Sorry, stores need crypto signatures or you get browser warnings. Does anybody turn over their banking info without seeing the SSL indications from their browser?
That prevents the problem of somebody bringing in a mobile device and claiming to be you... but doesn't stop you from giving your main password to a false app that asks for it.
CNET is a good fact-checking group, but they've fallen for tricks in the past. They're quick to put out a loud warning when they get tricked and figure it out, but they aren't perfect.
Knowing the number-crunching formula for credit card validation is a one-way result. A "reject" is 100% certainty that the card can't be valid. A "pass" simply means the number could be valid, but doesn't give you any clue that the number will work when you try to use it. Pass too many bad account numbers to be processed, and you'll be noticed.
This flies just as well as me posting the rumor that Psystar was funded by the major computer makers to destroy Apple and Microsoft if they got in front of a crazy judge that believed their arguments.
"Bank of America" is already a reserved word under trademark law. You could say that "bank" is a reserved word, but then you'll accidentally block "iBank" and such. Such problems.
Open source is another way to stop malware... not every user looks at the source, but enough curious ones will put out the warning should anything not be as its marked.
Nice feature, but most software houses see the downside.
Because Apple's vetting has a step in it where they verify the identity of the author. Pull that trick, and people will wonder why their accounts were compromised, and surveys of the users will find that everybody affected used your app. Go to jail, go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect $20.
The OSX platform has an undefeated record against viruses, but that's because any time the bad guys score they claim that the user had to approve the untrustworthy code along the way, which technically makes it a trojan horse.
It's the new buzzwords. Everybody who's got data now seems to have an API which stands for Applications Programming Interface. Programmers use the interface to make... applications. And there's where that word comes from.
iPhone's vetting process has a "AT&T doesn't like it, so Apple will deny" clause that the jailbreak stores don't. Apple then claims that jailbroken apps could be trojans that will overload AT&T's network.
Google seems to be taking a "we'll do what we want and carriers can't stop us" attitude. Good luck with that.
This is something that is far more unlikely to happen on the iPhone because of Apple's strict control and testing of all apps. Even the "jailbreak" stores will reject things that aren't as advertised.
Allow open development, and you've basically got a platform that the bad guys can target. There's already standards for signing code to prove that an app came from who you thought it did.
It's Droid09 software... finally, the makers of Antivirus 2009 and AntiVir have taken their software writing talents to the Android platform! Download now.
Slashdot is giving an image-heavy site a fighting chance by posting another story 2 minutes earlier... but will it be enough to survive the slashdot effect?
I have a personal favorite for an ad that makes no sense today and has to make you wondering what the people back then were thinking. I give you.... The Ode to Why.
There's rumors that Psystar was funded by the major PC makers (Dell, HP, Gateway, or the like) because here's what the situation was.
A: Very likely was the chance EULAs would be proven legal by a court, creating some case law that didn't exist before in the process. B: In a longshot, Apple's EULA would be overturned, creating case law that could be used to kill off many clauses in other ELUAs. Bad news everyone, all ELUAs would fall, and that would break up Microsoft among the other damage.
Now why would they fund Psystar... It's like betting on a single number at extra large roulette wheel. Yep, there's still the house advantage of green spaces, but there's still a huge payoff if the very unlikey event falls your way. Hmm... wanna play? They did. They lost. But the chance of winning times the multiple of the payout if they did seemed attractive to them so it was worth playing.
Excuse me, you've just got a phone call from a Mr. McBride from some Santa Cruz Organization... I think you want to take it.
Furthermore... if you fail to register your Linux and/or BIOS... your computer will start emitting a distress signal (even though that's something only ships at sea should do) and then things will get really weird. It gets even weirder after you do that.Did you not watch TechTV's TechLive?
The stats book I used in college had a table where they computed out the normal distribution equation to a table that the non calc-knowing could look up. Of course, than means that table had to be distributed on finals day.
Now, there's a funny think when you write out a table of values. You have to make an intentional mistake, or you're not able to have an effective copyright because the infringer could claim they did the work themselves.
I wrote a computer program to check the values to four digits (because that was the precision of the table) and found the one mistake. Funny thing, there were people who believed everything in the book had to be perfect... they also seemed to each have a favorite religion book, but the people didn't agree on the same one. The professors were alarmed... they had a problem about to use that value planned for the final...
When we found out there was only one return guy... he also informed us that he was about to take a one week vacation. So, we were about to get five days of zeros, followed by a double-week that wouldn't have been evenly distrusted, plus a customer service impact of people waiting an extra week to get their money back.
I had already become the guy he'd ask to when a tech product came back, so we found a team to try to do his job (not well) in a reasonable amount of time while doing our normal jobs too.
That's why they're not selling the software for $20. They're giving it away free, if they can, with purchase of an overpriced T-Shirt. If they lose, you have an overpriced slightly modified "I'm with stupid." shirt.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, stores need crypto signatures or you get browser warnings. Does anybody turn over their banking info without seeing the SSL indications from their browser?
