Actually, some companies have already started testing this technology (broadband over power lines that is, not news on toast:P). Read this and this or just go here and wade thru google.
I can see your points, and I agree with them. I never said that keeping the source code private would make it safe from all hackers. But it would help keep the numbers down (read my many posts prior to this one regarding the circumstances as I understood them and my reasoning behind my opinion). Going back to the burglar alarm scenario. Using an OTS system and keeping the manual & schematics, ahem, off the front porch, would keep the neighbors 15 year old kid from trying to take your home stereo while you are at work. Getting back on point, imagine the average programmer who only knows the same language this new Free Public Firewall/Virus protection package is written in and gets pissed of at his university, or people from his work, or whatever. He takes the time to figure out how to really screw with someone's computer, emails or hands an infected disk with his new virus/trojan or whatever to his victims. It works perfectly so he documents and posts his source to script-kiddies-r-us becuase he needs his ego stroked and the rest is history.
Excellent points, and for once, it seems someone that actually thinks before jumping on one bandwagon or another. I apologize for not taking the time to write my original post with more thought. In truth I was just checking the headlines while wasting 15 minutes before going on a work call.
That said, my original post was sincere and not trollbait, regardless of what you think. I am, quite assuredly, not anti-open source. I fully agree that Apache is a superior piece of software over IIS, as for the statistics, I believe there are more variants than I care to figure out in order to determine whether or not I'll believe what one company says or another. I also believe that even if there were 20x more Apache servers it would still be more secure and stable. 'Nuff said.
Oooooonnnnn the other hand. Let's take a more general look at the greater population. Would you begrude me saying that probably 50% of the general population of home computer owners are using either
a) no security/virus scanner,
b) using old/not up to date/no longer supported versions of software? Now imagine those same people using the exact same piece of software that is acting as firewall and/or virus protection... Don't tell me the general public won't have this stuff installed, hell it'd be thrown in as just one more lure to the average Joe as just one more perk because viruses are such big news items lately. Ok, so let's dumb it down so the average Joe can easily update the program with patches with out having to know anything technical. Ok, to keep things simple it'll be installed in a default directory with pretty graphics, limited options and automatically connects to a government owned update server. Hrm, doesn't sound like much fun now does it? So what's the solution? Tell you what, why don't you package your open source, "on your front porch" security package, convince the government that they can make it simple enough for the general public to understand and use, that support costs will be minimal (because it is open source!) and that they should make a push for everyone to use it so that we can squash this nasty virus stuff once and for all? Get back to me on how that goes, m'kay?
Oh, and since you were so nice as to liberally quote me...
If you want to affect the WWW at large, you attack that which comprises more than half the entire WWW, that being Apache.
Considering the quality of the rest of your post I'm dissappointed to see that you'd say something so blatently dumb. Perhaps you haven't been keeping up with the news lately... here's some non-Apache virii that have greatly impacted the Internet. MS-SQL Server Worm, Nimda and Code Red. SQL servers surely do not outnumber Apache servers, Nimda and Code Red were not exclusively IIS worms, but IIS played a pretty big part in their spread.
Damn, the more I read over your post, the more it starts to sound like a troll too...
LMAO, jesus fucking christ. Read the original post. We're not talking about open source here people. The original post is talking about government funded software for the masses. Anything that's government funded is going to have the government's fingers in it. Have you worked in any type of government or military. If not, then you have yet to see the true meaning of red-tape. Stop fucking attacking me like I'm Bill fucking Gates. I'm not anti-open source. The thought of open source / closed development of something as important as security that is in the hands of the government is not something I would buy into.
My original post is saying that it's bad enough with script kiddies wreaking havoc with IIS and AOL and whatnot. Can you imagine a piece of software that is installed on every non-techie's computer AND has the source code widely available? Not to mention the track record of the typical non-techie with patches and security alerts?
Get the fuck off of your high-horses and start looking at things objectively you elitest dipshits. Think about a piece of software that is installed on thousands and thousands of non-technical users that is most likely still using original settings and is probably still the original installed version. Hrm. Sounds kinda familiar huh? Maybe then you guys can find something else to bash other than (or along with) Microsoft.
I can see it now. Nimda IV shuts down the Internet again... Sundry DOS attacks drown out other DOS attacks,/. falls into ruins due to lack of content because the 50 people that do manage to get here every day say the same shit about MS and this new piece of public and free security software...
Yes extreme, yes i'm posting while I'm pissed, yes I'm tired of wading through the same elitist bullshit to get to the interesting posts, yes, yes, I know, I can just piss off.
Gee sounds like you didn't read the comment you quoted. Would you like this information available to anybody that walked up to your front door?
...posted in a book on your front porch?
