe's own PDF rendering library but it'll set you back a few thousand dollars.
Ghostscript is good but it isn't perfect: it does choke on some PDFs, misrenders some and won't pick up non-embedded TTF fonts, only external PS fonts. It also doesn't do any anti-aliasing so you probably want to render large and sample down and (IIRC) there's a max image size it can render. But by and large it does just work.
IIS has no part in resisting SQL injection attacks - it passes data to the application underneath and that app is responsible for properly escaping it before talking to the database *if* you're going to graft user data into SQL commands. And you shouldn't be - you should really be coding against stored procedures on any platform, particulary MS platforms which have supported them forever and because you get better performance that way, and you can invoke the stored procedures passing parameters directly without having to escape them at all - there's good APIs for all of that. And you should probably revoke the application user's permission to the reflection tables anyway if you can.
The goal of the game was to get your ship navigation unit back, the one that Triax teleported in and stole at the very start of the game. I remember having a cheat that let you spawn arbitrary items so I made one of those, plugged it in and my ship flew away with a victory chime. I think that was it for an ending.
10 REPEAT
20 PRINT "NO GOTOS HERE!"
30 UNTIL FALSE
The issue only occurs when a binary compiled with GCC 4.3 or later is run against a kernel that hasn't been fixed. Even then, things will only go wrong if a signal handler that uses string operations is triggered in the middle of a similar operation in the code that's running with the direction flag set, e.g. an overlapped memmove. It's very rare.
- the rules of the road say that you can assume you'll find your car in drive
- the old version of GCC used to always check anyway and put the car in drive for you; the new version just assumes the car is already in drive, because that's what the rules say.
The problem comes when an affected kernel temporarily hands your car over to a signal handler - let's say "parking valet". The valet now doesn't bother checking the car is in drive when he gets in, because the rules of the road say the kernel should have given him the car in drive. In the past GCC looked over his shoulder to make sure the kernel had really left the car in drive for him. But now no-one bothers checking for him and he might then accidentally crash your car.A service dumping to a console is tricker, since services can't assume that an interactive desktop exists or that there is exactly one interactive desktop or that desktop 0 is the user. I don't know if it's possible for a service to use the standard Windows console system but there's certainly a 'interact with the desktop' permission they can be granted which would allow them to create their own windows for output. Or they could use the debug ringbuffer which you can view through a sysinternals tool or through Visual Studio. Or they can log to a file which you tail -f in a console.
As I understand it, a block cipher is a transform of clear text X to some ciphertext Y. X will always encrypt to Y for a given key value. You use tricks like CBC with a random IV to make sure that attackers can't exploit that identity.
A stream cipher is a pseudorandom function that you combine with your cleartext in some way, e.g. xor, to encrypt it. X will encrypt to Y1=X+C1 at a given point in the stream and at Y2=X+C2 to a different point in the stream for random values C1 and C2 generated from a given key value.