The most fun thing to do would be hunt it in the air. Have your own drone with a camera so you can fly it from an known location.
Next you need to mount a couple short tubes on it with shotgun shells at the back. Replace the primers in the shells with something you can ignite electrically.
Just get near enough and blasting the police drone out of the sky should be chicken shoot.
I would be willing to entrain the argument if your device is set the the manufacturers default published password with no banner making it clear the service is supposed to be publicly accessible; its not very analogue to breaking and entering.
Its much more like you have locks on your house but don't use them; and someone lets themselves in, has a look around does no harm and does not remove anything. No its still not allowed, you can't just march around someones private property with no expectation you would reasonably be permitted and wanted there. That said its not a serious crime either, its simple trespassing.
That is really all this amounted to here. Everyone here getting so bent about it needs to get a sense of proportion.
Will I certainly agree that the government should have no-role in determining what we cannot ingest of our on fully informed free will. You're statement that it accomplished nothing is false.
Domestic violence fell by almost 50% during the prohibition years for instance. There was also a substantial drop in alcohol related related deaths during the period.
So actually the temperance movement/prohibition was quite successful addressing the social ills it sought to address. Even if it did create new and by some judgments more serious problems and cross a moral boundary infringing freedom in a way that continues to harm our nation today.
CEOs at companies the size of EA often have very short tenures; and no even abject failures are not necessarily career enders. It really comes down to investor perceptions. If the company is/was a mess to start with or the objective (I'll get to that) is thought to have not made any sense; they usually go on to other things without much trouble. Yes the existing board and management always blame the departing CEO for their ills if things are not great because lets face it, if you have to assign blame who better than they guy/gal who isn't there anymore? This works well because blaming the blaming the CEO (even if completely undeserved) is credible enough to protect the company from share holder legal actions or votes that might require other board-members or management to be removed.
Often CEO's will be moving on to "pursue other interests", "spend time with families", etc almost regardless of success or failure. Sure companies that are experiencing really good time might bring in a care taker CEO that hangs on longer but most are brought in to effect some thing, they have demonstrated they can do in the past. Maybe its move the target demographic for the product, major re-branding, off shoring efforts; but something along those lines. They can either do it or they can't and at the end of the 18-24 months its time for them to go. Even if successful as being good at getting one of those projects that sucks up an entire corporations' focus and doing day to day well after the dust settles are different skills and its rare one guy has both.
I don't disagree with anything you said, but just as much as its not DRM (borked), its not the game play (borked) but the marketing failure he is being ousted for.
From what I have seen there is simply no indication anyone writing official communications from EA recognizes the problems from our perspective. As far as they are concerned they think "he did not sell it right", and as far as the investors/sheep/dollars and cents all play together they might be correct.
Yea its pretty disappointing as product but I don't think that is what is driving the musical chairs game starting to play out at EA.
Exactly this. The sequester is a prefect example. The big arguments against it are this its ill timed, and second that its indiscriminate. I won't speak to former because its off topic but the later illustrates your point. The sequester is not bad solution because its indiscriminate; that is in fact the only reason why even the very very minor spending reduction it amounts to could be accomplished at all.
Sure in a perfectly sane world we would identify the least effective, most out dated, most abused, least needed programs and make cuts there. Our government has [d]evolved to a point where it can't accomplish that anymore though. The first is it really is actually a hard question the number of budget items is mind blowing, coupled with the fact that you could never guess in may cased what services an agency, office,..., actually provides without conducting weeks of interviews. The second more germane reason to this discussion is that every line item is someones sacred cow, or gravy train.
If you eliminate one of those line items those people suddenly have a big interest in hiring one of the lobbyists to go wine, dine, and blow (or provide blow to; depending on the members preferred forms of recreation) enough CONgress persons to get the legislation amended. Naturally these guys no how to spin it too. Even though as a libertarian I am pretty convinced our government has become a dangerous corrupt mess and only its ineptitude spares us real horror; I still believe most legislation is originally enacted with good intentions. So when you talk about any one item it always sound reasonable. "It only costs a few million and think of all the undernourished bullfrogs that get a second chance at life; oh and TEH JOBS!; also we can't let TEH TERRORISTS WIN!"