There's a big difference between YOU knowing how your security is set up and EVERYBODY knowing it. Sure for those of us that can code or actually enjoy reading through thousands of lines of source to see how things work, having the source code to something as important as security is great! But face reality, the original post said public source available to everyone (as I understood it). Going back to the home security analogy, what good would schematics, etc. do to someone who could make head nor tail of the drawings? Unless you've been living the life of a hermit with your only link to the "outside world" through/., I'm sure you've come to realize that most people either can't read through thousands of lines of source code, they don't have the time/have better things to do, or they just don't care and trust that their money is fairly well spent and prefer to leave the bug tracking to someone else and just download the patches. On the other hand, If you have been living the life of a hermit, I'm sorry to have assumed otherwise.
Hehe, sorry didn't give the brain enough time to think of the free anti-virus and firewall software out there. While writing I was thinking about some grand scheme where government funding had their free software included in every PC, etc. kinda freaky thought actuall...
Public source code for software that is designed to protect isn't a great idea IMO. Would you want your home security system, complete with sensor locations, schematics, etc. posted in a book on your front porch?
Giving "the enemy" free access to anti-virus code that is being used by the masses (because it is free) gives them the opportunity to figure out loopholes, how to sabatoge the anti-virus software, etc. Granted, it can be done now, but can you imagine the information being broken down and mass distributed so the average virus writer can take better advantage?
Publicly available anti-virus and firewall software would be great (source code witheld), but then you run into the same problem MS has. Huge user base = greater draw to those looking to undermine the software = more security issues. Besides, the government could never pull it off, there are too many companies with huge vested interests in those markets. Lastly, perhaps the greatest defense we have just might be the variety of choices in protective software...
Amen to that mah brothah. It's good to see someone else who looks at MS products objectively instead of jumping on the bashing bandwagon. I'm just glad I didn't have to scroll down too far to determine if someone made these points before I posted them myself.
You even included the biggest factor in product susceptibility (IMO), user base. People don't think about the basics. Of course there are more security issues found in MS programs, mainly it is due to the large number of potential victims. If you were going to go fishing would you rather go to a lake where it is known an abundance of fish are or a lake that is known to have significantly less fish (yes, yes, you can argue sportsmanship and what not, it's a friggin example ok?). More people working on finding security shortcomings and developing "insta-hack" programs and scripts naturally means more security issues being found.
What we need is a security scale indicating known loopholes vs userbase vs ???.
Now, with that being said, everyone else can save their breath, I don't want to hear about how much better Mozilla is, blah blah blah, I use Mozilla. I'm not a MS advocate, I just hate to hear people blindly bash things when they have not looked objectively at the item they are bashing.
Well, I just got back in town and have arrived on this topic a bit late, so forgive me for not reading all four pages of posts. I got.25 of the way down the first page and got tired of reading about NEAL Stephenson (whose books I have enjoyed enough to read more than once). Somone mentioned Marion Zimmer Bradley, but I did not see The Mists Of Avalon, but I'm sure you have already read this (based on your original post claiming to have read just about every Arthuran tale:P).
A couple of my favorite authors are Tad Williams (his books) and Mickey Zucker Reichert, check her chronological bio (complete with books) here and a nice book listing here (has book covers).
Tad Williams has a tendency to be quite wordy, especially in the Otherland series, but if you are a fan of detailed worlds, be sure to check him out. I would suggest starting with the Memory, Sorrow And Thorn series. As for Reichert, I can only attest to the Renshai books (pretty good IMO) and the first of the Bifrost Guardians (having never finished the series due to some distraction which I can not remember).
Should you feel the need for something different and wish to try some straight fiction, try Richard Russo of which, Straight Man is my favorite. Very witty and a great read.
To wrap things up, you may want to check out Gnod. Just search for an author and you'll get a kind of cool mapping of suggested reads based on your search. I haven't examined this site to see how accurate the suggestions are, but it looks like it may have potential.
Regardless of which authors you choose out of all these posts, I hope you find some fresh content that can keep you going. I always find myself in the same situation you described where I tend to just cycle through all of my books. Good luck on your search!
You're joking right? Sure he's 19, but he's working at a lawfirm for Christ's sake, with access to confidential and sensitive information. Not that bright? Hell, I need to move to his neighborhood and apply for some jobs since they're just giving them out to anyone that asks, regardless of qualifications.
I suspect he had full knowledge of the fact that what he was doing was wrong and against the law. Sure, he's only 19 and God knows a 19 year old male's cup o' common sense does not runneth over, but this does not mean that he should be let off the hook, or granted leniancy even. If that were the case then why not change the law to allow for people below the age of 21 to be tried as children? He took a chance with something and failed, I have to assume that someone working at a lawfirm would have some clue of the potential repercussions...
I guess it has become stylish to post before readin the full articles. Oh wait, that has always been in style.
Internet access is *NOT* equivalent to food or health care.
Kinda funny how you mention health care, but had you read some of the actual linked articles you would read about how the final link to the Internet from the 5 village WiFi network is located where -- in a hospital.
