"you cut 30% off the performance of my CPU expect to hear about it. -- Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-..."
I can't be the only person who sees the irony of a person complaining about performance degradation and that they make Firefox plug-ins in the same post.
Intel isn't making any changes because it is physically impossible for them to do so. The only option left for OS maintainers to make software patches to work around this flaw. They would be negligent for leaving a known security flaw unaddressed. This rests solely on Intel's shoulders - they created and sold a product with a serious, undisclosed flaw.
There is no, "battery problem". It's simply the nature of battery chemistry that they degrade with age. All rechargeable batteries do this, just in different ways depending on the chemistry. Apple's "slow down" was an effort to make devices with marginal batteries *last longer* which is something you'd think the consumer would want. Their failing was not keeping people informed.
Equifax Trans Union Experian Innovis PRBC ---I'm currently fighting with these chuckleheads. They have no online freeze method or even instructions. The "form" they emailed me was for a dispute. When I questioned how I'm supposed to use this to freeze my information with them, per state law, I was directed to *snail mail* or call them for instructions.
Because they're goaded into watching pabulum like, "Sex in the City" whereas most men wouldn't dream of complaining their significant other doesn't watch "Star Trek" with them.
"Google's Law" states that whenever you need to make something sound cool and innovative, just misuse and existing term like "Moore's Law", because reporters are stupid.
Who in their right mind designs life-critical systems around off the shelf operating systems like Windows? There's a reason aircraft computer systems are custom and highly redundant. Medical equipment of this caliber is no different.
What company produced this system? Their accreditation should be revoked.
Nobody was running those (except perhaps LibreOffice) on a low powered machine to begin with. For the 95% of users to browse the web, get email, open attachments and watch cat videos, a modern phone or tablet has plenty of horsepower....if the developer isn't lazy.
Because like most portable devices, they probably aren't running a full ntp daemon/stack, but an SNTP client that periodically queries a single time server and sets the device's clock to whatever the reply contains. At a bare minimum, they should query several quasi-random servers like pool.ntp.org (style) at the same time. It would make an attack like this more difficult. And or perform a sanity check using the following pseudocode:
If date Skylab leaving crater in Austrailia
don't do that stupid shit Else, set the damned clock.
You believe 1000 ms network latency is acceptable? In my world, that is sheer madness. Our Citrix guys would keelhaul me if I told them 1000ms is ok. Even something as simple as telnet/ssh is extremely annoying at that level.
What industry do you work in? I need to know this because the barrier to entry clearly is low.
We've been hearing for over a decade that wireless will make infrastructure specialists the new Cobol programmer. BS! Why hasn't this happened? Because going wireless implies a whole host of security and interoperability issues that are inherent to wireless. A corporation would be mad to place their critical data infrastructure in a shared media like 802.11A/B/G,. 4G and WiMax are still lightyears away from being as reliable and fast as current copper and fiber technologies.
No matter how fast and error resistant the state-of-the-art wireless technology is, there are limits dictated by the laws of physics that govern how much data you can squeeze through a given wireless spectrum in a given physical space. With physical mediums like copper and fiber, I'm only limited by how many runs I can cram into a given space, plus, I have physical control over data. And how my neighbor is using their copper/fiber is completely irrelevant, which is quite unlike current wireless technologies.
Beyond this. proper wireless infrastructure design is an order of magnitude more difficult to get right than physical infrastructure (ignoring slack-jawed installers who make stupid decisions). Anyone who tells you otherwise is ignorant beyond comparison or a damned liar.
I hate to break it to you, but you misunderstand the difference between layer 2 vs. 3, bridging vs. routing and how ARP works.
In your scenario where LAN clients only see the MAC of the Access Point, the AP is acting a a Router (Layer 3). A bridge works at layer 2, all MACs are passed unchanged. A bridge is nothing more than a two port switch (or hub, depending on how/if it manages unicast/broadcast/multicast). This has nothing to do with the nature of wireless.
Even if the AP is acting as a router as most home APs do, having identical MAC addresses on the wirless side will still mess with ARP and cause all kinds of weird connectivity issues. Even in the best case where you've spoofed your target's MAC address *and* IP address, there will be no way to differentiate which packets from each machine go where. In an unswitched network, you'll get massive collision errors and TCP will be quite upset with incomplete conversations flying around and in a switched environment, the switch's MAC table will be FUBARed.
