Upon reception of a valid warrant, the cloud provider should comply, provide the data and decrypt the data if it was encrypted by itself. Why a cloud provider should take side and decide to protect a party against another without legal binding to do so? There is no ground for such an insane behavior from a cloud provider. The cloud provider is providing services. If the client wish to protect his own data, it is up to him to protect it and encrypt it or not put it in the cloud in first place. Why should a cloud provider transform itself into a privacy activist?
However, if the provider is bound by contract to protect the data for its customers, in this case it is up to it to do so. But I don't know any sane person who would bind himself with such legal terms.
So, basically they invented a quantum fighter. The Schrödinger plane is everywhere and nowhere at the same time. And you can detect it, losing information on its location, kind of Heisenberg uncertainity principle.
You are totally wrong. Every user on Facebook generates revenues even if he uses adblockers. The reason is simple, because every user interact with others and keep others interacting with him and among these others there is some who are not using adblockers. That's the essence of social media. The attraction phenomena is driven by the users themselves. If you start to lose users, you are starting lose market, no matter if it reflects immediately on your revenues or not.
The whole upgrade hype is largely financially motivated on part of Microsoft and consulting agencies.
Not really. Your scenario means the sysadmins must forever deal with exceptions, control tightly the set of applications, the trusted sources and so on. There is an extra burden of work for this and it is prone to errors from the sysadmins. So, the switch may worth the extra bucks depending on the size and complexity of the environment. I tend to believe it is the case here with 26 000 workstations still running Windows XP.
Just in case you haven't notice, this isn't the iris scan that is stored on the phone and used. The iris scan is used as input for a one-way encryption function. Just like any password encryption function except you don't have to remember a password here. Sending the encrypted result useless by itself unless someone wants to use it to crack another site using your iris scan with the very same encryption function and seed.
The real problem is storing government and federal data outside the government and federal infrastructure. Why is that? All data should be stored encrypted, even if in a canadian cloud. But I still don't understand why the government need to store it in the cloud and not build its own cloud for this purpose. What are the advantages for the government to store it in the cloud instead of in-house?
Power transportation and distribution already exist on this site. Your comment 'but that was years ago' is totally irrelevant.Building distribution lines is expensive, they are already on site. It is not like you have to build them to an isolated site in the middle of nowhere.
Remember everyone, the DNC can be hacked and the Clinton campaign can be hacked, but there's NO WAY IN THE WORLD that Hillary's homebrew email server was hacked. Nope. Not possible. Pure as the driven snow.
Hillary Clinton's server was examined by top FBI forensic analysts, and no breach was detected.
As far as I know, FBI didn't say no breach was detected. So, reference please. What came out of the FBI is it is not possible to relate Clinton to the breach or prove without doubt in order to build a case for court on the evidence they have Clinton's responsability. By all means, this doesn't mean not breach was discovered.
(...) She probably didn't understand the security implications herself, and hired someone she thought competent, who obviously wasn't.
How competent is she to hire someone she thought is competent? That's the whole point and the prime reason these matters should be left in the hands of the experts at the government level. It these so called experts are not experts, solve the problem there in first place. Do not spread the problem by adding more unsecure stuff in a vain effort to make it secure.
Comments, line break and meaningful variable names cannot be considered unecessary code. Comments, line break and variable names are not translated into executable instructions.
This article is total BS. For another Chernobyl to happen, we need nuclear reactors without any containement vessel and confinement for the reactor. How many of these still exist today and are operating?
Slashdot Mirror
Upon reception of a valid warrant, the cloud provider should comply, provide the data and decrypt the data if it was encrypted by itself. Why a cloud provider should take side and decide to protect a party against another without legal binding to do so? There is no ground for such an insane behavior from a cloud provider. The cloud provider is providing services. If the client wish to protect his own data, it is up to him to protect it and encrypt it or not put it in the cloud in first place. Why should a cloud provider transform itself into a privacy activist?