This reminds me of all of the extra fees on your telephone bill that were put there by Al Gore. Yes, the "creating of the internet" that Al Gore takes credit for is largely the sneaky tax increases he jammed through Congress by adding numerous fees to your phone bill. That money is then used as welfare to (supposedly) give free internet access to low income folks. That is *NOT* the proper role of government.
That's funny, I must have skipped over the part that mentions our government's role in all this.
Similarly, bringing internet access to the jungles of Southeast asia is *NOT* the role of charitable organizations...
I was unaware that there are base rules dictating what form of help a charitable organization is allowed to offer. Are you the head of the Charitable Organization Rules Committee?
If you want to help these countries economically, you need to help them get a basic economic infrastructure in place so they can actually grow in a normal fashion.
All in all, these five villages are actually doing fairly well. They are now able to grow surplus rice and they wish to export handmade textiles. The computers and network will allow these people to grow financially. As I understand it they either do now (although not from a local phone) or they used to use telephone calls to check market prices, etc. Access to the network and phone system that is proposed will incur charges, allowing it to be a self sustaining system. It sounds to me like they've got the basic economic infrastructure in place already, they're just getting a 200 year technological boost to help compete in the world market.
Don't take this rant personally ThresholdRPG, I know I quoted from your post, but only out of convenience. It is pretty obvoius that the majority of people who have posted comments did not even bother to read a single link from the/. "article".
Now... Since I've played the devil's advocate, my opinion: I think we've got enough things to worry about here in our own country that would make a better choice for my donations. Hell, if we're trying to give people Internet connections, how about our own underprivledged schools? Wouldn't it be great if we didn't have to look overseas for programmers, etc. etc. etc.
Well put. Unfortunately I was suffering from a severe case of lack of sleep and didn't actually intend my reply to be posted under you comment (if I remember correctly). You make some excellent points, but that still does not address the fact that the critical and harsh words bandied about in these forums for "the average idiot" where I'm hearing things like something like 75% of the population is either average or below average (of course that wouldn't be a single one of us reading/., oh no...) and anybody who is not of exceptional intelligence is automatically labelled an idiot. Read back through all the nonsense from the parent of this comment tree and see if you don't get the same notion that these people are stroking their own ego with one hand and stroking their neighbor's with the other.
As to the above references to my parents/grandparents; I do tell them what I think when they try to crack their computers and/or administer the installed software.
I have no idea if you were one of the people relegating everyone outside of the/. community the status of idiot, as I've said, I didn't originally intend to attach my reply to yours, but I ask this -- Do you tell your parents and grandparents that they are stupid or they are an idiot, how about a moron?
The point of my original reply was to show that a great many of the people we are calling idiots because they will likely fall for this evil market research scheme (or whatever the hell you wanna call it) will be those same people we hold dear and love -- our parents, grandparents, girlfriends and other friends & family that are not technically savy enough to keep up with the evil goings-on in the world of computers.
I'm sorry if you took my original reply as an attack on your post, somehow I doubt the people I really wanted to read my post will ever see it. Oh well.
LOL, well see what happens when you start a long reply, then leave and return a little later to wrap it up? Someone replied much faster with your reply following quickly after while my reply was busy steaming in its own juices for a bit. NIF also checksums, although I have neglected to dig up any detailed information on how it is handled or even where this information is stored. Like I said before, NIF suits my needs on my XP boxes and have not experienced any problems with it.
I see one problem with your copied trusted binary and modified msvcrt.dll scenario. You say if someone can manage the requirements they can easily get untrusted code running within your trusted app. If someone managed to do all of that without you knowing I think you have a bigger issue to deal with than whether or not some company knows when you listen to Britney Spears. Not to mention whether or not it would be reasonable for this market research company (or whatever they are)to go to such lengths when the targetted market is most likely NOT going to be computer literate enough to care just how secure their machines are./. may be one of the more popular websites on the web(as illustrated every time the unsuspecting get slash-dotted) but we amount to a drop in the bucket when compared to the fans of Michael Jackson and the likes.
Ah, eloquently said, and yet it's obvious you have not spent any significant amount of time with NIF. On my XP box I use NIF and while I confess I too have failed to take a more in-depth look at exactly what is going on underneath the hood so to speak, I do know that once a binary, that has been given permission to outbound ports, changes, be it a patch or what not, you are given the dialog asking if said program is allowed outbound access. A screwed up sentence, I know, so I'll break it down. I haven't bothered to determine the means, but NIF will not let an altered (or masquarading) file Internet access without explicit permission. There may be a way around this, but for my purposes it works.
I have nothing but respect for the majority of your posts (see "mostly";-)), it is fairly obvious that you have a firm grasp on Linux of which you are a staunch supporter. That is fine, heh, even a good thing.