It becomes impossible to make the argument anyone thing will really benefit the bottom line. You can't justify causing one group so much pain to accomplish so little, in the way of reform. People just are not wired to see how a million here, and million there add up to a trillion. The numbers are just separated by to much magnitude. If on the other hand you indiscriminately cut everything. You make everyone suffer some loss, but not enough to justify the cost of a lobbying effort and maybe less able to afford it.
The same applies to industry issues. The IP lobby has gotten used to just getting ever stronger protections whenever any new technology threatens them. You'll never convince anyone they should be made to give anything they have up. If we all stick together and remain universally opposed to enacting new protections, and continue to frame the debate about being pro-freedom though we can probably block legislation like this. Do it long enough and the market will out grow the current players. They will become marginalized and nobody will care about them because disruptive technologies will have replaced them in our daily lives. Just like nobody much cares about laws regulating horse cart safety; other than small pockets of Amish here and there.
True it would not give them access to existing stuff and its true lots of revenue is derived from the back catalogs, so no its not as if the existing record companies would collapse over night but as Google becomes the producer/publisher for an ever growing slice of new content; and lands more and more of the contracts with the already big name artists; the revenue to old records companies will slowly start to dry up.
Additionally Google probably snap up rights valuable back catalogs from struggling labels in need of quick cash. If Apple gets in on the game with the billions sitting in cash; they can both finance a lot of production and buy up valuable blocs of IP (as long as they are very very careful and smart about the later).
Not without gathering a army of lawyers like never before seen, first to dot every I and cross every T; and I say that well aware Google probably has more lawyers than I could count. The content industry types are experts at separating even the most sophisticated investors from their money and leaving them with nothing to show for it.
Just look at every tech firm that has ever attempted to buy a content company. Its almost universally the case that some how the former owners manage to outright abscond with or otherwise impair any intellectual property or talent. Hollywood folk CAN'T BE TRUSTED to deal fairly; the tech industry never gets what they think they are buying. Which is why Netfix is smart to build their own content production capabilities rather than try and buy an existing studio.
Google would more likely be better off simply out record company-ing the record companies. Google has access to eyeballs to promote talent; they have outlets to market product directly to consumers, and can afford to let the artists have a bigger cut. If they really smart they make that cut almost 100% of the direct revenue (sales of music files; licensing of content to other media companies) and just draw their own profit from ads. The existing record industry probably could not match the dollars, Google with get the artists, and the RIAA ilk will get court dates for the bankruptcy hearings.
Google, Amazon, and Apple or some combination there of is well positioned to simply gut the existing record industry. Google probably the best because they have the least to loose in terms of reprisals.
Yes you can if the species is entirely gone. The "hard definition" is can to individuals breed and produce fertile offspring. So while we may have some of their DNA still in our population mostly they are now considered to be a district species, so they are extinct. An interesting question is could you breed a Neanderthal and a modern person, and would the offspring be fertile, I wounded if we are different species under the older firmer definition.
You know what's really funny, is that some people use sea salt because they think it contains less sodium. I'm not even kidding.
Well the difference is probably to small to matter but its likely the case the gram for gram a substance labeled "sea salt" does have less sodium than one labeled "table salt"; the former likely being less pure; containing other stuff besides NaCl.
except that electricity is only 6-12 cents a kilowatt hour. So for a huge portion of users that might only need the thing to be on an hour or two per day why they check some websites, and handle e-mails; its not an issue.
Yes if its a machine that you use all day, or is on all the time power efficiency matters on the bottom line, but its simply not the case for equipment that gets less run time, even if its one the bottom end of power efficiency (within the context of PCs and Laptops).
Making a VPN or something like tor available is not an act of war because its passive. Its the people using the VPN to violate their countries laws that are breaking laws. Is Colt manufacturing guns an act of war against China? No obviously but say furnishing them along with a full range of modern navy equipment to Tiwan at rock bottom prices might be; except no even that is not so interpreted in that way.
I don't see to many nations declaring Voice of America and act of war either even though that is ostensibly a US Government propaganda machine; deliberately broadcasting into territories controlled by unfriendly (in many cases) nations.
Finally so what if it is an act of war. Some wars should be fought and if we can win them with websites, flyers, and radio; I'd much rater do it that way than with guns, drones, and boots.