Perhaps his intended target was technically competent people who want rich context and full details. If this isn't you, feel free to skip the article. Your "right" to not have to "read fifteen paragraphs just to get a basic birds-eye view" is far less valid than the author's to state his case with as much detail as he pleases.
It didn't help that we were dropped into an ongoing blog, but it's not hard to figure that out and read earlier articles to gain context. If you're annoyed by one post to the point of labeling people (nerds), I'm pretty confident the odds you'll make it through the other blog posts are pretty low.
As someone who's been forced to support and develop for WM devices, I think I'm at least semi-qualified to make the judgement that Windows Mobile is complete and utter shite. Even latest versions running on 600 MHz+ Xscale processors are slow, crash prone memory hogs with an interface that must have been designed with pricipals created by Josef Mengele.
Beyond this, we've been screaming to various vendors for similar form factor devices running Linux, or at least *not WM*, but I keep hearing the same excuse, "We want to persue alternative operating systems for our devices, but Microsoft has threatened to cancel our preferred licensing status if we do." Since said vendors need to be able to supply the industry standard mobile OS (unfortunately WM), they're screwed and companies like mine are stuck with the same crap OS platform on every nearly every single device we've explored, regardless of vendor. It's a damned shame really, because we don't need an operating system that includes a crap version of Word, an inefficient media player, Bubble Breaker and Solitaire; just a terminal client, STANDARDS BASED web browser and maybe a SIP client is all we need. Yet we're paying for all that crap PLUS the software necessary to lock the system down to keep users away from it.
Windows Mobile has the marketshare it does mainly due to extortion, not innovation. Balmer is a tool.
He sure knows a lot about those electrons with their whirling and the twirling and the zapping of the genitals! How could we have file sharing without electrons? Don't *even* get me started on MATTER! Sheesh!
Wireless networking will not replace copper or optical mediums anytime soon and any IT manager worth his salt knows speed is not the only issue.
First, you have security as many have mentioned. Wired ethernet does have a measure of security because of it's phyical, localized nature. Sure, anyone can plug into a port, but if you should have reasonable physical security. Beyond this, you can require authentication to use E-net on a port by port basis. We do this where I work; you don't have the right user credentials and you're stopped at the switch port.
Now for the meat... Why is it that the (unlearned) masses forget nearly all wireless networking solutions rely on unlicensed frequency bands? Even with a perfectly working system today, there's no guarantee someone won't set up a couple wireless video transmitters next door tommorow. Like CB radio before it, WiFi and it's ilk suffers from the good ol' tragedy of the commons (times 3). On the totem-pole, your Wifi system is the bottom feeder. It has to accept any and all interference from microwave ovens, lighting systems, industrial dryers, commercial video uplinks, amateur radio operators and a slew of other interference sources you have no recourse over. Imagine the big box store that puts all of it's cash registers on wireless. What is the recourse when the amateur radio operator a block away sets up a 40 dBm uplink beaming over the store's property or a nearby busisness sets up a 2.4 Ghz analog video system? Nothing at all. All one can do is suck it up.
Now all the registers are down, tens of thousands of dollars an hour are lost and customers are livid. The manager will be paniced and the IT buffoon who designed the system will be sweating bullets as he has the blinding revelation that the up front cost of running copper or fiber pales in comparison to lost revenue. His job is toast.
Unless your network devices are mobile or low priority, they should NEVER rely on unlicensed wireless infrastructure. PERIOD. If you play the miser and use wireless to avoid the cost of copper (or fiber), you're gonna get bit.
Slashdot Mirror
Why would you run unactivated 10 when you can make it legit with a Win 7 licence code that can be had for the price of a McDonald's lunch?
You should double check that. Everything I've read is that they will continue to run ads, but the channel creator will no longer get any cut of that.
Seem legit to you?
"you cut 30% off the performance of my CPU expect to hear about it.
--
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-..."
I can't be the only person who sees the irony of a person complaining about performance degradation and that they make Firefox plug-ins in the same post.
