I run mail servers. I'll happily change them if I never have to see spam again. The problem is that everyone has to change theirs too which might just be possible given that the entire world hates spam.
It's pretty good protection actually. This guy tells everyone the servers are in a bunker and it takes a huge amount of effort before anyone finds out they are not.
Meanwhile he is charging his spammer friends bunker prices for dedicated servers with a bit of network redirection on them.
It is amazing that you can now do any crime you like, no matter how criminal like massive DDoS, and when caught you just have to say "I'm an Activist!".
You wait until the muggers, drug dealers, bank robbers, and serial killers hear about that one.
Have you ever lived anywhere in that region? I have. Same shit, different pile.
No, I never have. Tell me what it's like because I will listen.
I want to know what's going on in the world and the only thing I can be really sure of is that the mainstream media is lying about significant world events.
Hacking is an equalizer. With relatively few people, and relatively low investment, it allows hackers to use the notoriety of the hack to present their point of view.
Great. So what was the message? Because I still seem to have missed it.
"Increasingly experts are now calling for Twitter to step up security and offer two-factor authentication, essentially a disposable, single-use password for its users.
Jesus Christ BBC. Get some "experts" who know the difference between a One Time Password and Two-Factor Auth; I am thoroughly offended by your reporting.
I also LOL at the BBC's lack of security knowledge. I'll bet they got h4k0r3ed because they had a dictionary word password.
It's embarrassing for them but it can be fixed with no lasting harm done.
The BBC is usually neutral in most matters, they can usually be trusted.
But when it comes to anything military they push the government line aggressively even when that line is inconsistent or makes no sense. CNN is much the same in that regard.
Nothing but western propaganda. According to western media, no rule is allowed to defend itself and the rest of the country from an uprise, because fighting back is equal to murdering civilians. The FSA and the western backers are the real terrorists in this case.
Where is the neutral reporting of the facts of this 'uprising'? All I see is transparent propaganda trying to justify giving all kinds of aid to the rebels.
Only one message for this from me: Go fuck yourself, Assad. We know what you're up to.
Only we don't. We only know what's been reported by the mainstream media and so far that's been reports of Syrian rebels getting all kinds of aid from various places to help them attack their government. We really don't know who these rebels are or why they are attacking their governments.
This is the same kind of reporting that had far too many people convinced that Iraq had WMDs that could destroy half of Europe within 30 minutes of Saddam giving the order.
Does anyone actually have any idea what's actually happening with Syria?
I don't believe anything reported by the mainstream media on this, it stinks of the same type of transparent lies they spewed to get the public on side for the Iraq invasion.
Image burn in and ghosting are NOT the same thing. Ghosting is where images bleed into the next frame. Giving the ilusion of a ghost leaving a fading trail as it moves. Burn in is permanent, ghosting is 1 or several frames.
I don't claim to be an expert but I thought ghosting was a faint image a short distance to the right of the real image caused by a sharp bend in a co-ax cable which creates a faint out of phase repeat of an analog TV signal.
Maybe both effects are called ghosting. Neither are anything like this modern equivalent of phosphor burn in.
He seems to have had enough power to cut phone lines with the south and break a 60 year old treaty and place them in a condition of war. He may be a five year old with his daddy's gun but he's still holding a gun that looks like a couple of nukes and a large army.
My point is that he didn't do these things off his own back. Say what you like about American or European politicians, but each and every one of them has access to free information, a more or less free press, advisors and supports who will advise honestly and are free to question or even replace their leaders.
Our friend Kim is most likely in an information vacuum knowing only what his fathers advisors choose to tell him.
This kind of reminds me of Michael Keaton's character in "Multiplicity" wherein he says "You know how when you make a copy of a copy, it's not as sharp as... well... the original." Each iteration of the "<insert adjective> Leader" gets a little less stable than its predecessor. Given this one's extreme youth and actions thus far, I wonder if we will ever see round 4 of this franchise.
I somehow doubt that someone of his age and inexperience is really in charge. I suspect Kim Jong Un is really a figurehead while North Korea is being run by the top brass of their army.
In very limited longer-term storage experiments, I had complete data loss on several flash-drives. CD-ROM is not much better. If they understood how long-term data storage works, they would have copies on traditional HDDs and backup-copies printed on paper. What they are doing instead is on low amateur level.
I agree CD-ROMs are not built to last but I've only ever seen 1 flash drive fail out of hundreds I've used. I've had far worse luck with both magnetic and solid state hard disks.
Paper sounds like the best idea as long as it's not the cheap laser printer rubbish that turns yellow in a year or two.
What makes you think they are lying? It's doesn't seem difficult at all to secure things the way they are suggesting.
It would be time consuming to withdraw bitcoins but this is meant to be a hedge fund, not a current account. I'm sure it's time consuming to withdraw a ton of gold from a bank too.
You can add bitcoins to a private key knowing only the public key ( the bitcoin address ).
Slashdot Mirror
>slow some web traffic to a crawl
didn't notice shit. next.
I don't think many people noticed shit. This may have been a massive attack but the effect was little to none.
What technical fix do you suggest?
I run mail servers. I'll happily change them if I never have to see spam again. The problem is that everyone has to change theirs too which might just be possible given that the entire world hates spam.
For decade cyberbunker is not in a bunker.
It's pretty good protection actually. This guy tells everyone the servers are in a bunker and it takes a huge amount of effort before anyone finds out they are not.
