For this, you'd want to use something like Tripwire or AIDE. It's been used for years, and will detect changes to files.
You're right that it won't help you detect that somebody has managed to insert a chunk of javascript or PHP in your insecure mySQL/PHP web app, though. Perhaps a combination of Snort, Ntop (if it wasn't shit), a "hardened" PHP binary and config, and log monitoring would alert you in the case of an attack.
The problem is that there's a lot of badly written or out of date software out there that can be exploited, even without discovering new holes. If you're running this sort of thing and making it publicly accessible over the net, somebody is going to take advantage of it.
How about the alternatives to this, such as engineering mosquitos that reproduce less, or can't bite through human skin, or cannot carry the disease, or who explode in a hilarious chain reaction upon contact with human blood? How about releasing some that can carry beneficial biological material around (whatever that might mean) instead of deadly diseases?
We've done this kind of thing before by releasing irradiated insects to reduce the population, if I remember correctly. A big risk of this would be the accidental release of swarms of unaltered insects, perhaps if they weren't irradiated strongly enough or if the genetic alterations were half-assed or behaved in unexpected ways in the wild.
Basically, if we're going to mess with nature these days we might as well go crazy with it. I doubt we're able to predict the result on the food chain and ecosystem from even the smallest tweak or change, so I welcome the plagues of exploding, HIV vaccine-injecting super-mosquitos powered by biological ion engines.
I would advise spending all that dead time looking for a new job before your boss realises you're leeching money out of his pocket to screw about on Slashdot.
But that's just my opinion.
Note that these specs have been available previously, royalty free, just by e-mailing MS (or so they claim), meaning that anybody who wanted them has got them, or can get them.
The only interesting thing here is the converter they're proposing, assuming nobody beats them to it with a better one.
How about speeding up the boot of existing systems? I know most people use the Sleep function on laptops, and that's what it's designed for, but why does the OS need to do so much even if I haven't changed any hardware or software between reboots? Shouldn't it be possible to cache more of this, or store the "clean boot" state as a file alongside the sleep/swapfile and similar, then just load that into memory on boot? If the hardware state has changed, a full boot could be performed instead. If the user installs some software or changes an OS option that requires a different booting sequence, why not refresh the boot file in the background while the user continues working, or even while the system is shutting down?
I haven't had my coffee yet, so I suspect I'm rambling. I personally would have no interest in booting into a half-assed Linux environment and using that all day just to shave 30 seconds off your morning boot. Laptops are excluded from this unless you're in the habit of shutting down your laptop every time you close the lid, or have reasons for doing that beyond saving ~1% of your battery overnight.
I can possibly see the appeal of using it to quickly switch on the computer to Google something, then switching it off again. If you were doing this repeatedly you might benefit from using an embedded or VM OS. You would also benefit from using the right tool for that job (like a portable device, or one capable of sleeping) and basically not fucking about cycling the power on your computer all day praying that your square peg will eventually fit through that round hole.
We've had this in the UK (and probably the rest of the world) for years now, with each ISP implementing it in different ways while continuing to advertise "unlimited bandwidth*".
Here's a suggestion: send a letter to the heaviest users advising them that they're screwing with their "fair use" policy by transferring so much data (porn and torrents, I'll wager) and that they need to cut back or they'll be throttled. While doing this, apply a blanket weekly bandwidth limit to all their accounts that can deal with occasional spikes of traffic if a user wants to download a few GB of data at the weekend, but will shape the traffic of those users who are, as we say over here, "taking the piss" and leaving their computer on 24/7 with a queue of 100 torrents, or running servers off their home connection.
I've been hit repeatedly by the hard, monthly limits set by most ISPs. Let's say you download a few game demos over Xbox Live, or you (legally) download a movie and some music. Do this a few times and you'll hit your ISPs monthly transfer limits, which are often as "low" as 10-30gb. I hit my previous ISP's limit within two weeks just from downloading backups of our servers every few days (off-peak, while Hamerica is sleeping). You've then got several weeks of crippled (10KB/s) downloads, while your ISP continues to bill you for the $50 "Unlimited" account you signed up for to escape similar bullshit at your last ISP.
It's their own fault for overselling their capacity like a lot of "unlimited space and bandwidth" shared web hosting companies do; they promise unlimited monthly transfers and crazy speeds, because they believed that 90% of their customers will be light users who would essentially be paying the bills for the heavier users. Now that the "average" customer is spending more time with music and video files, downloading Jigabytes of porn and warez, or chewing up bandwidth on retarded Youtube movies, they can no longer support the business model.
Here's another way to think of the situation: a restaurant offers "all you can eat" on a Friday night, where customers can eat as much pizza as they want for $20. Knowing that most customers will probably only eat $10 worth of pizza before they puke and/or leave, while only a few will eat $30 worth of pizza, they are using the same business model to make a profit. The "normal" pizza-eaters are paying for the fat bastards, who are the only ones to actually benefit from this type of deal.
In fact, HD-DVD means "High Definition Digital Versatile Disk", which is pretty complicated to explain to consumer. It's not sexy nor simple.
I would think that explaining that a HD-DVD was a "High Definition DVD", which the consumer can play on their HD-TV (or "High Definition TV") was pretty simple, considering that it uses terms that any consumer of today would understand.
My real concern is hearing people calling them "BluRay DVDs".
If we were going to invent time travel, wouldn't we have seen some evidence of it already? Where are the people in funky futuristic outfits travelling back in time to watch us? Have they invented invisibility, too?
Wouldn't using that bring your server to it's knees? From a brief read of it, it traps spiders in an endless loop by generating infinite, recursive links on your site.
Slashdot Mirror
Pfft. That make your compiler and interpreter AI, too.
Just sounds like text processing to me, which Perl (and most scripting/shell languages) are designed for.