Intel isn't making any changes because it is physically impossible for them to do so. The only option left for OS maintainers to make software patches to work around this flaw. They would be negligent for leaving a known security flaw unaddressed. This rests solely on Intel's shoulders - they created and sold a product with a serious, undisclosed flaw.
There is no, "battery problem". It's simply the nature of battery chemistry that they degrade with age. All rechargeable batteries do this, just in different ways depending on the chemistry. Apple's "slow down" was an effort to make devices with marginal batteries *last longer* which is something you'd think the consumer would want. Their failing was not keeping people informed.
That's not really Spotify's fault. That's a direct result of recording companies parasitic nature and the horrible contracts artists entered into.
FIVE Credit Bureaus!
Equifax
Trans Union
Experian
Innovis
PRBC ---I'm currently fighting with these chuckleheads. They have no online freeze method or even instructions. The "form" they emailed me was for a dispute. When I questioned how I'm supposed to use this to freeze my information with them, per state law, I was directed to *snail mail* or call them for instructions.
Because they're goaded into watching pabulum like, "Sex in the City" whereas most men wouldn't dream of complaining their significant other doesn't watch "Star Trek" with them.
So I need to consider the feelings of the other gender before offering an honest opinion of TV SHOWS?
Do they have any idea where the "Special Snowflake" stereotype comes from and how this reinforces it?
"Google's Law" states that whenever you need to make something sound cool and innovative, just misuse and existing term like "Moore's Law", because reporters are stupid.
Who in their right mind designs life-critical systems around off the shelf operating systems like Windows? There's a reason aircraft computer systems are custom and highly redundant. Medical equipment of this caliber is no different.
What company produced this system? Their accreditation should be revoked.
Nobody was running those (except perhaps LibreOffice) on a low powered machine to begin with. For the 95% of users to browse the web, get email, open attachments and watch cat videos, a modern phone or tablet has plenty of horsepower. ...if the developer isn't lazy.
Because like most portable devices, they probably aren't running a full ntp daemon/stack, but an SNTP client that periodically queries a single time server and sets the device's clock to whatever the reply contains. At a bare minimum, they should query several quasi-random servers like pool.ntp.org (style) at the same time. It would make an attack like this more difficult. And or perform a sanity check using the following pseudocode:
If date Skylab leaving crater in Austrailia
don't do that stupid shit
Else, set the damned clock.
MAC spoofing is trivially easy.
Set up sudo correctly and it will.
BINGO!
Just say, "Study finds more people are stupid than before".
You believe 1000 ms network latency is acceptable? In my world, that is sheer madness. Our Citrix guys would keelhaul me if I told them 1000ms is ok. Even something as simple as telnet/ssh is extremely annoying at that level.
What industry do you work in? I need to know this because the barrier to entry clearly is low.
We've been hearing for over a decade that wireless will make infrastructure specialists the new Cobol programmer. BS! Why hasn't this happened? Because going wireless implies a whole host of security and interoperability issues that are inherent to wireless. A corporation would be mad to place their critical data infrastructure in a shared media like 802.11A/B/G,. 4G and WiMax are still lightyears away from being as reliable and fast as current copper and fiber technologies.
No matter how fast and error resistant the state-of-the-art wireless technology is, there are limits dictated by the laws of physics that govern how much data you can squeeze through a given wireless spectrum in a given physical space. With physical mediums like copper and fiber, I'm only limited by how many runs I can cram into a given space, plus, I have physical control over data. And how my neighbor is using their copper/fiber is completely irrelevant, which is quite unlike current wireless technologies.
Beyond this. proper wireless infrastructure design is an order of magnitude more difficult to get right than physical infrastructure (ignoring slack-jawed installers who make stupid decisions). Anyone who tells you otherwise is ignorant beyond comparison or a damned liar.
I hate to break it to you, but you misunderstand the difference between layer 2 vs. 3, bridging vs. routing and how ARP works.
In your scenario where LAN clients only see the MAC of the Access Point, the AP is acting a a Router (Layer 3). A bridge works at layer 2, all MACs are passed unchanged. A bridge is nothing more than a two port switch (or hub, depending on how/if it manages unicast/broadcast/multicast). This has nothing to do with the nature of wireless.
