Someone should E-mail some honeypot information to them right now (meaning: the hijacked site). Something with username/password and money potential.
This can be simple, like sending an E-mail confirmation of someone's (honeypot) E-mail address, and seeing if it gets spam at a later date. Then log all attempts to access the account.
For a more interesting example, if someone can quickly setup a reasonably official looking honeypot online banking site, then send an E-mail pretending to be the parent of a college student letting him know that his "allowance account" for the upcoming semester is online, with username and password and balance.
This could help out enormously in tracking down the culprits at a later date.
I'm willing to bet that more people have built FM transmitters and been frustrated by crappy results, than have succeeded perfectly.
I didn't want to get technical in the article, but if you've built the Ramsey kit, then don't be shy: let us know what sort of THD you got and how much hiss is on the channel! Tell us that you are using it to transmit FM in your house, as I am doing right now!
I don't know if you noticed, but at least one other poster agrees with me on this issue (below), so you can't say that my argument is completely without merit. Other people feel as I do - are you so certain that there's *nothing* wrong with the kits?
You sound more like one of the owners of Ramsey, with an axe to grind. Negative feedback is like gold - you could use it to improve your product instead of carping at the customers. I'm only reporting first-hand experience in the subject.
I'm happy that, as a HAM RADIO operator you can build noiseless transmitters. The majority of hobbyists, however, don't have the benefit of your expertise. Take your Ramsey kit and compare it with the C.Crane one, and I'll bet you'll find that your system has hiss you simply didn't notice.
Beware of cheap FM transmitters for this purpose: the majority of them are no good.
Ultra cheap FM transmitters use a tuned tank circuit to control frequency (ie - a variable capacitor). These are very difficult to get to the exact center of the frequency you choose, the result will more than likely be poor audio response.
Furthermore, your receiver is probably digitally controlled to an exact FM frequency and the variable cap system will change frequency slightly with temperature and humidity, so that the transmitter will slowly go in and out of channel. The receiver is phase locked to the correct channel, and the result is that the system will gain and lose quality over time. Digitally controlled frequency is a must for this application.
Kit systems are usually poor at doing audio; making a noise-free circuit is somewhat of a black art and it takes a lot of research and tinkering to get it right. For example, Ramsey Electronics makes an FM transmitter kit with digital frequency control and all that. The problem is that the board layout introduces an unacceptablt amount of hiss into the audio signal. No amount of adjustment will fix this, and the average hobbyist is unprepared to even figure out what the problem is.
Finally, Be very careful of high end ($300) transmitters used for gyms. Some of them are mono only (!) but do not specify this on the advert.
Your best bet is to look on the net for reviews of any transmitter you're thinking of buying. When people have good things to say and don't point out the obvious flaws, then the product might be OK.
I purchased several poor FM transmitters before I got one that worked well, and I use it for transmitting FM throughout the house.
That would be the C.Crane FM transmitter. You can get it for about $80, and Froogle lists several vendors.
It's even worse than that. Suppose some malicious hacker starts logging into their online systems with a modded system that has a random serial number, with the sole intent of making that number unusable in the online service. The legitimate owner of the box with that number will be denied online service forever. This process can probably be automated.
Is it possible for someone to sufficiently pollute the MS online database that they will have to change their "lifetime ban" procedures? Or at least, to cause MS a severe case of trouble over it?
The supreme court has upheld the ideal that everyone has freedom of speech, loosely defined as expression of ideas. Thus, handing out flyers is protected under freedom of speech, even though no one is actually talking. Songs are protected (meaning, your right to write whatever words you want to your songs), internet communications are protected, questionable works of art are protected, and so on.
What is *not* protected is the manner in which those ideas are expressed. You have every right to your opinion, but you may not shout it into my window at 3:00 AM. You cannot vandalize the side of a building with grafitti. You cannot post rude and harassing comments to someone elses messageboard, but you have every right to open a website and showcase your rude and harassing opinions to the world.
The general idea is that your expression cannot interfere with someone else's rights: life, liberty, the quiet enjoyment of their property, the need for public safety ("fire" in a crowded theatre") and so on.
Spam faxes are a clear violation of the recipients rights, since they require the recipient to waste money and deprive the recipient of the use of their machine.
This case should not hinge on First amendment issues.
The supreme court has upheld the ideal that everyone has freedom of speech, loosely defined as expression of ideas. Thus, handing out flyers is protected under freedom of speech, even though no one is actually talking. Songs are protected (meaning, your right to write whatever words you want to your songs), internet communications are protected, questionable works of art are protected, and so on.
What is *not* protected is the manner in which those ideas are expressed. You have every right to your opinion, but you may not shout it into my window at 3:00 AM. You cannot vandalize the side of a building with grafitti. You cannot post rude and harassing comments to someone elses messageboard, but you have every right to open a website and showcase your rude and harassing opinions to the world.
The general idea is that your expression cannot interfere with someone else's rights: life, liberty, the quiet enjoyment of their property, the need for public safety ("fire" in a crowded theatre") and so on.
Spam faxes are a clear violation of the recipients rights, since they require the recipient to waste money and deprive the recipient of the use of their machine.
This case should not hinge on First amendment issues.
We were designing cars over in Detroit-land, and thought that it'd be a good idea to have a button that the owner could push to dump the oil. This was added as a convenience for those owners who change their own oil (drive over the pan, press the button, add new oil, and voila! you're done).
