Does your mother know your still up kiddiot? FYI I posted the link for your dumb ass. Why don't morons like you find something more productive to do with your lives... It baffles me that you idiots run around posting such nonsense.
Here's the information to what I was speaking about for those interested in the above thread I posted.
http://www.brainfingers.com/technical.htm extreme thanks to Michael (don't know if he wants his last name posted) for pointing me in the right direction with the link.
About a month ago I watched a television show about people with disabilities. During the show they had this mind control based program attached to a person's head which allowed them to think of which way to turn things. The program was dropped by the USAF (or they said it was) but continues for paraplegics.
I don't recall the complete set up they had, but it seemed like electrical wiring attached to the backside of the persons head allowed them to think about moving objects in a specific direction, sent signals to their wheelchairs or in another case implanted motors in one crippled persons hand to commit the actions.
Anyways the USAF was testing it previously since they were stating that pilots had too many buttons, controls, gauges to monitor, so they were looking for alternative methods of having them manuever the aircraft when they were flying. If I'm not mistaken it (the technology) was highly used in NASA as well.
So aside from all this semi informative stuff. I would rather have NASA spend time fscking around to get things done properly then to keep having them waste money crashing, and losing aircraft.
the great "conspiracy theorist" theory
on
The DNA Bomb
·
· Score: 2
So I post relevant information and I'm a conspiracy theorist? I wonder how that got tossed into the loop? FYI I recently watched a program on PBS about the effects of war on the environment about two weeks ago. I guess the guys who produced it must be conspirators as well.
If you take a quick look at the effects of war you would know that most countries break the Geneva convention with their weapons via way of the chemicals used to create the weapons, the aftereffects of explosions, and the overall aftereffects of simple things like residue created from smoke, intermixing with other toxins such as carbon monoxide, etc., to form other forms of deadly toxins that kill quite similar to this.
So excuse me for opening up someone's eyes with factual based information. Next time I'll dig really deep into bogus information like crop circle theories to post some unsubstantied bullshit information, this way next time you could _really_ call me a conspiracy theorist. Oh sure I see your point now, I hijacked the packets used by the New York Times to create that article, then using CIA MKUltra techniques, I implanted the thoughts of those who commented on the excerpts from what I posted, into their brains via methods only a conspirator would know.
You caught me red handed
Is everyone asleep at the wheel?
on
The DNA Bomb
·
· Score: 5
Government has been doing things like this for years via most of their wars. Happened in Bosnia where a lot of their water is contaminated, and their food crops are expected to suffer unless the US intervenes to pay for the clean ups. Happened in Columbia too with their (*cough*bullshit*cough*) war on drugs.
The application of a second "Agent Orange" over the Colombian Amazon, has caused tremendous alarm among international environmentalists and inhabitants of the region. But residents of Southern Colombia and the Ecuadorian border region of Sucumbios are now expecting a new and even greater threat to their health and their ecosystem - the release of a biological control that environmental activists are referring to as "Agent Green".
Fusarium Oxysporum is a fungus native to temperate and tropical zones. In its natural state it is well-known as a plant pathogen that affects the roots and vacular systems of a variety of cultivated plants, causing disintegration of cells leading to withering, rot and death. Doctor David C. Sands, a plant pathologist at the University of Montana and one of the chief researchers on Fusarium Oxysporyum (FO) calls it "an Attila the Hun disease," noting that there are strains of fusarium for virtually every cultivated plant and many wild ones. Some species of fusarium have also been known to cause illness in humans, especially those with depressed immunity from cancer or HIV-AIDS.
There are many instances of these outbreaks of shit going on in everyday life except their quickly hushed, or many people just don't have a strong enough voice to be heard.
A third agreement breached by this joint policy of the U.S. and Colombia is the U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity, signed by 157 nations during the historic meeting in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992. Article 3 of this convention confirms "the obligation to ensure that activities carried out within the jurisdiction of a state or under its control do not threaten the ecological balance within other states." Article 8 binds member parties to "Promote the protection of ecosystems and natural habitats without introducing exotic species that could threaten ecosystems, habitats or species." Article 14c states that "Each member nation will promote the notification and exchange of information regarding activities in its jurisdiction which could foreseeably have adverse effects on the biodiversity of another state, and will notify immediately in case of the emergence in its jurisdiction or control of imminent dangers for biodiversity under the jurisdiction of other states."