> insecure mySQL/PHP web app
I meant "vulnerable", but feel free to insert jokes about neurotic software here:
For this, you'd want to use something like Tripwire or AIDE. It's been used for years, and will detect changes to files.
You're right that it won't help you detect that somebody has managed to insert a chunk of javascript or PHP in your insecure mySQL/PHP web app, though. Perhaps a combination of Snort, Ntop (if it wasn't shit), a "hardened" PHP binary and config, and log monitoring would alert you in the case of an attack.
The problem is that there's a lot of badly written or out of date software out there that can be exploited, even without discovering new holes. If you're running this sort of thing and making it publicly accessible over the net, somebody is going to take advantage of it.
How about the alternatives to this, such as engineering mosquitos that reproduce less, or can't bite through human skin, or cannot carry the disease, or who explode in a hilarious chain reaction upon contact with human blood? How about releasing some that can carry beneficial biological material around (whatever that might mean) instead of deadly diseases?
We've done this kind of thing before by releasing irradiated insects to reduce the population, if I remember correctly. A big risk of this would be the accidental release of swarms of unaltered insects, perhaps if they weren't irradiated strongly enough or if the genetic alterations were half-assed or behaved in unexpected ways in the wild.
Basically, if we're going to mess with nature these days we might as well go crazy with it. I doubt we're able to predict the result on the food chain and ecosystem from even the smallest tweak or change, so I welcome the plagues of exploding, HIV vaccine-injecting super-mosquitos powered by biological ion engines.
I would advise spending all that dead time looking for a new job before your boss realises you're leeching money out of his pocket to screw about on Slashdot. But that's just my opinion.
This article is a complete waste of time.
Note that these specs have been available previously, royalty free, just by e-mailing MS (or so they claim), meaning that anybody who wanted them has got them, or can get them.
The only interesting thing here is the converter they're proposing, assuming nobody beats them to it with a better one.
How about speeding up the boot of existing systems? I know most people use the Sleep function on laptops, and that's what it's designed for, but why does the OS need to do so much even if I haven't changed any hardware or software between reboots? Shouldn't it be possible to cache more of this, or store the "clean boot" state as a file alongside the sleep/swapfile and similar, then just load that into memory on boot? If the hardware state has changed, a full boot could be performed instead. If the user installs some software or changes an OS option that requires a different booting sequence, why not refresh the boot file in the background while the user continues working, or even while the system is shutting down?
I haven't had my coffee yet, so I suspect I'm rambling. I personally would have no interest in booting into a half-assed Linux environment and using that all day just to shave 30 seconds off your morning boot. Laptops are excluded from this unless you're in the habit of shutting down your laptop every time you close the lid, or have reasons for doing that beyond saving ~1% of your battery overnight.
I can possibly see the appeal of using it to quickly switch on the computer to Google something, then switching it off again. If you were doing this repeatedly you might benefit from using an embedded or VM OS. You would also benefit from using the right tool for that job (like a portable device, or one capable of sleeping) and basically not fucking about cycling the power on your computer all day praying that your square peg will eventually fit through that round hole.
(also, "Mr Chong" is an awesome name)
We've had this in the UK (and probably the rest of the world) for years now, with each ISP implementing it in different ways while continuing to advertise "unlimited bandwidth*".
Here's a suggestion: send a letter to the heaviest users advising them that they're screwing with their "fair use" policy by transferring so much data (porn and torrents, I'll wager) and that they need to cut back or they'll be throttled. While doing this, apply a blanket weekly bandwidth limit to all their accounts that can deal with occasional spikes of traffic if a user wants to download a few GB of data at the weekend, but will shape the traffic of those users who are, as we say over here, "taking the piss" and leaving their computer on 24/7 with a queue of 100 torrents, or running servers off their home connection.
I've been hit repeatedly by the hard, monthly limits set by most ISPs. Let's say you download a few game demos over Xbox Live, or you (legally) download a movie and some music. Do this a few times and you'll hit your ISPs monthly transfer limits, which are often as "low" as 10-30gb. I hit my previous ISP's limit within two weeks just from downloading backups of our servers every few days (off-peak, while Hamerica is sleeping). You've then got several weeks of crippled (10KB/s) downloads, while your ISP continues to bill you for the $50 "Unlimited" account you signed up for to escape similar bullshit at your last ISP.
It's their own fault for overselling their capacity like a lot of "unlimited space and bandwidth" shared web hosting companies do; they promise unlimited monthly transfers and crazy speeds, because they believed that 90% of their customers will be light users who would essentially be paying the bills for the heavier users. Now that the "average" customer is spending more time with music and video files, downloading Jigabytes of porn and warez, or chewing up bandwidth on retarded Youtube movies, they can no longer support the business model.
Here's another way to think of the situation: a restaurant offers "all you can eat" on a Friday night, where customers can eat as much pizza as they want for $20. Knowing that most customers will probably only eat $10 worth of pizza before they puke and/or leave, while only a few will eat $30 worth of pizza, they are using the same business model to make a profit. The "normal" pizza-eaters are paying for the fat bastards, who are the only ones to actually benefit from this type of deal.
I would think that explaining that a HD-DVD was a "High Definition DVD", which the consumer can play on their HD-TV (or "High Definition TV") was pretty simple, considering that it uses terms that any consumer of today would understand.
My real concern is hearing people calling them "BluRay DVDs".
"I send you this killer nano-cyber-phd-owning-AI program in order to attack your brain"
If we were going to invent time travel, wouldn't we have seen some evidence of it already? Where are the people in funky futuristic outfits travelling back in time to watch us? Have they invented invisibility, too?
Wouldn't using that bring your server to it's knees? From a brief read of it, it traps spiders in an endless loop by generating infinite, recursive links on your site.