However, if the provider is bound by contract to protect the data for its customers, in this case it is up to it to do so. But I don't know any sane person who would bind himself with such legal terms.
Of course, porn was showing as hexadecimal dumps on our screens. That was the good old time.
So, basically they invented a quantum fighter. The Schrödinger plane is everywhere and nowhere at the same time. And you can detect it, losing information on its location, kind of Heisenberg uncertainity principle.
You are totally wrong. Every user on Facebook generates revenues even if he uses adblockers. The reason is simple, because every user interact with others and keep others interacting with him and among these others there is some who are not using adblockers. That's the essence of social media. The attraction phenomena is driven by the users themselves. If you start to lose users, you are starting lose market, no matter if it reflects immediately on your revenues or not.
Exactly! This is a never ending story.
And you have the right to use any ad block, invent a new one or whatever to avoid them pushing more ads on you.
The whole upgrade hype is largely financially motivated on part of Microsoft and consulting agencies.
Not really. Your scenario means the sysadmins must forever deal with exceptions, control tightly the set of applications, the trusted sources and so on. There is an extra burden of work for this and it is prone to errors from the sysadmins. So, the switch may worth the extra bucks depending on the size and complexity of the environment. I tend to believe it is the case here with 26 000 workstations still running Windows XP.
You are stealing the words from my mouth.
Who cares? As long as the Schroedinger cat is dead and alive, everything is just fine.
Still much less than the space program or a couple of buildings in a large city. Less than hosting the Olympic games.
These days are gone. Quit the nostalgia and embrace the brave new world. All alone together!
Just in case you haven't notice, this isn't the iris scan that is stored on the phone and used. The iris scan is used as input for a one-way encryption function. Just like any password encryption function except you don't have to remember a password here. Sending the encrypted result useless by itself unless someone wants to use it to crack another site using your iris scan with the very same encryption function and seed.
You have it right. The OP is just smoke and drama.
It ain't squirrels, it's beavers. You insensitive clod!
The real problem is storing government and federal data outside the government and federal infrastructure. Why is that? All data should be stored encrypted, even if in a canadian cloud. But I still don't understand why the government need to store it in the cloud and not build its own cloud for this purpose. What are the advantages for the government to store it in the cloud instead of in-house?
Power transportation and distribution already exist on this site. Your comment 'but that was years ago' is totally irrelevant.Building distribution lines is expensive, they are already on site. It is not like you have to build them to an isolated site in the middle of nowhere.
Remember everyone, the DNC can be hacked and the Clinton campaign can be hacked, but there's NO WAY IN THE WORLD that Hillary's homebrew email server was hacked. Nope. Not possible. Pure as the driven snow.
Hillary Clinton's server was examined by top FBI forensic analysts, and no breach was detected.
As far as I know, FBI didn't say no breach was detected. So, reference please. What came out of the FBI is it is not possible to relate Clinton to the breach or prove without doubt in order to build a case for court on the evidence they have Clinton's responsability. By all means, this doesn't mean not breach was discovered.
(...) She probably didn't understand the security implications herself, and hired someone she thought competent, who obviously wasn't.
How competent is she to hire someone she thought is competent? That's the whole point and the prime reason these matters should be left in the hands of the experts at the government level. It these so called experts are not experts, solve the problem there in first place. Do not spread the problem by adding more unsecure stuff in a vain effort to make it secure.
You are so 1789.
I never read code unless it is actually called. So, your superfluous methods just generate yourself superfluous work.
Comments, line break and meaningful variable names cannot be considered unecessary code. Comments, line break and variable names are not translated into executable instructions.
You are nuts. GM can shut down OnStar vehicles and can restart them as well.
Tin foil case making a Faraday box is a low tech way to ensure it doesn't leak any signal or pick any neither.
With Tesla building trucks, terrorists will become optional with the self-driving mode.
This article is total BS. For another Chernobyl to happen, we need nuclear reactors without any containement vessel and confinement for the reactor. How many of these still exist today and are operating?