No - 802.11b has two modes, managed and ad-hoc. Ad-hoc sacrifices a bit of performance for the ability to join peer-peer networks that don't have any base station
> But according to you, I should be suing Sendmail?
not at all:
(a) sendmail is free, hardly fair for them to be liable when they give the thing away. On the other hand MS, kazaa et al profit from the software they ship.
(b) config issue - who's responsible for this copy of sendmail, your hosting company? Their server is setup wrongly if its letting some kiddie impersonate you. Sendmail is not a mass-market product - its fair expect its users to be people who understand computer security issues. XP is - userbase of millons of people who don't even know what a buffer overflow is. Result is that sendmail users are usually responsible about the software they run and the effects it could have on others and kazaa users don't have the faintest idea.
Tangent to this: sendmail is open source, so the person running it has every opportunity to fix problems. You don't see people doing that with XP).
So your saying haxx0rs should be responsible for their actions. I agree entirely, but what about the people who create beasts so huge and vulnerable for them to control? At least some of the buck should stop with kazza, MS et al for shipping insecure code when they know what it could cause.
Trouble is this won't stop until someone forces them to be responsible for the things they create. Or until 30 million kazaa users become clueful.
and hasn't it always been this way? Zillions of insecure routers, servers and hosts out there for the taking? Only difference is that now there's less diversity than ever before. In ye olden days there were so many different architectures/os-en/programs that causing serious damage to the 'net by subverting one or two was pretty impossible. Now we have massive networks of nodes running on identical code ('doze, kazaa, even redhat in the linux world) - enough identical nodes for worms to do serious damage.
So whats the way forward? Having software thats popular with the unwashed masses *and* secure just isn't going to happen (unclued users, no incentive for authors, etc etc)...
Perhaps the only solution is liability - lets hold commercial entities responsible when their buggy code wreaks havoc on the net.
"The 2-VU operates in the Microsoft Windows 2000 and XP® environments and features the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. This strategy avoids the problems of a propriety, closed environment while maintaining the file integrity offered through these state-of-the-art digital rights management platforms."
This must be some other, new definition of proprietary... one that you can use to mean anything you want. Can you do this with all words?
Slashdot Mirror
mmm, across the road from my desk... i'll be there
I just got home from it... the wifi access is nothing to write home about but the old hardware is cool and the guy with the wearable spectrum rocked
:/
If any of you go - the entrance is around the back of the building, not on euston road - took me a while to figure that out
>however, doesn't 802.11b require a base station?
No - 802.11b has two modes, managed and ad-hoc. Ad-hoc sacrifices a bit of performance for the ability to join peer-peer networks that don't have any base station
scientists announce webserver discovered running on GM mouse. Slashdot crowd stamp on mouse.
posting that had to be someone's idea of a joke, right?
I wonder how long before people combine this sort of thing with mesh networks? Then you could wander around getting your pockets slashdotted all day
must be a slow news day... if the stories stopped coming we'd all get bored and tell ghost stories on kuro5hin :)
not at all:
(a) sendmail is free, hardly fair for them to be liable when they give the thing away. On the other hand MS, kazaa et al profit from the software they ship.
(b) config issue - who's responsible for this copy of sendmail, your hosting company? Their server is setup wrongly if its letting some kiddie impersonate you. Sendmail is not a mass-market product - its fair expect its users to be people who understand computer security issues. XP is - userbase of millons of people who don't even know what a buffer overflow is. Result is that sendmail users are usually responsible about the software they run and the effects it could have on others and kazaa users don't have the faintest idea.
Tangent to this: sendmail is open source, so the person running it has every opportunity to fix problems. You don't see people doing that with XP).
So your saying haxx0rs should be responsible for their actions. I agree entirely, but what about the people who create beasts so huge and vulnerable for them to control? At least some of the buck should stop with kazza, MS et al for shipping insecure code when they know what it could cause.
Trouble is this won't stop until someone forces them to be responsible for the things they create. Or until 30 million kazaa users become clueful.
and hasn't it always been this way? Zillions of insecure routers, servers and hosts out there for the taking? Only difference is that now there's less diversity than ever before. In ye olden days there were so many different architectures/os-en/programs that causing serious damage to the 'net by subverting one or two was pretty impossible. Now we have massive networks of nodes running on identical code ('doze, kazaa, even redhat in the linux world) - enough identical nodes for worms to do serious damage.
So whats the way forward? Having software thats popular with the unwashed masses *and* secure just isn't going to happen (unclued users, no incentive for authors, etc etc)...
Perhaps the only solution is liability - lets hold commercial entities responsible when their buggy code wreaks havoc on the net.
Hah. yeahright, like thats ever going to happen.
mmmm, lizards baby
heh... just might be. But now the truth is protected by the dark power of goth mopiness nothing can stop it! [bwahahahaha]
now thats just cruel... within 5 minutes the page is slashdotted and five people setup mirrors - and for it they lose karma. Nice one moderators.
not to karma whore, but...
h tm
mirror: http://www.gothicasfuck.co.uk/temp/echelon2-arch.
"The 2-VU operates in the Microsoft Windows 2000 and XP® environments and features the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. This strategy avoids the problems of a propriety, closed environment while maintaining the file integrity offered through these state-of-the-art digital rights management platforms."
This must be some other, new definition of proprietary... one that you can use to mean anything you want. Can you do this with all words?