[slips on his flame retardent undaroos]
It's just that the winbashing bandwagon far exceeded its maximum occupancy a long time ago, and while it was fashionable at one time, I think it has nearly run its course. It has become pretty tiresome watching so many people scramble to their pedestals in an attempt to trump the last winbash, seeing themselves in their mind's eye as someone far superior to the masses. In truth the "uber-geek" looks for praise from their own vocal minority while the majority (read the average Joe) sees the you as the socially inept stroking their own egos. BR>
*blink* *blink* "the vocal minority"??? Why yes, of course I am referring to those who are fairly to exceptionally knowledgeable in all things Linux and can't find a horn big enough to to call their own to toot. I do not refer to those that have been trained to "be original, be unique, be different, don't follow the mainstream, assert yourself!" You know the type, the sheep that feel the need to be cool by asserting that they are better than everyone else because they can spew the same rhetoric they hear/read from channels they think are intellectually obscure, which they've been trained to believe is superior, regardless of the merits of the actual person speaking/writing.
I picture it like one big intellectual pyramid scheme, someone at the top expresses a thought and it is passed down to the masses, gaining momentum, changing slightly on its trip down, until the sheep have it in their heads that it is "us against them". Now, the vocal majority in this vocal minorty can't get enough of trying to put everyone that do not agree with their agenda (even if they don't understand this agenda, it is what they want to believe dammit!) which in turn causes this sentiment to reverberate back up, like shockwaves, influencing the ranks above and so it perpetuates.
But then again, maybe not.
Point being, I say we try something different. How about we leave off the bashing, stop prejudging those that don't walk behind you like lost puppies (see your 2nd to last paragraph, 0x0d0a) and persue more productive posts.
I know I strayed pretty far off-topic while replying to a post that was already askew from the original news post, I'm sorry.
And for what it is worth 0x0d0a, regardless of how it may have come across, this truly wasn't an attack on you or your post. I really do enjoy reading most of your posts.
Ahem, before I get blasted on the weakness of my security, let me say this. Knowledge is power. You're only as secure as you make yourself. You don't have to put your nickel piggy bank in an insured, fireproof safe tucked neatly away in a bank vault.
That is, know your system(s). Keep them current with updates/patches/etc. and keep informed of vulnerabilities. What's the purpose of corporate strength proxies/firewalls/etc for typical residential use? The bottom line? Of all my home systems ever owned, I can honestly say that I've been virus free and hack free with only one exception, a virus on an ex-girlfriends computer which was quickly taken care of with minimal effects and inconvenience. And not one permanent dedicated PC for firewal/proxy/router service.
What really cracks me up is how this "holier-than-thou" sentiment is lavashed in a forum where we think it is important to be the bigger nerd but what I'd really like to know is how many of you tell your grandma/mother/aunt/girlfriend/whatever that they're an idiot for not keeping up with PC security, or for not patching their OS (what?!?! your grandma doesn't use Linux! What a fucking moron! I'm glad she's not related to me...). Gimme a break folks. How many of you immediately turned around and issued a security bulletin to your family about this horrid new CD technology.
I can see it now..."I repeat, DO NOT INSERT THE CD INTO YOUR COMPUTER'S CD DRIVE!!! If you feel unsafe or unsure whether or not you are using one of these new CDs, please contact my secretary, er answering machine and schedule an appoint, er leave a message and I'll set a time for me to do a security visit with you to ensure you are not in any DANGER. I repeat you morons, DO NOT INSERT THE CD INTO YOUR COMPUTER'S CD DRIVE!!!! (yes grandma, this means you too)."
Get real guys.
There is an exchange rate. I checked this out when it was in early beta and there really was quite a bit missing in gameplay. I don't remember the exact exchange rate but it was reasonable considering the very limited resources you could spend your money on. This primarily revolved around mining equipment, etc. which would in turn, allow you to make in game money. Of course you don't just drop ten bucks and go out prospecting, only to return to town a virtual millionaire. You had to invest more and more money while you built up your skills to prospect and mine, basically investing in your future so to speak. The problem was the tedium of finding ore, mining it, lugging your meager findings back to a town, etc. With all things said and done, I'd rather drop 10-15 bucks a month on a MMORPG that didn't require me to basically "go to work" on my off time. That is, I'd much rather hack-n-slash a variety of monsters, exploring unknown lands, gaining useful items and selling off the junk. All things said, they can keep the ten bucks I basically wasted there, I won't be back.
Heh, technically an address getting/.ed is a form of DOS...
Re:Thanks Micheal, you're gonna /.
on
Root Zone Changed
·
· Score: 1
Exactly, it has been done, and frankly, will probably happen again. The system is designed to keep the internet running, in theory, as long as one is still up and active. The servers are located virtually and geographically seperate to keep the possibility of a disaster (massive hardware failures, natural disasters, etc.) from keeping the internet from grinding to a halt.
Heh, it figures. 10 minutes after I post this, it gets bumped waaaaay lower due to a handful of funny posts and their replies. Oh well, I tried:P.