One thing that I have never understood is why is Backtrack/Kali a distro in the first place. Why not just release a set of packages with a meta package to require the others if you chose deb, or rpm, if you want to run on Ubuntu/Debian/RH/Centos or as like a Slackware diskset with tag files if you go that way?
I can understand most users not wanted to plot the packages into their regular install they actively use. There are lots of tools that need setuid etc and specific versions of libraries you might not want around on the system for other reasons. Still if it was just a package set it would make it easy to install in a Linux container or chroot environment without having to run in a full VM. It would make it much easier to install a subset of the functionality if you have domain specific needs on your main install as well. At the same time it would make it no harder to install on a VM or dedicated portable, just install the distro than slap the packages on. Its not as if anyone doing anything useful with msf etc can't manage to do installpkg kali-*.tgz, or apt get kali or whatever.
Don't take the is post as knocking the project; I really mean it as just asking a question and stating some reasons why I think a different approach might make some sense. This is an amazingly well put together tool. I am sure there is a ton of effort that went in continues to into getting all those packages built and playing nice with each other. Lots of the code and build scripts etc for those tools are not exactly what you would ordinarily call release ready. Having tried to package some of them myself along the way I fully aware of this. I know the maintainers also have to put lots of effort into making sure they don't package anything that really is malicious too; which is no small task.
I think your analogy is a little off. An employer will rarely let an employee start dictating terms; and ignoring parts of the original contract they don't like. I am sure my boss would not tolerate me deciding that I am not staying past 3 most days and not bothering to come in at all on Tuesdays. Especially while I demand more salary to feed a hungry kitten at home.
The DPRK is doing just that. They insist everyone gives them handouts, while they work on their little nuclear toys and generally agitating and griefing their neighbors. If everyone is afraid to put them in their place, they get to make the rules. The armistice means exactly nothing. If they say its canceled, its canceled. They do whatever they want compliant with agreement or otherwise and we all let them. I think what we actually have at this point is a twisted form of MAD (that exists independently of their nukes). The DPRK does not start shooting because they know they are getting trampled, whether its South Korea and the USA curb stomping them; or if they happen to find themselves in the middle of the strange US/China proxy war it might touch off. At the same time even though A US, China conflict would be terrible for everyone else; to so everyone just stands off.
claims that it has canceled the 1953 Armistice although the UN notes this cannot be done unilaterally
Only in the imagination of diplomats is unilateral cancellation of an armistice impossible. The rest of us know what the North Koreans know; that they can start shooting anytime they want.
There is a *HUGE* difference between wearing a rude headset and recording/sharing/analyzing/uploading everything seen and heard possibly 100% of the time with Big Brother vs. people taking out a cell phone and snapping a few photos or video clips every now and then.
No there used to be a huge difference. With number of camera phones and such floating around an facebook doing not just tagging but facial recognition. There is effectively not difference. Its rapidly becoming one giant surveillance cloud.
I am not sure what the answers are or how to approach the problem or even if it really is a problem; but the reality is that with ubiquity of camera devices, folks recent proclivity for uploading them to more or less publicly accessible websites and tag them, while those sites also correlate across users, doing geo location matching and face recognitions; unless a facility out right bans all photography you have or will soon have no hope of privacy. This is true with or without Google getting in on the game.
Correct we have someone being threatened with 30 years because of what amounts to trespassing a violating a click thru contract. Aaron's death is nobodies fault but his own, he his life he had agency in that. That does not make the behavior of the state any less disgusting this man was abused and threaten with punishments that in no way fit the crime.
Frankly it's people like Eric holder who should be stood against the wall.
I think comparing Holder to a used car salesman is really unfair to used car salesmen. I know which one I'd rather trust my assets, lively hood, and personal freedom to and it's not Holder
I find this funny. I have been a Slackware user both personally for about 15 years and professionally for about 10 years.
I was recently given a Mac at work to test our stuff out on Mac OS. I have made a real effort to move all my daily work flow to the machine for the sake of really giving Mac OS a serious eval and trying to overcome the difference in familiarity.
First off I have had anything but a just works experience. I have had to find and delete cache files to unbreak the app store. Re-install various packages because something went wrong the first time, xcode, office, and java.