That is to say, both Colombia and the U.S. are engaged in chemical and biological warfare in violation of international law and their own
constitutions.
According to the July 6 New York Times report ("Fungus Considered as a Tool to Kill Coca in Colombia"), lawyers at the White House and the State Department spent years debating whether or not the use of Fusarium Oxysporyum violated international conventions on biological warfare. They came to the conclusion that international law would not be violated if Colombia made its own decision to test or use the fungus. One U.S. intelligence official who maintains a stance against the fungus is quoted by the New York Times as saying, "I dont support using a product on a bunch of Colombian peasants that you wouldnt use against a bunch of rednecks growing marijuana in Kentucky. And there is definitely less than unanimous support for this in Colombia."
My site doesn't charge anything since I don't expect anyone to "feed me." Good content for a site should be expected in order for a site to provide some banner ads to those who WANT to advertise on a site to make money. Some of these sites flat out suck (mines included) but that doesn't mean they can't make money on it. Provide strong content to keep stats up then provide advertising rates on your own, or as stated if you have good content your liable to get companies involved with the core of your content to want to pay you to advertise.
How many sites have you been to which target a specific kind of information, often have banner ads of odd companies (away from the sites core content) in rotation. By creating good enough content, keeping stats going a site would be able to determine how to get revenue whether its by banner advertising or product reviews, etc. Its really not that hard, most people are too fscking lazy and want everything handed to them on silver platters, and think by signing up with some "post a banner make some money" scheme is going to pay for the site which is ALWAYS and I repeat ALWAYS going to be a false assumption. The only person who'll win at that game is the company who suckered others into signing on with them, because they in turn, go back to possible clients with stats. Stats that I stated, if good enough should speak for themselves, and generate revenue for those who are smart enough to get their heads out of their asses and make their own rules for their own site.
As for me I don't need money to run my site. Its freely hosted by means only known to us involved with it, and what's the kicker about it, is we get a lot of attention for ourselves in our targeted market, so we get a lot of queries from companies questioning about services we may speak about, so we get to network with others for money, or we often get contract work via the site.
So as I said I'm fine running with my site the way it is, I think for the most part I provide semi good information, I keep people laughing while making them aware of certain situations, they would otherwise not hear of, and many people can take a quick look around and see we're not stupid when we're serious about something. We may act the stupid role, but most of us involved on my site have 7 years plus Unix administration, Network Engineering (CCNA), Security administration skills under our belts and make decent money, and can afford to keep it banner free.
Understandable that many sites would need to pay for hosting, but this is something that should be thought of beforehand by the webmasters. My own site is a hobbyish site, and personally I would rather pay for my own (even though I have free hosting via a good friend) then pimp out with banners only to get shafted down the road.
Its one thing to create a site for your own purposes, then expect others to save your ass via way of advice on how to make money. As I stated if your content is that good, let the stats speak for themselves, post your stats, create your own terms for advertising for companies to look at, and I'm sure somewhere down the line you'll get play.
Listen, I get propositioned by companies involved in the security biz sometimes, and I decline most of their offers since they seem quirky. Show me the money, then we'll talk. If someone is dumb enough to fall for a takl for us, and we'll pay you later deal, then they deserve it. Rule number one in business there are no freebies, and no one is your friend. Once you learn to master that rule you'll be successful with all of the others.
One of the reasons I've never bothered with ads on my sites is because one of a few reasons. 1) I feel its whoring myself, and a site shouldn't have to place ads on their site if their content is good (I push 2-4mill hits a month at times 700k-1mill unique) 2) Don't want ads which aren't themed in accordance to my content 3) companies are crooks.
So let me elaborate on number 3 since it may offend many people who do place ads. Trying to find a surefire method of advertising in these economic times are murder. With so many companies getting tossed, its only a matter of time before most of those "place a banner get paid companies" become completely extinct.
Their business models are often far fetched, marketed with obscurely written hidden agendas to those posting the ads, and there is really no legal measures you can take to defend yourself.
So lets see you place a banner from a company promising x amount of dollars per x amount of hits. Which means unless your pushing mega traffic its usually worthless to the average site. So you now believe you should take them to court, and now have to evaluate the math by doing that. Court costs for instances like this would be astronomical and often cost you more than you would get in return, not to mention drag on for years before you even get anything, PROVIDED, PROVIDED, that the company doesn't go under...