Meanwhile he is charging his spammer friends bunker prices for dedicated servers with a bit of network redirection on them.
It is amazing that you can now do any crime you like, no matter how criminal like massive DDoS, and when caught you just have to say "I'm an Activist!".
You wait until the muggers, drug dealers, bank robbers, and serial killers hear about that one.
You say this guy has supporters but who are they? Everyone on here hates him.
Maybe the spam scumbags like him, but everyone hates them too.
Have you ever lived anywhere in that region? I have. Same shit, different pile.
No, I never have. Tell me what it's like because I will listen.
I want to know what's going on in the world and the only thing I can be really sure of is that the mainstream media is lying about significant world events.
Thanks.
I like the details. Who is involved in this and what do they want?
I could assume the details but I don't know enough about Syria to make a reasonable guess.
Hacking is an equalizer. With relatively few people, and relatively low investment, it allows hackers to use the notoriety of the hack to present their point of view.
Great. So what was the message? Because I still seem to have missed it.
Jesus Christ BBC. Get some "experts" who know the difference between a One Time Password and Two-Factor Auth; I am thoroughly offended by your reporting.
I also LOL at the BBC's lack of security knowledge. I'll bet they got h4k0r3ed because they had a dictionary word password.
It's embarrassing for them but it can be fixed with no lasting harm done.
The BBC is usually neutral in most matters, they can usually be trusted.
But when it comes to anything military they push the government line aggressively even when that line is inconsistent or makes no sense. CNN is much the same in that regard.
Nothing but western propaganda. According to western media, no rule is allowed to defend itself and the rest of the country from an uprise, because fighting back is equal to murdering civilians. The FSA and the western backers are the real terrorists in this case.
Where is the neutral reporting of the facts of this 'uprising'? All I see is transparent propaganda trying to justify giving all kinds of aid to the rebels.
Only one message for this from me: Go fuck yourself, Assad. We know what you're up to.
Only we don't. We only know what's been reported by the mainstream media and so far that's been reports of Syrian rebels getting all kinds of aid from various places to help them attack their government. We really don't know who these rebels are or why they are attacking their governments.
This is the same kind of reporting that had far too many people convinced that Iraq had WMDs that could destroy half of Europe within 30 minutes of Saddam giving the order.
Does anyone actually have any idea what's actually happening with Syria?
I don't believe anything reported by the mainstream media on this, it stinks of the same type of transparent lies they spewed to get the public on side for the Iraq invasion.
Menials and the uneducated.
*Rich guy laugh*
And people who work doing the same things they would do for free if they were not being paid.
And the blind stubborn who won't give up no matter what.
Who the hell works more than 30 hours per week anyway?
People who get things done. Some of us are self-employed. Some of us actually care about the stuff we do.
I assume you are pointing out the difference between being at work and actually working.
Image burn in and ghosting are NOT the same thing. Ghosting is where images bleed into the next frame. Giving the ilusion of a ghost leaving a fading trail as it moves. Burn in is permanent, ghosting is 1 or several frames.
I don't claim to be an expert but I thought ghosting was a faint image a short distance to the right of the real image caused by a sharp bend in a co-ax cable which creates a faint out of phase repeat of an analog TV signal.
Maybe both effects are called ghosting. Neither are anything like this modern equivalent of phosphor burn in.
Now that is cool!
He seems to have had enough power to cut phone lines with the south and break a 60 year old treaty and place them in a condition of war. He may be a five year old with his daddy's gun but he's still holding a gun that looks like a couple of nukes and a large army.
My point is that he didn't do these things off his own back. Say what you like about American or European politicians, but each and every one of them has access to free information, a more or less free press, advisors and supports who will advise honestly and are free to question or even replace their leaders.
Our friend Kim is most likely in an information vacuum knowing only what his fathers advisors choose to tell him.
That is deeply flawed reasoning.
This kind of reminds me of Michael Keaton's character in "Multiplicity" wherein he says "You know how when you make a copy of a copy, it's not as sharp as... well... the original." Each iteration of the "<insert adjective> Leader" gets a little less stable than its predecessor. Given this one's extreme youth and actions thus far, I wonder if we will ever see round 4 of this franchise.
I somehow doubt that someone of his age and inexperience is really in charge. I suspect Kim Jong Un is really a figurehead while North Korea is being run by the top brass of their army.
In very limited longer-term storage experiments, I had complete data loss on several flash-drives. CD-ROM is not much better. If they understood how long-term data storage works, they would have copies on traditional HDDs and backup-copies printed on paper. What they are doing instead is on low amateur level.
I agree CD-ROMs are not built to last but I've only ever seen 1 flash drive fail out of hundreds I've used. I've had far worse luck with both magnetic and solid state hard disks.
Paper sounds like the best idea as long as it's not the cheap laser printer rubbish that turns yellow in a year or two.
A rouge fund manager could only access the funds he was given to manage. He could not steal whats locked up in cold storage.
What makes you think they are lying? It's doesn't seem difficult at all to secure things the way they are suggesting.
It would be time consuming to withdraw bitcoins but this is meant to be a hedge fund, not a current account. I'm sure it's time consuming to withdraw a ton of gold from a bank too.
You can add bitcoins to a private key knowing only the public key ( the bitcoin address ).
RAED - Redundant Array of Expensive Data(!)