All in all my take away has been Slackware ever since version 13.0 or so has offered a better out of box experience than Mac OS X. XFCE 4.10 is much much better it terms of UI, features, and even eye candy. Having spent a month or so using a Mac 8 hours a day now; I can honestly say I'd never recommend one to anybody; not novice, nor expert. Truthfully the Aunt Tilly's out there and the I must have some proprietary closed application crowd are still better off on Windows and GNU/Linux/X.org/XFCE is better for everyone else. I would put Mac Os at the bottom of heap all around.
You mean how the Obama administration is busily advocating the SCOTUS strike down prop 8 in CA after the voters decided to not recognize same sex marriage, like that.
Frankly I am opposed to gay marriage too, because I think government needs to get out of the marriage business not start doing more of it. Who you are or are not married to should be between you, your partner and your god. Wether your employer, Church, or car wash recognizes it is their own business.
Google is not a good example just yesterday, their 8.8.8.8 dns server was returning anything for www.youtube.com ( no not NXDOMIN ) just nothing would time out. Yet every other query I could think to send it worked fine. It was really odd actually. Gmail was down just a couple months ago. Slate even had an article about how debilitating it was for everyone.
Again its about not enabling someone to get your password in the first place. Rotation absolutely helps with that in the even a master password database is stolen. There are any number of reasons you might not be aware of that as well, not the least of which is an admin who has rights to copy the file decides to do so. He might find it very useful to be able to brute force the CEOs passwords and take a look around at the companies financial statements or his mailbox with out appearing in any logs for example and without having to tamper with logs, which he might also get caught doing.
As far as passwords like mypassword1, followed by mypassword2 there are simple technical methods to prevent users from doing that as well and they should be employed. Passwords written down are big problem, which is why I suggested in the vast majority of situations make the passwords complex enough to stand up for 90 days and not requiring users to change them more often than that. One thing we suggest to people is if you absolutely have to write down a password keep it in your wallet/purse. You will usually know right away if its gone missing and change your password immediately or phone the helpdesk to have your account locked if this happens.
The security guys that argue passwords should not expire are crappy security guys. Passwords should be long enough and not expire at to great a frequency, I would say probably not less than 90 days. Many password attacks are inside jobs. Did the guy who does the backups take home a copy of the sam database? If you don't rotate your passwords he can probably brute force them if they are weak pretty quickly. They might hold up several months if they are strong. Once he gets a password to a privileged account or a valuable account like C?O he is now free to do things and it will be hard to account for them or prove who did it. That is one of the biggest reasons to rotate passwords.
Certificate expiration is important as well. You talk about revocation. That only works if the system can get a revocation list or reach a oscp sever. There are plenty of cases where a system may need to validate a certificate where it does not have access to the specified revocation authority. That is probably not the case with the Azure cloud but certainly is true of a device like a smart phone which moves between networks. Often the most you can do in this situation is assume if everything else is okay the certificate is valid or fail. If you go with the former at least having an expiration date forces the presenter of the certificate to "re-authenticate" with the authority at some point to get a new cert. Otherwise that 'revoked' certificate would seem to be authentic to any device that can't do a revocation check either forever or until the CA certificate expires.
Not quite useless. In colder climates we call them "Self propelled hot water bottles." Get a good ( a matter of luck mostly ) and it will come when its called.
Cats also can be very effective detection systems. Mine will let me know about a dripping faucet, tree branch that has started rubbing the side the house etc; and anything making a new noise. She is very effective pre-diagnostic tool. Also at least a few times over the past years made her self useful as pest control.
Once last summer I opened the porch door to the outside an a mouse ran in (I think they live in garden ). I called the cat pointed at the mouse. She had it in my hand in 5min. I tossed it back into the garden to go about his business. It was unharmed; well physically anyway I am sure it was traumatic. Had I had to corner that mouse myself I would have been moving tables and generally tearing the place apart. The cat just basically watched it for moment and and then pounced.
Now I will readily concede that a dog could have probably do all these things just as well or better as the cat does; even the mousing. That said the cat is very low maintenance by comparison. I have had both. I don't have to walk the cat, I can leave an little extra food down; if I am not coming home some evening. The cat can handle herself for at least 48 hours. Same goes if you actually want to travel with your pet. Dogs on log (14+ hour) road trips are pain.
Slashdot Mirror
The most fun thing to do would be hunt it in the air. Have your own drone with a camera so you can fly it from an known location.