That prevents the problem of somebody bringing in a mobile device and claiming to be you... but doesn't stop you from giving your main password to a false app that asks for it.
CNET is a good fact-checking group, but they've fallen for tricks in the past. They're quick to put out a loud warning when they get tricked and figure it out, but they aren't perfect.
Knowing the number-crunching formula for credit card validation is a one-way result. A "reject" is 100% certainty that the card can't be valid. A "pass" simply means the number could be valid, but doesn't give you any clue that the number will work when you try to use it. Pass too many bad account numbers to be processed, and you'll be noticed.
So who do you let into the "partner" program without being called biased against a "too small" programming shop?
And that's why certificates can be revoked, and apps can be pulled from the app store after the fact.
This flies just as well as me posting the rumor that Psystar was funded by the major computer makers to destroy Apple and Microsoft if they got in front of a crazy judge that believed their arguments.
"Bank of America" is already a reserved word under trademark law. You could say that "bank" is a reserved word, but then you'll accidentally block "iBank" and such. Such problems.
Open source is another way to stop malware... not every user looks at the source, but enough curious ones will put out the warning should anything not be as its marked.
Nice feature, but most software houses see the downside.
Because Apple's vetting has a step in it where they verify the identity of the author. Pull that trick, and people will wonder why their accounts were compromised, and surveys of the users will find that everybody affected used your app. Go to jail, go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect $20.
The OSX platform has an undefeated record against viruses, but that's because any time the bad guys score they claim that the user had to approve the untrustworthy code along the way, which technically makes it a trojan horse.
It's the new buzzwords. Everybody who's got data now seems to have an API which stands for Applications Programming Interface. Programmers use the interface to make... applications. And there's where that word comes from.
iPhone's vetting process has a "AT&T doesn't like it, so Apple will deny" clause that the jailbreak stores don't. Apple then claims that jailbroken apps could be trojans that will overload AT&T's network.
Google seems to be taking a "we'll do what we want and carriers can't stop us" attitude. Good luck with that.
I didn't start the flame war. It was started by the summary.
Sandboxing is an "always deny" tech that keeps legit applications from working easily. Effective, yes. Going to catch on with the average user, no.
This is something that is far more unlikely to happen on the iPhone because of Apple's strict control and testing of all apps. Even the "jailbreak" stores will reject things that aren't as advertised.
Allow open development, and you've basically got a platform that the bad guys can target. There's already standards for signing code to prove that an app came from who you thought it did.
It's Droid09 software... finally, the makers of Antivirus 2009 and AntiVir have taken their software writing talents to the Android platform! Download now.
Stop kicking me. All these tech products are long discontinued.
Slashdot is giving an image-heavy site a fighting chance by posting another story 2 minutes earlier... but will it be enough to survive the slashdot effect?
I have a personal favorite for an ad that makes no sense today and has to make you wondering what the people back then were thinking. I give you.... The Ode to Why.
There's rumors that Psystar was funded by the major PC makers (Dell, HP, Gateway, or the like) because here's what the situation was.
A: Very likely was the chance EULAs would be proven legal by a court, creating some case law that didn't exist before in the process.
B: In a longshot, Apple's EULA would be overturned, creating case law that could be used to kill off many clauses in other ELUAs. Bad news everyone, all ELUAs would fall, and that would break up Microsoft among the other damage.
Now why would they fund Psystar... It's like betting on a single number at extra large roulette wheel. Yep, there's still the house advantage of green spaces, but there's still a huge payoff if the very unlikey event falls your way. Hmm... wanna play? They did. They lost. But the chance of winning times the multiple of the payout if they did seemed attractive to them so it was worth playing.
Excuse me, you've just got a phone call from a Mr. McBride from some Santa Cruz Organization... I think you want to take it.
Furthermore... if you fail to register your Linux and/or BIOS... your computer will start emitting a distress signal (even though that's something only ships at sea should do) and then things will get really weird. It gets even weirder after you do that.Did you not watch TechTV's TechLive?
The stats book I used in college had a table where they computed out the normal distribution equation to a table that the non calc-knowing could look up. Of course, than means that table had to be distributed on finals day.
Now, there's a funny think when you write out a table of values. You have to make an intentional mistake, or you're not able to have an effective copyright because the infringer could claim they did the work themselves.
I wrote a computer program to check the values to four digits (because that was the precision of the table) and found the one mistake. Funny thing, there were people who believed everything in the book had to be perfect... they also seemed to each have a favorite religion book, but the people didn't agree on the same one. The professors were alarmed... they had a problem about to use that value planned for the final...
When we found out there was only one return guy... he also informed us that he was about to take a one week vacation. So, we were about to get five days of zeros, followed by a double-week that wouldn't have been evenly distrusted, plus a customer service impact of people waiting an extra week to get their money back.
I had already become the guy he'd ask to when a tech product came back, so we found a team to try to do his job (not well) in a reasonable amount of time while doing our normal jobs too.
That's why they're not selling the software for $20. They're giving it away free, if they can, with purchase of an overpriced T-Shirt. If they lose, you have an overpriced slightly modified "I'm with stupid." shirt.