Maybe amusing, but it's a reality. My cellphone is my primary business number, when it breaks (which happens) my business is basically shut down.
I really can't have that, even for 24 hours, so I keep an operational backup phone to use when my smartphone goes dead.
Well, from the looks of the debris, on top of the idiocy of jumping off of a 12 foot height, they didn't prep the table either.
Those folding tables have a metal frame screwed to their underside, which wrestlers remove in order to make the table break easily. It then is changed from a semi-solid object that hurts, to an energy sink that simply slows the body down before it hits the ground.
"in your disk drive analogy, it would be like coming up with a cheap flash drive that beat the specs for lifetime and cost to those spinning magnets you mentioned"
Yeah, it would beat the specs for lifetime and cost, but it would require 100 watts of power to operate.
Personally, I consider any action that makes the the writing of virii and worms harder a good thing.
Generally they'll be smarter than the people *buying* these devices, but they're not very often smarter than the people who create and write updates for these machines. The only hurdle is to consistently get these updates into the wild, this is a step in that direction.
"Ultimately I do not see how this machine is any different from a virus checker (except on the packet level). Its nothing new, its nothing clever, presumably its not that different to standard IDS schemes such as SNORT signatures, and its biggest weaknesses are going to be exactly the same as virus scanning. i.e. getting the signatures out to enough people quickly enough."
Exactly right. The difference is that it shifts the burden from the clueless end user to a group of knowledgeable professionals who's job it is to keep things secure.
That's not true at all... As soon as a virus def. is released you can add it to your device. Voila, your entire network is secured against that threat.
This won't stop the first contacts with a new virus, but it can certainly contain them, which is really the best you can ask for, and all that's neccesary anyway.
See, you're looking at this from the perspective of an office that has already been infected. Try looking from another point of view, the office that *hasn't* been infected, but the sysadmin has just caught a notice of a new worm that's spreading like wildfire.
With this device he can update the definitions once and cover the entire office, whithout this device he has to get every single workstation updated. Which is easier? Even if your office _is_ already infected, this can help ensure that your office doesn't spread things even further while you lock it down.
In the individual office this type of device is nothing more than a simpler, more effective AV app, on a global scale this is the type of thing that could shut down virus' and worms for good. Nobody will bother writing the things if it's a foregone conclusion that they won't go anywhere and will be completely contained within a day.
Oh no? They don't make sure that there isn't illegal content on the websites hosted on their servers? They don't null route flood attacks? They don't shut down clients who are port scanning? Many ISPs even block outbound port 25 as a spam prevention measure.
They already do that. Really though, these are two unconnected issues. It's completely impractical to expect ISP's to employ trained professionals to track down infected users on their networks.
I didn't miss your point, I just think it's irrellevant. This serves the exact same purpose that software AV does, but does it better, faster, and in a more effective manner.
Which is easier, trying to force thousands of people to practice network security, or installing a device that does it for them?
Sure you need to update the thing as new viruses come out, but you need to do the same thing with your AV software, that doesn't make it worthless. This won't stop virus' and worms from being written, but it can stop them from spreading past day 2.
The difference is that this can be easily implemented at a single point in a network or ISP and protect numerous systems. It doesn't matter if joe user doesn't update his virus definitions if his service provider has one of these things plugged in just after the router.
You'd implement something like this with distribution level routers, not in the home.
If you filtered connections individually you'd need millions of these things. Instead you filter at the upstream provider where a single unit can filter for thousands of individuals.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe amusing, but it's a reality. My cellphone is my primary business number, when it breaks (which happens) my business is basically shut down.
I really can't have that, even for 24 hours, so I keep an operational backup phone to use when my smartphone goes dead.
Well, from the looks of the debris, on top of the idiocy of jumping off of a 12 foot height, they didn't prep the table either.
Those folding tables have a metal frame screwed to their underside, which wrestlers remove in order to make the table break easily. It then is changed from a semi-solid object that hurts, to an energy sink that simply slows the body down before it hits the ground.
3.2 billion takes you pretty far...