Next you need to mount a couple short tubes on it with shotgun shells at the back. Replace the primers in the shells with something you can ignite electrically.
Just get near enough and blasting the police drone out of the sky should be chicken shoot.
I would be willing to entrain the argument if your device is set the the manufacturers default published password with no banner making it clear the service is supposed to be publicly accessible; its not very analogue to breaking and entering.
Its much more like you have locks on your house but don't use them; and someone lets themselves in, has a look around does no harm and does not remove anything. No its still not allowed, you can't just march around someones private property with no expectation you would reasonably be permitted and wanted there. That said its not a serious crime either, its simple trespassing.
That is really all this amounted to here. Everyone here getting so bent about it needs to get a sense of proportion.
Will I certainly agree that the government should have no-role in determining what we cannot ingest of our on fully informed free will. You're statement that it accomplished nothing is false.
Domestic violence fell by almost 50% during the prohibition years for instance. There was also a substantial drop in alcohol related related deaths during the period.
So actually the temperance movement/prohibition was quite successful addressing the social ills it sought to address. Even if it did create new and by some judgments more serious problems and cross a moral boundary infringing freedom in a way that continues to harm our nation today.
CEOs at companies the size of EA often have very short tenures; and no even abject failures are not necessarily career enders. It really comes down to investor perceptions. If the company is/was a mess to start with or the objective (I'll get to that) is thought to have not made any sense; they usually go on to other things without much trouble. Yes the existing board and management always blame the departing CEO for their ills if things are not great because lets face it, if you have to assign blame who better than they guy/gal who isn't there anymore? This works well because blaming the blaming the CEO (even if completely undeserved) is credible enough to protect the company from share holder legal actions or votes that might require other board-members or management to be removed.
Often CEO's will be moving on to "pursue other interests", "spend time with families", etc almost regardless of success or failure. Sure companies that are experiencing really good time might bring in a care taker CEO that hangs on longer but most are brought in to effect some thing, they have demonstrated they can do in the past. Maybe its move the target demographic for the product, major re-branding, off shoring efforts; but something along those lines. They can either do it or they can't and at the end of the 18-24 months its time for them to go. Even if successful as being good at getting one of those projects that sucks up an entire corporations' focus and doing day to day well after the dust settles are different skills and its rare one guy has both.
I don't disagree with anything you said, but just as much as its not DRM (borked), its not the game play (borked) but the marketing failure he is being ousted for.
From what I have seen there is simply no indication anyone writing official communications from EA recognizes the problems from our perspective. As far as they are concerned they think "he did not sell it right", and as far as the investors/sheep/dollars and cents all play together they might be correct.
Yea its pretty disappointing as product but I don't think that is what is driving the musical chairs game starting to play out at EA.
Exactly this. The sequester is a prefect example. The big arguments against it are this its ill timed, and second that its indiscriminate. I won't speak to former because its off topic but the later illustrates your point. The sequester is not bad solution because its indiscriminate; that is in fact the only reason why even the very very minor spending reduction it amounts to could be accomplished at all.
Sure in a perfectly sane world we would identify the least effective, most out dated, most abused, least needed programs and make cuts there. Our government has [d]evolved to a point where it can't accomplish that anymore though. The first is it really is actually a hard question the number of budget items is mind blowing, coupled with the fact that you could never guess in may cased what services an agency, office, ..., actually provides without conducting weeks of interviews. The second more germane reason to this discussion is that every line item is someones sacred cow, or gravy train.
If you eliminate one of those line items those people suddenly have a big interest in hiring one of the lobbyists to go wine, dine, and blow (or provide blow to; depending on the members preferred forms of recreation) enough CONgress persons to get the legislation amended. Naturally these guys no how to spin it too. Even though as a libertarian I am pretty convinced our government has become a dangerous corrupt mess and only its ineptitude spares us real horror; I still believe most legislation is originally enacted with good intentions. So when you talk about any one item it always sound reasonable. "It only costs a few million and think of all the undernourished bullfrogs that get a second chance at life; oh and TEH JOBS!; also we can't let TEH TERRORISTS WIN!"