Re:It was announced on NANOG.....
on
Root Zone Changed
·
· Score: 5, Informative
As it has been pointed out further down (for those of us that sort by score), this is truly a non-event and makes no significant impact on the typical/. reader. I will not take credit for the following information, but will quote someone that I think summed up the situation enough to hopefully keep the average Joe from/.ing any of the links posted in the article above.
ccandreva posted
This is not a change that needs to be done immediately. For one thing, there are 13 (A - M) root servers. As long as your name server can contact one of them, it will download the latest list at start-up, so your root file can be fairly out of date, and still be fine when running.
Also, the announcement says that the server will respond on both IP addresses "for the forseeable future".
Essentially, unless you know specifically that you are directly affected by this change, and can explain in detail why exactly you need this information right now, there is no need to/. any of the links above. If you run a linux box and keep your builds rather current, then I can assure you that there is no need to update. Think about it, the last change was 5 years ago, there should not be a major rush to update for the majority of us.
What do you call cancer found in other parts of the body? Here (the US) we say lung cancer, throat cancer, skin cancer, etc. While I personally don't know, I just can't see people saying throat tumor or skin tumor, but that may just be the American in me,:P. Sure, I've seen the term "brain tumor" used here in the US but it seems to have been supplanted with the cancer label, as I have not seen any type of cancerous condition referred to as tumors anytime recently. Perhaps the label change has something to do with the whole political correctness movement that has had such a huge impact on the way we speak, but I don't know. Because I know next to nothing about modern medicine, perhaps there is another reason this label changed from tumor to cancer...?
Getting back on topic, I agree his death is truly a great loss and a shame.
Which is the point I had just made... By the time (IF) anyone says anything about these links, the only gain news.com could possibly get by linking to this program would have already been reaped.
Are you saying 2 hours only because those news.com articles are gonna be./-ed drawing much attention or are did you miss the fact that this is the second article from them with this link? ([Oct 3] and [Oct 7])
This should be interesting to see if news.com decides to keep the links in. As monkeydo said earlier:
Their lawyers would have told them, "Sure you can fight it, but does that link actually have any value?"
Should the heat get turned on news.com what reason would they have to keep the links in these stories? None. CNN has nothing to gain by keeping the links. In fact, the only value they could possibly get is an increase of visitors, maybe a few people (relatively speaking) decide to visit their websitemore often or whatever all due to the attention given these two articles based specifically on the fact that they are linking directly to a DeCSS executible and not on the merits of the actual story../ has done its part in sending what will probably amount to a noticible increase in visitors to news.com for a day or two.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, some companies have already started testing this technology (broadband over power lines that is, not news on toast :P). Read this and this or just go here and wade thru google.
I can see your points, and I agree with them. I never said that keeping the source code private would make it safe from all hackers. But it would help keep the numbers down (read my many posts prior to this one regarding the circumstances as I understood them and my reasoning behind my opinion). Going back to the burglar alarm scenario. Using an OTS system and keeping the manual & schematics, ahem, off the front porch, would keep the neighbors 15 year old kid from trying to take your home stereo while you are at work. Getting back on point, imagine the average programmer who only knows the same language this new Free Public Firewall/Virus protection package is written in and gets pissed of at his university, or people from his work, or whatever. He takes the time to figure out how to really screw with someone's computer, emails or hands an infected disk with his new virus/trojan or whatever to his victims. It works perfectly so he documents and posts his source to script-kiddies-r-us becuase he needs his ego stroked and the rest is history.
That said, my original post was sincere and not trollbait, regardless of what you think. I am, quite assuredly, not anti-open source. I fully agree that Apache is a superior piece of software over IIS, as for the statistics, I believe there are more variants than I care to figure out in order to determine whether or not I'll believe what one company says or another. I also believe that even if there were 20x more Apache servers it would still be more secure and stable. 'Nuff said.
Oooooonnnnn the other hand. Let's take a more general look at the greater population. Would you begrude me saying that probably 50% of the general population of home computer owners are using either
a) no security/virus scanner,
b) using old/not up to date/no longer supported versions of software?
Considering the quality of the rest of your post I'm dissappointed to see that you'd say something so blatently dumb. Perhaps you haven't been keeping up with the news lately... here's some non-Apache virii that have greatly impacted the Internet. MS-SQL Server Worm, Nimda and Code Red. SQL servers surely do not outnumber Apache servers, Nimda and Code Red were not exclusively IIS worms, but IIS played a pretty big part in their spread.Now imagine those same people using the exact same piece of software that is acting as firewall and/or virus protection... Don't tell me the general public won't have this stuff installed, hell it'd be thrown in as just one more lure to the average Joe as just one more perk because viruses are such big news items lately. Ok, so let's dumb it down so the average Joe can easily update the program with patches with out having to know anything technical. Ok, to keep things simple it'll be installed in a default directory with pretty graphics, limited options and automatically connects to a government owned update server. Hrm, doesn't sound like much fun now does it? So what's the solution? Tell you what, why don't you package your open source, "on your front porch" security package, convince the government that they can make it simple enough for the general public to understand and use, that support costs will be minimal (because it is open source!) and that they should make a push for everyone to use it so that we can squash this nasty virus stuff once and for all? Get back to me on how that goes, m'kay?