Of course, the owner's manual states clearly that the button should never be pushed while the vehicle was in motion.
Slashdot Mirror
This can be simple, like sending an E-mail confirmation of someone's (honeypot) E-mail address, and seeing if it gets spam at a later date. Then log all attempts to access the account.
For a more interesting example, if someone can quickly setup a reasonably official looking honeypot online banking site, then send an E-mail pretending to be the parent of a college student letting him know that his "allowance account" for the upcoming semester is online, with username and password and balance.
This could help out enormously in tracking down the culprits at a later date.
Try to pay w/o cookies and you get exactly your reported results.
I didn't want to get technical in the article, but if you've built the Ramsey kit, then don't be shy: let us know what sort of THD you got and how much hiss is on the channel! Tell us that you are using it to transmit FM in your house, as I am doing right now!
I don't know if you noticed, but at least one other poster agrees with me on this issue (below), so you can't say that my argument is completely without merit. Other people feel as I do - are you so certain that there's *nothing* wrong with the kits?
You sound more like one of the owners of Ramsey, with an axe to grind. Negative feedback is like gold - you could use it to improve your product instead of carping at the customers. I'm only reporting first-hand experience in the subject.
I'm happy that, as a HAM RADIO operator you can build noiseless transmitters. The majority of hobbyists, however, don't have the benefit of your expertise. Take your Ramsey kit and compare it with the C.Crane one, and I'll bet you'll find that your system has hiss you simply didn't notice.
Sonny, eh? Great use of sanctimony there, bub.
Ultra cheap FM transmitters use a tuned tank circuit to control frequency (ie - a variable capacitor). These are very difficult to get to the exact center of the frequency you choose, the result will more than likely be poor audio response.
Furthermore, your receiver is probably digitally controlled to an exact FM frequency and the variable cap system will change frequency slightly with temperature and humidity, so that the transmitter will slowly go in and out of channel. The receiver is phase locked to the correct channel, and the result is that the system will gain and lose quality over time. Digitally controlled frequency is a must for this application.
Kit systems are usually poor at doing audio; making a noise-free circuit is somewhat of a black art and it takes a lot of research and tinkering to get it right. For example, Ramsey Electronics makes an FM transmitter kit with digital frequency control and all that. The problem is that the board layout introduces an unacceptablt amount of hiss into the audio signal. No amount of adjustment will fix this, and the average hobbyist is unprepared to even figure out what the problem is.
Finally, Be very careful of high end ($300) transmitters used for gyms. Some of them are mono only (!) but do not specify this on the advert.
Your best bet is to look on the net for reviews of any transmitter you're thinking of buying. When people have good things to say and don't point out the obvious flaws, then the product might be OK.
I purchased several poor FM transmitters before I got one that worked well, and I use it for transmitting FM throughout the house.
That would be the C.Crane FM transmitter. You can get it for about $80, and Froogle lists several vendors.
Disclaimer: I work for the company that makes these.
It's even worse than that. Suppose some malicious hacker starts logging into their online systems with a modded system that has a random serial number, with the sole intent of making that number unusable in the online service. The legitimate owner of the box with that number will be denied online service forever. This process can probably be automated.
Is it possible for someone to sufficiently pollute the MS online database that they will have to change their "lifetime ban" procedures? Or at least, to cause MS a severe case of trouble over it?
The supreme court has upheld the ideal that everyone has freedom of speech, loosely defined as expression of ideas. Thus, handing out flyers is protected under freedom of speech, even though no one is actually talking. Songs are protected (meaning, your right to write whatever words you want to your songs), internet communications are protected, questionable works of art are protected, and so on.
What is *not* protected is the manner in which those ideas are expressed. You have every right to your opinion, but you may not shout it into my window at 3:00 AM. You cannot vandalize the side of a building with grafitti. You cannot post rude and harassing comments to someone elses messageboard, but you have every right to open a website and showcase your rude and harassing opinions to the world.
The general idea is that your expression cannot interfere with someone else's rights: life, liberty, the quiet enjoyment of their property, the need for public safety ("fire" in a crowded theatre") and so on.
Spam faxes are a clear violation of the recipients rights, since they require the recipient to waste money and deprive the recipient of the use of their machine.
This case should not hinge on First amendment issues.
The supreme court has upheld the ideal that everyone has freedom of speech, loosely defined as expression of ideas. Thus, handing out flyers is protected under freedom of speech, even though no one is actually talking. Songs are protected (meaning, your right to write whatever words you want to your songs), internet communications are protected, questionable works of art are protected, and so on.
What is *not* protected is the manner in which those ideas are expressed. You have every right to your opinion, but you may not shout it into my window at 3:00 AM. You cannot vandalize the side of a building with grafitti. You cannot post rude and harassing comments to someone elses messageboard, but you have every right to open a website and showcase your rude and harassing opinions to the world.
The general idea is that your expression cannot interfere with someone else's rights: life, liberty, the quiet enjoyment of their property, the need for public safety ("fire" in a crowded theatre") and so on.
Spam faxes are a clear violation of the recipients rights, since they require the recipient to waste money and deprive the recipient of the use of their machine.
This case should not hinge on First amendment issues.
Of course, the owner's manual states clearly that the button should never be pushed while the vehicle was in motion.