It becomes impossible to make the argument anyone thing will really benefit the bottom line. You can't justify causing one group so much pain to accomplish so little, in the way of reform. People just are not wired to see how a million here, and million there add up to a trillion. The numbers are just separated by to much magnitude. If on the other hand you indiscriminately cut everything. You make everyone suffer some loss, but not enough to justify the cost of a lobbying effort and maybe less able to afford it.
The same applies to industry issues. The IP lobby has gotten used to just getting ever stronger protections whenever any new technology threatens them. You'll never convince anyone they should be made to give anything they have up. If we all stick together and remain universally opposed to enacting new protections, and continue to frame the debate about being pro-freedom though we can probably block legislation like this. Do it long enough and the market will out grow the current players. They will become marginalized and nobody will care about them because disruptive technologies will have replaced them in our daily lives. Just like nobody much cares about laws regulating horse cart safety; other than small pockets of Amish here and there.
True it would not give them access to existing stuff and its true lots of revenue is derived from the back catalogs, so no its not as if the existing record companies would collapse over night but as Google becomes the producer/publisher for an ever growing slice of new content; and lands more and more of the contracts with the already big name artists; the revenue to old records companies will slowly start to dry up.
Additionally Google probably snap up rights valuable back catalogs from struggling labels in need of quick cash. If Apple gets in on the game with the billions sitting in cash; they can both finance a lot of production and buy up valuable blocs of IP (as long as they are very very careful and smart about the later).
Not without gathering a army of lawyers like never before seen, first to dot every I and cross every T; and I say that well aware Google probably has more lawyers than I could count. The content industry types are experts at separating even the most sophisticated investors from their money and leaving them with nothing to show for it.
Just look at every tech firm that has ever attempted to buy a content company. Its almost universally the case that some how the former owners manage to outright abscond with or otherwise impair any intellectual property or talent. Hollywood folk CAN'T BE TRUSTED to deal fairly; the tech industry never gets what they think they are buying. Which is why Netfix is smart to build their own content production capabilities rather than try and buy an existing studio.
Google would more likely be better off simply out record company-ing the record companies. Google has access to eyeballs to promote talent; they have outlets to market product directly to consumers, and can afford to let the artists have a bigger cut. If they really smart they make that cut almost 100% of the direct revenue (sales of music files; licensing of content to other media companies) and just draw their own profit from ads. The existing record industry probably could not match the dollars, Google with get the artists, and the RIAA ilk will get court dates for the bankruptcy hearings.
Google, Amazon, and Apple or some combination there of is well positioned to simply gut the existing record industry. Google probably the best because they have the least to loose in terms of reprisals.
Yes you can if the species is entirely gone. The "hard definition" is can to individuals breed and produce fertile offspring. So while we may have some of their DNA still in our population mostly they are now considered to be a district species, so they are extinct. An interesting question is could you breed a Neanderthal and a modern person, and would the offspring be fertile, I wounded if we are different species under the older firmer definition.
You know what's really funny, is that some people use sea salt because they think it contains less sodium. I'm not even kidding.
Well the difference is probably to small to matter but its likely the case the gram for gram a substance labeled "sea salt" does have less sodium than one labeled "table salt"; the former likely being less pure; containing other stuff besides NaCl.
except that electricity is only 6-12 cents a kilowatt hour. So for a huge portion of users that might only need the thing to be on an hour or two per day why they check some websites, and handle e-mails; its not an issue.
Yes if its a machine that you use all day, or is on all the time power efficiency matters on the bottom line, but its simply not the case for equipment that gets less run time, even if its one the bottom end of power efficiency (within the context of PCs and Laptops).
Making a VPN or something like tor available is not an act of war because its passive. Its the people using the VPN to violate their countries laws that are breaking laws. Is Colt manufacturing guns an act of war against China? No obviously but say furnishing them along with a full range of modern navy equipment to Tiwan at rock bottom prices might be; except no even that is not so interpreted in that way.
I don't see to many nations declaring Voice of America and act of war either even though that is ostensibly a US Government propaganda machine; deliberately broadcasting into territories controlled by unfriendly (in many cases) nations.
Finally so what if it is an act of war. Some wars should be fought and if we can win them with websites, flyers, and radio; I'd much rater do it that way than with guns, drones, and boots.
One thing that I have never understood is why is Backtrack/Kali a distro in the first place. Why not just release a set of packages with a meta package to require the others if you chose deb, or rpm, if you want to run on Ubuntu/Debian/RH/Centos or as like a Slackware diskset with tag files if you go that way?