Wow thats a lot to expect to look forward to when dealing with these companies. Maybe some sites should promote advertising to companies on their own. Provide statistical information for their sites, via methods of logging, then promote the sites on their own. You cut out the middle man and the creating of your own banner generating script is not that hard.
Verisign is somewhat of a joke as is PKI (Bruce Schneier doc) but their financial impact is what's going to give them the upper hand no matter what anyone thinks about them. (1)
FUD comes into the game by Congressmen/women who've forgotten to take vitamin clue, and don't fully understand tech, often becoming confused by most of the matters thrown before them. So most are going to be quick to believe the obscure information Verisign throws at them thinking that Verisign is a martyr or meat behind whatever they (Verisign's people) place in their (congressmen/women's) path.
*.Biz I browsed the top post claiming business should have first dibs on registering a.biz TLD, so here's an argument for many to think about where naming is concerned since Apple was cited. Why shouldn't that little mom and pop shop in Littleville USA named Apple have rights to register the domain if they beat Apple to the punch doing so? Shouldn't they have the same rights as the bug boys or are you suggesting that if you have money you should be able to buy your way into something just because government is passing cruddy laws allowing you to do so?
As for ICANN, its truly a shameful organization thats leaning towards catering to their own needs when they had previously set out to make sure no one entity took control of the.com,.net, org, $INSERT_YOUR_TLD_HERE, when now it seems they want to for some reason have total control of it all, when they're only supposed to be laying down the law. Funny organization. Even funnier arguments.
Join the parade. Macki writes "Three weeks ago, Ford Motor Company sued 2600 over a DNS entry pointing FuckGeneralMotors.com at the Ford website.
Lets get some facts straight here. This is slander which is illegal, not only that but it is a waste of Ford's resources via way of bandwidth which is unfair. Aside from that 2600 may be whoring themselves in too broad fashions nowadays to make some outrageous statements for "the cause" well which cause of Hacking/Phreaking does General Motors fall into?
2600 which is a semi good magazine should be a slight bit more responsible with their actions, especially now that they're under the gun with e DVD case. I believe they should have the right to say whatever they want, its an Amendment, but they have no right to point Fuckgeneralmotors at Ford's website. I'm sure Ford never authorized it. They should have just created a virtual directory on their own sites with their own petty propaganda.
What if it were Apple making a "FuckLinux" website which pointed to Microsoft? I'm sure they'd be an uproar.
Get a DLT (digital linear tape) and create a cron script to run nightly/weekly according to your discretion. DLT's have dropped since there are other alternatives, so their inexpensive (considering you have a 15tb set up) or you could always have a Clariion purchased for this. Even a Netapp using bzip2 on a sys will do more justice than people realize. Many companies don't have any idea how important a backup plan is until the shit hits the fan and they're shit out of luck.
Its always good to have at least 90 days worth of backups in case something may have been corrupted, whats more is the storage of that data. You don't want to just leave it lying around. Consider renting small storage space for a monthly dump of the tapes or keep em locked up in a secure place such as a safe, or encrypt the tapes so the average joe can't read it should they get their hands on them (the tapes)
I hate even thinking about the idea of going to a new company, and having to deal with this since its a painstaking task, but once its done, its all a matter of following up on things, and making it part of daily/weekly/monthly work. It gets easier once you've done it and gotten it over with.
This is one of the topics covered in the CISSP exam, I think the CISA also has it. Methods for disaster recovery, which are often ignored by many companies. Often I wonder how much a company has prepared for a disaster, via way of anything imaginable, hurricanes, fires, break-ins, etc.
Personally I think companies grow too fast and focus on growing, growing, growing, rarely stopping to take the time to implement measures against disaster recovery.
One of the things we do @ my place is once every other month we have a sit in with beers, pizza, etc., and focus on security via way of games. Why do you need a safe password is based on a guess your co-workers info to see how much we can gather by knowing them to see if we could guess their pw's, we also have a twist on Jeopardy where we use the names obtained from Attrition.org, and make a question about the company, so we could say "yes this company was owned this/last month" in order to make our workers aware of the risks involved on the `net'.