Even if the AP is acting as a router as most home APs do, having identical MAC addresses on the wirless side will still mess with ARP and cause all kinds of weird connectivity issues. Even in the best case where you've spoofed your target's MAC address *and* IP address, there will be no way to differentiate which packets from each machine go where. In an unswitched network, you'll get massive collision errors and TCP will be quite upset with incomplete conversations flying around and in a switched environment, the switch's MAC table will be FUBARed.
Perhaps his intended target was technically competent people who want rich context and full details. If this isn't you, feel free to skip the article. Your "right" to not have to "read fifteen paragraphs just to get a basic birds-eye view" is far less valid than the author's to state his case with as much detail as he pleases.
It didn't help that we were dropped into an ongoing blog, but it's not hard to figure that out and read earlier articles to gain context. If you're annoyed by one post to the point of labeling people (nerds), I'm pretty confident the odds you'll make it through the other blog posts are pretty low.
Might I interest you in a "Twilight" novel?
As someone who's been forced to support and develop for WM devices, I think I'm at least semi-qualified to make the judgement that Windows Mobile is complete and utter shite. Even latest versions running on 600 MHz+ Xscale processors are slow, crash prone memory hogs with an interface that must have been designed with pricipals created by Josef Mengele.
Beyond this, we've been screaming to various vendors for similar form factor devices running Linux, or at least *not WM*, but I keep hearing the same excuse, "We want to persue alternative operating systems for our devices, but Microsoft has threatened to cancel our preferred licensing status if we do." Since said vendors need to be able to supply the industry standard mobile OS (unfortunately WM), they're screwed and companies like mine are stuck with the same crap OS platform on every nearly every single device we've explored, regardless of vendor. It's a damned shame really, because we don't need an operating system that includes a crap version of Word, an inefficient media player, Bubble Breaker and Solitaire; just a terminal client, STANDARDS BASED web browser and maybe a SIP client is all we need. Yet we're paying for all that crap PLUS the software necessary to lock the system down to keep users away from it.
Windows Mobile has the marketshare it does mainly due to extortion, not innovation. Balmer is a tool.
Pyramid
"My user number is probably lower than yours."
I doubt it.
He sure knows a lot about those electrons with their whirling and the twirling and the zapping of the genitals! How could we have file sharing without electrons? Don't *even* get me started on MATTER! Sheesh!
Pyramid
Wireless networking will not replace copper or optical mediums anytime soon and any IT manager worth his salt knows speed is not the only issue.
First, you have security as many have mentioned. Wired ethernet does have a measure of security because of it's phyical, localized nature. Sure, anyone can plug into a port, but if you should have reasonable physical security. Beyond this, you can require authentication to use E-net on a port by port basis. We do this where I work; you don't have the right user credentials and you're stopped at the switch port.
Now for the meat... Why is it that the (unlearned) masses forget nearly all wireless networking solutions rely on unlicensed frequency bands? Even with a perfectly working system today, there's no guarantee someone won't set up a couple wireless video transmitters next door tommorow. Like CB radio before it, WiFi and it's ilk suffers from the good ol' tragedy of the commons (times 3). On the totem-pole, your Wifi system is the bottom feeder. It has to accept any and all interference from microwave ovens, lighting systems, industrial dryers, commercial video uplinks, amateur radio operators and a slew of other interference sources you have no recourse over. Imagine the big box store that puts all of it's cash registers on wireless. What is the recourse when the amateur radio operator a block away sets up a 40 dBm uplink beaming over the store's property or a nearby busisness sets up a 2.4 Ghz analog video system? Nothing at all. All one can do is suck it up.
Now all the registers are down, tens of thousands of dollars an hour are lost and customers are livid. The manager will be paniced and the IT buffoon who designed the system will be sweating bullets as he has the blinding revelation that the up front cost of running copper or fiber pales in comparison to lost revenue. His job is toast.
Unless your network devices are mobile or low priority, they should NEVER rely on unlicensed wireless infrastructure. PERIOD. If you play the miser and use wireless to avoid the cost of copper (or fiber), you're gonna get bit.
Phreon