Oh, and since you were so nice as to liberally quote me...
Damn, the more I read over your post, the more it starts to sound like a troll too...
LMAO, jesus fucking christ. Read the original post. We're not talking about open source here people. The original post is talking about government funded software for the masses. Anything that's government funded is going to have the government's fingers in it. Have you worked in any type of government or military. If not, then you have yet to see the true meaning of red-tape. Stop fucking attacking me like I'm Bill fucking Gates. I'm not anti-open source. The thought of open source / closed development of something as important as security that is in the hands of the government is not something I would buy into.
/. falls into ruins due to lack of content because the 50 people that do manage to get here every day say the same shit about MS and this new piece of public and free security software...
My original post is saying that it's bad enough with script kiddies wreaking havoc with IIS and AOL and whatnot. Can you imagine a piece of software that is installed on every non-techie's computer AND has the source code widely available? Not to mention the track record of the typical non-techie with patches and security alerts?
Get the fuck off of your high-horses and start looking at things objectively you elitest dipshits. Think about a piece of software that is installed on thousands and thousands of non-technical users that is most likely still using original settings and is probably still the original installed version. Hrm. Sounds kinda familiar huh? Maybe then you guys can find something else to bash other than (or along with) Microsoft.
I can see it now. Nimda IV shuts down the Internet again... Sundry DOS attacks drown out other DOS attacks,
Yes extreme, yes i'm posting while I'm pissed, yes I'm tired of wading through the same elitist bullshit to get to the interesting posts, yes, yes, I know, I can just piss off.
There's a big difference between YOU knowing how your security is set up and EVERYBODY knowing it. Sure for those of us that can code or actually enjoy reading through thousands of lines of source to see how things work, having the source code to something as important as security is great! But face reality, the original post said public source available to everyone (as I understood it). Going back to the home security analogy, what good would schematics, etc. do to someone who could make head nor tail of the drawings? Unless you've been living the life of a hermit with your only link to the "outside world" through
Hehe, sorry didn't give the brain enough time to think of the free anti-virus and firewall software out there. While writing I was thinking about some grand scheme where government funding had their free software included in every PC, etc. kinda freaky thought actuall...
Public source code for software that is designed to protect isn't a great idea IMO. Would you want your home security system, complete with sensor locations, schematics, etc. posted in a book on your front porch?
Giving "the enemy" free access to anti-virus code that is being used by the masses (because it is free) gives them the opportunity to figure out loopholes, how to sabatoge the anti-virus software, etc. Granted, it can be done now, but can you imagine the information being broken down and mass distributed so the average virus writer can take better advantage?
Publicly available anti-virus and firewall software would be great (source code witheld), but then you run into the same problem MS has. Huge user base = greater draw to those looking to undermine the software = more security issues. Besides, the government could never pull it off, there are too many companies with huge vested interests in those markets. Lastly, perhaps the greatest defense we have just might be the variety of choices in protective software...
Amen to that mah brothah. It's good to see someone else who looks at MS products objectively instead of jumping on the bashing bandwagon. I'm just glad I didn't have to scroll down too far to determine if someone made these points before I posted them myself.
You even included the biggest factor in product susceptibility (IMO), user base. People don't think about the basics. Of course there are more security issues found in MS programs, mainly it is due to the large number of potential victims. If you were going to go fishing would you rather go to a lake where it is known an abundance of fish are or a lake that is known to have significantly less fish (yes, yes, you can argue sportsmanship and what not, it's a friggin example ok?). More people working on finding security shortcomings and developing "insta-hack" programs and scripts naturally means more security issues being found.
What we need is a security scale indicating known loopholes vs userbase vs ???.
Now, with that being said, everyone else can save their breath, I don't want to hear about how much better Mozilla is, blah blah blah, I use Mozilla. I'm not a MS advocate, I just hate to hear people blindly bash things when they have not looked objectively at the item they are bashing.
Well, I just got back in town and have arrived on this topic a bit late, so forgive me for not reading all four pages of posts. I got .25 of the way down the first page and got tired of reading about NEAL Stephenson (whose books I have enjoyed enough to read more than once). Somone mentioned Marion Zimmer Bradley, but I did not see The Mists Of Avalon, but I'm sure you have already read this (based on your original post claiming to have read just about every Arthuran tale :P).
A couple of my favorite authors are Tad Williams (his books) and Mickey Zucker Reichert, check her chronological bio (complete with books) here and a nice book listing here (has book covers).
Tad Williams has a tendency to be quite wordy, especially in the Otherland series, but if you are a fan of detailed worlds, be sure to check him out. I would suggest starting with the Memory, Sorrow And Thorn series. As for Reichert, I can only attest to the Renshai books (pretty good IMO) and the first of the Bifrost Guardians (having never finished the series due to some distraction which I can not remember).
Should you feel the need for something different and wish to try some straight fiction, try Richard Russo of which, Straight Man is my favorite. Very witty and a great read.