Its better than ramming security down their throats and constantly lecturing people. We also have little twists on dealing with all sorts of issues, voicemail management to avoid having pw's cracked, social engineering games, and makeshift scenarios where someone comes in to social engineer their way into information.
keep us on our toes;)... For those with higher ranking positions I suggest you go out and get the "Information Management Handbook -- Tipton/Krauss" which has tons of informative information regarding safeguarding data, disaster recovery techniques, etc. Its one of the best books I ever bought.
Thats what filtering is for. Use a firewall to block it all its still not a big deal. People overhype everything and its mother. See the "reality check time" post for what I think is insightful information on what should be done.
It isn't a big deal since any skilled network administrator should have enough of a clue when it comes to blocking spammers. I would hope at least
Joe Average User lets his ISP deal with the spam issue -- filtering, etc. -- and the costs of such services are passed along to him.
So what makes you think ISP's would want spam eliminated if this were the case. Rather they'd look forward to making more money at any cost (remember their a business not your friends) Its the ISP's faults from the get go, since they should be responsible to set up their networks free from the ability of having users send spam via way of "spoofing" or other methods
used by spammers. Set up their networks correctly with the proper outgoing and incoming filters.
If spam was effectively eliminated, either through a technological or legislative solution, these costs would disappear, and either ISPs could pass along the savings to the customer.
Uh... Think about what your saying here. Create a "one rule fits all" situation which would create more chaos then it would help. Why should the US follow laws created in West Bubblefuck and vice versa? Then what? I think you should look into a cybercrime bill the EU is trying to pass which is right along the lines of this... Meaning officials down with the cybercrime law would be able to serve a warrant in their country and have another country honor that warrant. Don't you see the possible abuse of ideas such as yours?
echo enter assholes name
read asshole
asshole=$ashole
nslookup $assholes | grep Address | awk '{print $2}' | grep -v YOUR-NAME-SERVER-GOES-HERE >/tmp/morons
for i in `cat/tmp/morons` ; do echo ipf block in on all from $i/24 to any port = 25 >>/etc/ipf.rules ; done
rm/tmp/morons
Or... you could just...
echo ipf block in on all from $assholes/24 to any port = 25 >>/etc/ipf.rules
I've blocked tons of unwanted shit with little scripts like this... I never understood whats so damn bad about just creating something similar... Besides most of the spam I receive is from completely worthless mail servers that I barely know anyone at. If they need to reach me I'm sure they'll find a way...
Sorry not to troll here, but everyone receives spam. Yes its annoying, no it won't be stopped no matter what many think since laws here, won't apply elsewhere, and vice versa.
When I receive spam takes me about 5 muscles to hit the down arrow, then hit the d key to delete it in mutt. Not a big deal at all. One of the things I do it firewall repetitive hosts that the message traversed through via ipf and its very simple to create a script to just block it via ipf as well or any other firewall your using.
Sorry I know it sounds trollish to post this but the fact remains, spam will always be around on the net simply because you cannot regulate the entire world with a "one rule fits all" scheme.
Personally to me crypto its not a matter of "hiding criminal evidence from the feds" which is the basis of every single argument they'll thwo into the loop. As a citizen of the US you should be entitled as Amended to your right to privacy. What people rarely see is the level of abuse the Feds partake in regarding technology nowadays, abuse that happens on a scale that is barely told out of fear from sounding like an "anti-government" looney ranting about rights.
As I posted in a prior thread, taking a look at some of the cases going down with tech (Jerome Hackenkamp, Jim Bell, and others) its regretful to see no one has truly questioned the methods of the FBI regarding tech. What we do hear about are overhyped situations fed to the media, in order for Big Brother to look like a martyr. (e.g. Notice every month they announce a so called "cyberwar", or expected DoS attacks?) Rarely does any media outlet post situations like the Hackenkamp situation or the Max Vision situation, and the judge flat out gagged the media on the Jim Bell case.
So why is this done? Simple government does not want you to have the right to privacy when it comes to encryption, should they want to screw you as they have others, crypto makes everything more difficult for them to do so. Now when I say screw I literally mean screw. For those who have read the cases what happens is, when gov wants someone they'll use every resource in the book to get them. Even if its something as minimal as spitting on the floor. So to proactive people like Jim Bell, and Max Vision, who are likely to use crypto this makes their job that mich harder, so they take a "crypto is for criminals" attitude on the situation in hopes of proving that because some have used crypto for bad purposes in the past, everyone will as well. Argumentative however this isn't done when dealing with issues such as firearms. Why? Because when you have people like the NRA to voice out and pay politicians off, the situation quickly gets hushed, as opposed to tech where you have a handful of associations which attempt to help but are understaffed/underfunded/underadmined such as EPIC, EFF, and others.