I can understand most users not wanted to plot the packages into their regular install they actively use. There are lots of tools that need setuid etc and specific versions of libraries you might not want around on the system for other reasons. Still if it was just a package set it would make it easy to install in a Linux container or chroot environment without having to run in a full VM. It would make it much easier to install a subset of the functionality if you have domain specific needs on your main install as well. At the same time it would make it no harder to install on a VM or dedicated portable, just install the distro than slap the packages on. Its not as if anyone doing anything useful with msf etc can't manage to do installpkg kali-*.tgz, or apt get kali or whatever.
Don't take the is post as knocking the project; I really mean it as just asking a question and stating some reasons why I think a different approach might make some sense. This is an amazingly well put together tool. I am sure there is a ton of effort that went in continues to into getting all those packages built and playing nice with each other. Lots of the code and build scripts etc for those tools are not exactly what you would ordinarily call release ready. Having tried to package some of them myself along the way I fully aware of this. I know the maintainers also have to put lots of effort into making sure they don't package anything that really is malicious too; which is no small task.
I think your analogy is a little off. An employer will rarely let an employee start dictating terms; and ignoring parts of the original contract they don't like. I am sure my boss would not tolerate me deciding that I am not staying past 3 most days and not bothering to come in at all on Tuesdays. Especially while I demand more salary to feed a hungry kitten at home.
The DPRK is doing just that. They insist everyone gives them handouts, while they work on their little nuclear toys and generally agitating and griefing their neighbors. If everyone is afraid to put them in their place, they get to make the rules. The armistice means exactly nothing. If they say its canceled, its canceled. They do whatever they want compliant with agreement or otherwise and we all let them. I think what we actually have at this point is a twisted form of MAD (that exists independently of their nukes). The DPRK does not start shooting because they know they are getting trampled, whether its South Korea and the USA curb stomping them; or if they happen to find themselves in the middle of the strange US/China proxy war it might touch off. At the same time even though A US, China conflict would be terrible for everyone else; to so everyone just stands off.
claims that it has canceled the 1953 Armistice although the UN notes this cannot be done unilaterally
Only in the imagination of diplomats is unilateral cancellation of an armistice impossible. The rest of us know what the North Koreans know; that they can start shooting anytime they want.
There is a *HUGE* difference between wearing a rude headset and recording/sharing/analyzing/uploading everything seen and heard possibly 100% of the time with Big Brother vs. people taking out a cell phone and snapping a few photos or video clips every now and then.
No there used to be a huge difference. With number of camera phones and such floating around an facebook doing not just tagging but facial recognition. There is effectively not difference. Its rapidly becoming one giant surveillance cloud.
I am not sure what the answers are or how to approach the problem or even if it really is a problem; but the reality is that with ubiquity of camera devices, folks recent proclivity for uploading them to more or less publicly accessible websites and tag them, while those sites also correlate across users, doing geo location matching and face recognitions; unless a facility out right bans all photography you have or will soon have no hope of privacy. This is true with or without Google getting in on the game.
Correct we have someone being threatened with 30 years because of what amounts to trespassing a violating a click thru contract. Aaron's death is nobodies fault but his own, he his life he had agency in that. That does not make the behavior of the state any less disgusting this man was abused and threaten with punishments that in no way fit the crime.
Frankly it's people like Eric holder who should be stood against the wall.
I think comparing Holder to a used car salesman is really unfair to used car salesmen. I know which one I'd rather trust my assets, lively hood, and personal freedom to and it's not Holder
I did not go in and screw anything up. I opened up the app store put in my apple id; and tried to download some things. No work-y.
This was completely out of box. Initial setup screen direct to app store. What are you going to tell me I clicked it wrong?
I find this funny. I have been a Slackware user both personally for about 15 years and professionally for about 10 years.
I was recently given a Mac at work to test our stuff out on Mac OS. I have made a real effort to move all my daily work flow to the machine for the sake of really giving Mac OS a serious eval and trying to overcome the difference in familiarity.
First off I have had anything but a just works experience. I have had to find and delete cache files to unbreak the app store. Re-install various packages because something went wrong the first time, xcode, office, and java.