To wrap things up, you may want to check out Gnod. Just search for an author and you'll get a kind of cool mapping of suggested reads based on your search. I haven't examined this site to see how accurate the suggestions are, but it looks like it may have potential.
Regardless of which authors you choose out of all these posts, I hope you find some fresh content that can keep you going. I always find myself in the same situation you described where I tend to just cycle through all of my books. Good luck on your search!
You're joking right? Sure he's 19, but he's working at a lawfirm for Christ's sake, with access to confidential and sensitive information. Not that bright? Hell, I need to move to his neighborhood and apply for some jobs since they're just giving them out to anyone that asks, regardless of qualifications.
I suspect he had full knowledge of the fact that what he was doing was wrong and against the law. Sure, he's only 19 and God knows a 19 year old male's cup o' common sense does not runneth over, but this does not mean that he should be let off the hook, or granted leniancy even. If that were the case then why not change the law to allow for people below the age of 21 to be tried as children? He took a chance with something and failed, I have to assume that someone working at a lawfirm would have some clue of the potential repercussions...
Don't take this rant personally ThresholdRPG, I know I quoted from your post, but only out of convenience. It is pretty obvoius that the majority of people who have posted comments did not even bother to read a single link from the
Now... Since I've played the devil's advocate, my opinion: I think we've got enough things to worry about here in our own country that would make a better choice for my donations. Hell, if we're trying to give people Internet connections, how about our own underprivledged schools? Wouldn't it be great if we didn't have to look overseas for programmers, etc. etc. etc.
The point of my original reply was to show that a great many of the people we are calling idiots because they will likely fall for this evil market research scheme (or whatever the hell you wanna call it) will be those same people we hold dear and love -- our parents, grandparents, girlfriends and other friends & family that are not technically savy enough to keep up with the evil goings-on in the world of computers.
I'm sorry if you took my original reply as an attack on your post, somehow I doubt the people I really wanted to read my post will ever see it. Oh well.
LOL, well see what happens when you start a long reply, then leave and return a little later to wrap it up? Someone replied much faster with your reply following quickly after while my reply was busy steaming in its own juices for a bit. NIF also checksums, although I have neglected to dig up any detailed information on how it is handled or even where this information is stored. Like I said before, NIF suits my needs on my XP boxes and have not experienced any problems with it.
/. may be one of the more popular websites on the web(as illustrated every time the unsuspecting get slash-dotted) but we amount to a drop in the bucket when compared to the fans of Michael Jackson and the likes.
I see one problem with your copied trusted binary and modified msvcrt.dll scenario. You say if someone can manage the requirements they can easily get untrusted code running within your trusted app. If someone managed to do all of that without you knowing I think you have a bigger issue to deal with than whether or not some company knows when you listen to Britney Spears. Not to mention whether or not it would be reasonable for this market research company (or whatever they are)to go to such lengths when the targetted market is most likely NOT going to be computer literate enough to care just how secure their machines are.
Ah, eloquently said, and yet it's obvious you have not spent any significant amount of time with NIF. On my XP box I use NIF and while I confess I too have failed to take a more in-depth look at exactly what is going on underneath the hood so to speak, I do know that once a binary, that has been given permission to outbound ports, changes, be it a patch or what not, you are given the dialog asking if said program is allowed outbound access. A screwed up sentence, I know, so I'll break it down. I haven't bothered to determine the means, but NIF will not let an altered (or masquarading) file Internet access without explicit permission. There may be a way around this, but for my purposes it works.
;-)), it is fairly obvious that you have a firm grasp on Linux of which you are a staunch supporter. That is fine, heh, even a good thing.
I have nothing but respect for the majority of your posts (see "mostly"
[slips on his flame retardent undaroos]
It's just that the winbashing bandwagon far exceeded its maximum occupancy a long time ago, and while it was fashionable at one time, I think it has nearly run its course. It has become pretty tiresome watching so many people scramble to their pedestals in an attempt to trump the last winbash, seeing themselves in their mind's eye as someone far superior to the masses. In truth the "uber-geek" looks for praise from their own vocal minority while the majority (read the average Joe) sees the you as the socially inept stroking their own egos.
BR> *blink* *blink* "the vocal minority"??? Why yes, of course I am referring to those who are fairly to exceptionally knowledgeable in all things Linux and can't find a horn big enough to to call their own to toot. I do not refer to those that have been trained to "be original, be unique, be different, don't follow the mainstream, assert yourself!" You know the type, the sheep that feel the need to be cool by asserting that they are better than everyone else because they can spew the same rhetoric they hear/read from channels they think are intellectually obscure, which they've been trained to believe is superior, regardless of the merits of the actual person speaking/writing.