With a UID of 300k that means you've most likely taken another account, or you just opened that up last year around August/September, and if thats the case quit your yapping.
Solution click on another link if the content doesn't appeal to you. So many people whine about the content and articles here, yet the same ones who complain have yet to submit an article they found interesting.
So why are you bitching in reality? How much did it cost you in life to visit this site? Did you have to pay to get here? Did you lose some blood somewhere down the line reading/. or are you just being a troll for the hell of it? Don't cry for me Argentina I troll every so often, but all this whining shit, spork, goatse.cx shit is just lame on any level, and especially the whiney little bitches complaining about the content here.
Shame on the moderator who +1'ed this up, and shame on the one who -1'ses this one down.
If it doesn't appeal to you, then don't bother visiting, you'd save bandwidth when I read here, and alleviate the load on the servers when die harders post.
Could it be the author wrote this book left it on the shelf and avoided the problems which are plaguing the industry at this current time?
This is a future in which the sovereign individual is freed to become as much as she allows.
Wrong, this is a future where many are going to have to tiptoe through all sorts of scenarios to avoid having a future littered with legal worries from all sides of the spectrum. How can you become "freed" from anything when at the rate the tech field is going, we've seen a surge of lawsuits from all walks of life ranging from patents, to copyrights, to any other fabled scenario a company wants to spend money litigating?
Looking at that aspect, I'd say many would become rather restricted and reluctant to promote "the next best thing", or even themselves out of fear of retribution.
Secondly amidst all that nonsense, for those who either don't notice, or ignore the warnings, taking a look at the legal system itself regarding tech, it will only get worse, as laws (which are often so broad and obsolete to a circumstances) prohibits many from acting. (e.g. Jerome Hackenkamp, Max Vision, Keith Henson, Napster [corporations aren't free from actions either], Jim Bell and the list goes on) to promote or revolutionize, or even speak in today's world.
What world is the author living in I'd like to visit? However, Gilder does miss one important point; in the abundance of bandwidth, there becomes a new scarcity of content. In the end, Gilder's book
may best be thought of as a call to arms: start wasting bandwidth, and start working on solving the next problem -- one of novel creation.
How can you expect to solve the next problem when the ones in front of you are ignored? What about taking a realistic approach to focusing on whats on the table now before crying over spilled milk later?
Microsoft has hired Al Gore as a consultant while they plan on having TPC recount the benchmarking process which they labeled as unfair.
"This is ludicrous, no way are those results in any way proof of anything more, and with a 52 billion dollar budget allocated to marketing we'll prove it." stated an anonymous Microsoft spokesperson.
According to an insider, MS is also planning on declaring war on SGI for not using their ZX-10 servers for the test. An SGI spokesperson simply states, "We tried to use the fucking server, but the shit just bluescreened before we even turned the son of bitch on, so we kicked it a few times and chucked that shitty OS for the benchmarking test. Look, in all fairness we tried, but until Microsoft gets their shit together, we're going to try to capitalize on using a free OS such as Linux. Our company isn't do so great anyways so Microsoft can take their licensing and shove it."
After conceding to SGI, Microsoft then contacted Mr. Gore in efforts to gain insight on what not to do when asking for a recount. "We called Al to see where he screwed up asking for a recount so we don't fall victim to the same outcomes. We then tried to have him sell XP licenses at Columbia, but he conceded when pushed too hard." stated the anonymous MS employee.
I'm still waiting on the consortium between the NSA, IBM, Microsoft and Sun to form so I could have a 1gig chip implanted in my head that plugs into any outlet which is connected to a 1terrabit drive created by clustered Clariion's which stores the data in my head for STORAGE PURPOSES ONLY thank you.
A few months ago in my newsletter Crypto-Gram, I talked about Microsoft's system for digitally signing cryptography suits that go into its operating system. The point is that only approved crypto suites can be used, which makes thing like export control easier. Annoying as it is, this is the current marketplace.
Microsoft has two keys, a primary and a spare. The Crypto-Gram article talked about attacks based on the fact that a crypto suite is considered signed if it is signed by EITHER key, and that there is no mechanism for transitioning from the primary key to the backup. It's stupid cryptography, but the sort of thing you'd
expect out of Microsoft.