All in all my take away has been Slackware ever since version 13.0 or so has offered a better out of box experience than Mac OS X. XFCE 4.10 is much much better it terms of UI, features, and even eye candy. Having spent a month or so using a Mac 8 hours a day now; I can honestly say I'd never recommend one to anybody; not novice, nor expert. Truthfully the Aunt Tilly's out there and the I must have some proprietary closed application crowd are still better off on Windows and GNU/Linux/X.org/XFCE is better for everyone else. I would put Mac Os at the bottom of heap all around.
You mean how the Obama administration is busily advocating the SCOTUS strike down prop 8 in CA after the voters decided to not recognize same sex marriage, like that.
Frankly I am opposed to gay marriage too, because I think government needs to get out of the marriage business not start doing more of it. Who you are or are not married to should be between you, your partner and your god. Wether your employer, Church, or car wash recognizes it is their own business.
Google is not a good example just yesterday, their 8.8.8.8 dns server was returning anything for www.youtube.com ( no not NXDOMIN ) just nothing would time out. Yet every other query I could think to send it worked fine. It was really odd actually. Gmail was down just a couple months ago. Slate even had an article about how debilitating it was for everyone.
Again its about not enabling someone to get your password in the first place. Rotation absolutely helps with that in the even a master password database is stolen. There are any number of reasons you might not be aware of that as well, not the least of which is an admin who has rights to copy the file decides to do so. He might find it very useful to be able to brute force the CEOs passwords and take a look around at the companies financial statements or his mailbox with out appearing in any logs for example and without having to tamper with logs, which he might also get caught doing.
As far as passwords like mypassword1, followed by mypassword2 there are simple technical methods to prevent users from doing that as well and they should be employed. Passwords written down are big problem, which is why I suggested in the vast majority of situations make the passwords complex enough to stand up for 90 days and not requiring users to change them more often than that. One thing we suggest to people is if you absolutely have to write down a password keep it in your wallet/purse. You will usually know right away if its gone missing and change your password immediately or phone the helpdesk to have your account locked if this happens.
The security guys that argue passwords should not expire are crappy security guys. Passwords should be long enough and not expire at to great a frequency, I would say probably not less than 90 days. Many password attacks are inside jobs. Did the guy who does the backups take home a copy of the sam database? If you don't rotate your passwords he can probably brute force them if they are weak pretty quickly. They might hold up several months if they are strong. Once he gets a password to a privileged account or a valuable account like C?O he is now free to do things and it will be hard to account for them or prove who did it. That is one of the biggest reasons to rotate passwords.
Certificate expiration is important as well. You talk about revocation. That only works if the system can get a revocation list or reach a oscp sever. There are plenty of cases where a system may need to validate a certificate where it does not have access to the specified revocation authority. That is probably not the case with the Azure cloud but certainly is true of a device like a smart phone which moves between networks. Often the most you can do in this situation is assume if everything else is okay the certificate is valid or fail. If you go with the former at least having an expiration date forces the presenter of the certificate to "re-authenticate" with the authority at some point to get a new cert. Otherwise that 'revoked' certificate would seem to be authentic to any device that can't do a revocation check either forever or until the CA certificate expires.
Not quite useless. In colder climates we call them "Self propelled hot water bottles." Get a good ( a matter of luck mostly ) and it will come when its called.
Cats also can be very effective detection systems. Mine will let me know about a dripping faucet, tree branch that has started rubbing the side the house etc; and anything making a new noise. She is very effective pre-diagnostic tool. Also at least a few times over the past years made her self useful as pest control.
Once last summer I opened the porch door to the outside an a mouse ran in (I think they live in garden ). I called the cat pointed at the mouse. She had it in my hand in 5min. I tossed it back into the garden to go about his business. It was unharmed; well physically anyway I am sure it was traumatic. Had I had to corner that mouse myself I would have been moving tables and generally tearing the place apart. The cat just basically watched it for moment and and then pounced.
Now I will readily concede that a dog could have probably do all these things just as well or better as the cat does; even the mousing. That said the cat is very low maintenance by comparison. I have had both. I don't have to walk the cat, I can leave an little extra food down; if I am not coming home some evening. The cat can handle herself for at least 48 hours. Same goes if you actually want to travel with your pet. Dogs on log (14+ hour) road trips are pain.