I picture it like one big intellectual pyramid scheme, someone at the top expresses a thought and it is passed down to the masses, gaining momentum, changing slightly on its trip down, until the sheep have it in their heads that it is "us against them". Now, the vocal majority in this vocal minorty can't get enough of trying to put everyone that do not agree with their agenda (even if they don't understand this agenda, it is what they want to believe dammit!) which in turn causes this sentiment to reverberate back up, like shockwaves, influencing the ranks above and so it perpetuates.
But then again, maybe not.
Point being, I say we try something different. How about we leave off the bashing, stop prejudging those that don't walk behind you like lost puppies (see your 2nd to last paragraph, 0x0d0a) and persue more productive posts.
I know I strayed pretty far off-topic while replying to a post that was already askew from the original news post, I'm sorry. And for what it is worth 0x0d0a, regardless of how it may have come across, this truly wasn't an attack on you or your post. I really do enjoy reading most of your posts. Ahem, before I get blasted on the weakness of my security, let me say this. Knowledge is power. You're only as secure as you make yourself. You don't have to put your nickel piggy bank in an insured, fireproof safe tucked neatly away in a bank vault.
That is, know your system(s). Keep them current with updates/patches/etc. and keep informed of vulnerabilities. What's the purpose of corporate strength proxies/firewalls/etc for typical residential use? The bottom line? Of all my home systems ever owned, I can honestly say that I've been virus free and hack free with only one exception, a virus on an ex-girlfriends computer which was quickly taken care of with minimal effects and inconvenience. And not one permanent dedicated PC for firewal/proxy/router service.
What really cracks me up is how this "holier-than-thou" sentiment is lavashed in a forum where we think it is important to be the bigger nerd but what I'd really like to know is how many of you tell your grandma/mother/aunt/girlfriend/whatever that they're an idiot for not keeping up with PC security, or for not patching their OS (what?!?! your grandma doesn't use Linux! What a fucking moron! I'm glad she's not related to me...). Gimme a break folks. How many of you immediately turned around and issued a security bulletin to your family about this horrid new CD technology. I can see it now..."I repeat, DO NOT INSERT THE CD INTO YOUR COMPUTER'S CD DRIVE!!! If you feel unsafe or unsure whether or not you are using one of these new CDs, please contact my secretary, er answering machine and schedule an appoint, er leave a message and I'll set a time for me to do a security visit with you to ensure you are not in any DANGER. I repeat you morons, DO NOT INSERT THE CD INTO YOUR COMPUTER'S CD DRIVE!!!! (yes grandma, this means you too)." Get real guys.
There is an exchange rate. I checked this out when it was in early beta and there really was quite a bit missing in gameplay. I don't remember the exact exchange rate but it was reasonable considering the very limited resources you could spend your money on. This primarily revolved around mining equipment, etc. which would in turn, allow you to make in game money. Of course you don't just drop ten bucks and go out prospecting, only to return to town a virtual millionaire. You had to invest more and more money while you built up your skills to prospect and mine, basically investing in your future so to speak. The problem was the tedium of finding ore, mining it, lugging your meager findings back to a town, etc. With all things said and done, I'd rather drop 10-15 bucks a month on a MMORPG that didn't require me to basically "go to work" on my off time. That is, I'd much rather hack-n-slash a variety of monsters, exploring unknown lands, gaining useful items and selling off the junk. All things said, they can keep the ten bucks I basically wasted there, I won't be back.
Heh, technically an address getting /.ed is a form of DOS...
Exactly, it has been done, and frankly, will probably happen again. The system is designed to keep the internet running, in theory, as long as one is still up and active. The servers are located virtually and geographically seperate to keep the possibility of a disaster (massive hardware failures, natural disasters, etc.) from keeping the internet from grinding to a halt.
Heh, it figures. 10 minutes after I post this, it gets bumped waaaaay lower due to a handful of funny posts and their replies. Oh well, I tried :P.
What do you call cancer found in other parts of the body? Here (the US) we say lung cancer, throat cancer, skin cancer, etc. While I personally don't know, I just can't see people saying throat tumor or skin tumor, but that may just be the American in me, :P. Sure, I've seen the term "brain tumor" used here in the US but it seems to have been supplanted with the cancer label, as I have not seen any type of cancerous condition referred to as tumors anytime recently. Perhaps the label change has something to do with the whole political correctness movement that has had such a huge impact on the way we speak, but I don't know. Because I know next to nothing about modern medicine, perhaps there is another reason this label changed from tumor to cancer...?
Getting back on topic, I agree his death is truly a great loss and a shame.
Which is the point I had just made... By the time (IF) anyone says anything about these links, the only gain news.com could possibly get by linking to this program would have already been reaped.
This should be interesting to see if news.com decides to keep the links in. As monkeydo said earlier:
Should the heat get turned on news.com what reason would they have to keep the links in these stories? None. CNN has nothing to gain by keeping the links. In fact, the only value they could possibly get is an increase of visitors, maybe a few people (relatively speaking) decide to visit their websitemore often or whatever all due to the attention given these two articles based specifically on the fact that they are linking directly to a DeCSS executible and not on the merits of the actual story.