Suddenly there's a flurry of press activity because someone notices that the second key is called "NSAKEY" in the code. Ah ha! The NSA
can sign crypto suites. They can use this ability to drop a Trojaned crypto suite into your computers. Or so the conspiracy theory goes.
I don't buy it.
First, if the NSA wanted to compromise Microsoft's Crypto API, it would be much easier to either 1) convince MS to tell them the secret key for MS's signature key, 2) get MS to sign an NSA-compromised module, 3) install a module other than Crypto API to break the encryption (no other modules need signatures). It's always easier to break good encryption.
Second, NSA doesn't need a key to compromise security in Windows. Programs like Back Orifice can do it without any keys. Attacking the Crypto API still requires that the victim run an executable (even a Word macro) on his computer. If you can convince a victim to run an untrusted macro, there are a zillion smarter ways to
compromise security.
Third, why in the world would anyone call a secret NSA key "NSAKEY." Lots of people have access to source code within Microsoft; a conspiracy like this would only be known by a few people. Anyone
with a debugger could have found this "NSAKEY." If this is a covert mechanism, it's not very covert.
I see two possibilities. One, that the backup key is just as Microsoft says, a backup key. It's called "NSAKEY" for some dumb reason, and that's that.
Two, that it is actually an NSA key. If the NSA is going to use Microsoft products for classified traffic, they're going to install their own cryptography. They're not going to want to show it to anyone, not even Microsoft. They are going to want to sign their own modules. So the backup key could also be an NSA internal key, so that they could install strong cryptography on Microsoft products for their own internal use.
But it's not an NSA key so they can secretly install weak cryptography on the unsuspecting masses. There are just too many smarter things they can do to the unsuspecting masses.
Theres a company who's owned by the same investors that own GT Interactive (Doom and others), who have something in the works. I wish I remembered their name off hand. Using something that resembles sort of a voting booth, they're able to project an extremely high quality 3d image using mirrors, and something reminiscent of one of the old screen televisions, rgb colored lights from 4 angles that get color and depth values from computer generated output run on I think it was an SGI =( fuck I wish I could remember the name of the company offhand.
Anyways the original intent for these gizmos were for use in trade shows, and things of that nature. On the way out from consulting at the company my friend and I were speaking to some of the game developers at GTI, who stated that they were supposedly slated to do something with the company in the future. (this is rumored so don't quote me)
When I saw the gizmo's though I was impressed as all hell by the images though, and unfortunately the techies responsible for its creation were pricks who didn't care to shred any kind of info on how exactly its run... Anyways I'm hoping someone would have seen something similar at a Linuxworld expo or some other conference, I'm sure its been seen, maybe not payed attention to though.
Oh well as for this company their PDF's tell nothing, but they look colorful, they do say they run an PII @ 800mhz but no words on OS or anything else. And they're huge files for such little information. Will this be another one of those "smell the internet" schemes?
Slashdot Mirror
Does your mother know your still up kiddiot? FYI I posted the link for your dumb ass. Why don't morons like you find something more productive to do with your lives... It baffles me that you idiots run around posting such nonsense.
Here's the information to what I was speaking about for those interested in the above thread I posted.
http://www.brainfingers.com/technical.htm extreme thanks to Michael (don't know if he wants his last name posted) for pointing me in the right direction with the link.
About a month ago I watched a television show about people with disabilities. During the show they had this mind control based program attached to a person's head which allowed them to think of which way to turn things. The program was dropped by the USAF (or they said it was) but continues for paraplegics.
I don't recall the complete set up they had, but it seemed like electrical wiring attached to the backside of the persons head allowed them to think about moving objects in a specific direction, sent signals to their wheelchairs or in another case implanted motors in one crippled persons hand to commit the actions.
Anyways the USAF was testing it previously since they were stating that pilots had too many buttons, controls, gauges to monitor, so they were looking for alternative methods of having them manuever the aircraft when they were flying. If I'm not mistaken it (the technology) was highly used in NASA as well.
So aside from all this semi informative stuff. I would rather have NASA spend time fscking around to get things done properly then to keep having them waste money crashing, and losing aircraft.
2600 being run by Peter Pan
"Asus has..." as opposed to "Asus have..."