Those were symptoms of the bubble, not causes. The cause was wild speculation.
I'm impressed... you managed to put together an analysis of Googles valuation without considering *anything about it's actual value*.
You should be a broker "well, the P/E is through the roof, and the market is already getting shaky, but they're good guys. I'm recommending a buy".
I believe what it targets is the people who are hiring the spammers, not the presumed source of the email.
Slippery Slope.
There's nothing about this that suggests that the definition of spam will considerably change in scope.
"in your disk drive analogy, it would be like coming up with a cheap flash drive that beat the specs for lifetime and cost to those spinning magnets you mentioned"
Yeah, it would beat the specs for lifetime and cost, but it would require 100 watts of power to operate.
Yeah, and with my last debian installation apt-get simply refused to connect to any sources, despite being online and perfectly fine.
Hmmmm, I've installed windows 2000 and XP dozens of times, only one reboot needed.
Personally, I consider any action that makes the the writing of virii and worms harder a good thing.
Generally they'll be smarter than the people *buying* these devices, but they're not very often smarter than the people who create and write updates for these machines.
The only hurdle is to consistently get these updates into the wild, this is a step in that direction.
"Ultimately I do not see how this machine is any different from a virus checker (except on the packet level). Its nothing new, its nothing clever, presumably its not that different to standard IDS schemes such as SNORT signatures, and its biggest weaknesses are going to be exactly the same as virus scanning. i.e. getting the signatures out to enough people quickly enough."
Exactly right. The difference is that it shifts the burden from the clueless end user to a group of knowledgeable professionals who's job it is to keep things secure.
That's not true at all... As soon as a virus def. is released you can add it to your device. Voila, your entire network is secured against that threat.
This won't stop the first contacts with a new virus, but it can certainly contain them, which is really the best you can ask for, and all that's neccesary anyway.
1) Cisco switches are hardware, but the logic is (I believe) software based.
2) I don't use Cicso IOS as much as I'd like, can Cisco IOS really scan for virus signatures in the traffic being passed through?
See, you're looking at this from the perspective of an office that has already been infected. Try looking from another point of view, the office that *hasn't* been infected, but the sysadmin has just caught a notice of a new worm that's spreading like wildfire.
With this device he can update the definitions once and cover the entire office, whithout this device he has to get every single workstation updated. Which is easier? Even if your office _is_ already infected, this can help ensure that your office doesn't spread things even further while you lock it down.
In the individual office this type of device is nothing more than a simpler, more effective AV app, on a global scale this is the type of thing that could shut down virus' and worms for good. Nobody will bother writing the things if it's a foregone conclusion that they won't go anywhere and will be completely contained within a day.
Oh no? They don't make sure that there isn't illegal content on the websites hosted on their servers? They don't null route flood attacks? They don't shut down clients who are port scanning? Many ISPs even block outbound port 25 as a spam prevention measure.
They already do that. Really though, these are two unconnected issues. It's completely impractical to expect ISP's to employ trained professionals to track down infected users on their networks.
I'd assume the same entity that decides what you can send and recieve through your connection now, your ISP.
I didn't miss your point, I just think it's irrellevant. This serves the exact same purpose that software AV does, but does it better, faster, and in a more effective manner.
Which is easier, trying to force thousands of people to practice network security, or installing a device that does it for them?
Sure you need to update the thing as new viruses come out, but you need to do the same thing with your AV software, that doesn't make it worthless. This won't stop virus' and worms from being written, but it can stop them from spreading past day 2.
The difference is that this can be easily implemented at a single point in a network or ISP and protect numerous systems. It doesn't matter if joe user doesn't update his virus definitions if his service provider has one of these things plugged in just after the router.
You'd implement something like this with distribution level routers, not in the home.
If you filtered connections individually you'd need millions of these things. Instead you filter at the upstream provider where a single unit can filter for thousands of individuals.
Did they come up with some way to crack 128 bit encryption when I wasn't looking?
How would that be any different from today? They can't break modern encryption now, yet don't keep the public from using it.
conversely, even the thought of that will probably prevent me from sleeping at night.