So I post relevant information and I'm a conspiracy theorist? I wonder how that got tossed into the loop? FYI I recently watched a program on PBS about the effects of war on the environment about two weeks ago. I guess the guys who produced it must be conspirators as well.
If you take a quick look at the effects of war you would know that most countries break the Geneva convention with their weapons via way of the chemicals used to create the weapons, the aftereffects of explosions, and the overall aftereffects of simple things like residue created from smoke, intermixing with other toxins such as carbon monoxide, etc., to form other forms of deadly toxins that kill quite similar to this.
So excuse me for opening up someone's eyes with factual based information. Next time I'll dig really deep into bogus information like crop circle theories to post some unsubstantied bullshit information, this way next time you could _really_ call me a conspiracy theorist. Oh sure I see your point now, I hijacked the packets used by the New York Times to create that article, then using CIA MKUltra techniques, I implanted the thoughts of those who commented on the excerpts from what I posted, into their brains via methods only a conspirator would know.
You caught me red handed
Government has been doing things like this for years via most of their wars. Happened in Bosnia where a lot of their water is contaminated, and their food crops are expected to suffer unless the US intervenes to pay for the clean ups. Happened in Columbia too with their (*cough*bullshit*cough*) war on drugs.
Read on
There are many instances of these outbreaks of shit going on in everyday life except their quickly hushed, or many people just don't have a strong enough voice to be heard.
My site doesn't charge anything since I don't expect anyone to "feed me." Good content for a site should be expected in order for a site to provide some banner ads to those who WANT to advertise on a site to make money. Some of these sites flat out suck (mines included) but that doesn't mean they can't make money on it. Provide strong content to keep stats up then provide advertising rates on your own, or as stated if you have good content your liable to get companies involved with the core of your content to want to pay you to advertise.
How many sites have you been to which target a specific kind of information, often have banner ads of odd companies (away from the sites core content) in rotation. By creating good enough content, keeping stats going a site would be able to determine how to get revenue whether its by banner advertising or product reviews, etc. Its really not that hard, most people are too fscking lazy and want everything handed to them on silver platters, and think by signing up with some "post a banner make some money" scheme is going to pay for the site which is ALWAYS and I repeat ALWAYS going to be a false assumption. The only person who'll win at that game is the company who suckered others into signing on with them, because they in turn, go back to possible clients with stats. Stats that I stated, if good enough should speak for themselves, and generate revenue for those who are smart enough to get their heads out of their asses and make their own rules for their own site.
As for me I don't need money to run my site. Its freely hosted by means only known to us involved with it, and what's the kicker about it, is we get a lot of attention for ourselves in our targeted market, so we get a lot of queries from companies questioning about services we may speak about, so we get to network with others for money, or we often get contract work via the site.
So as I said I'm fine running with my site the way it is, I think for the most part I provide semi good information, I keep people laughing while making them aware of certain situations, they would otherwise not hear of, and many people can take a quick look around and see we're not stupid when we're serious about something. We may act the stupid role, but most of us involved on my site have 7 years plus Unix administration, Network Engineering (CCNA), Security administration skills under our belts and make decent money, and can afford to keep it banner free.
Understandable that many sites would need to pay for hosting, but this is something that should be thought of beforehand by the webmasters. My own site is a hobbyish site, and personally I would rather pay for my own (even though I have free hosting via a good friend) then pimp out with banners only to get shafted down the road.
Its one thing to create a site for your own purposes, then expect others to save your ass via way of advice on how to make money. As I stated if your content is that good, let the stats speak for themselves, post your stats, create your own terms for advertising for companies to look at, and I'm sure somewhere down the line you'll get play.
Listen, I get propositioned by companies involved in the security biz sometimes, and I decline most of their offers since they seem quirky. Show me the money, then we'll talk. If someone is dumb enough to fall for a takl for us, and we'll pay you later deal, then they deserve it. Rule number one in business there are no freebies, and no one is your friend. Once you learn to master that rule you'll be successful with all of the others.
One of the reasons I've never bothered with ads on my sites is because one of a few reasons. 1) I feel its whoring myself, and a site shouldn't have to place ads on their site if their content is good (I push 2-4mill hits a month at times 700k-1mill unique) 2) Don't want ads which aren't themed in accordance to my content 3) companies are crooks.
So let me elaborate on number 3 since it may offend many people who do place ads. Trying to find a surefire method of advertising in these economic times are murder. With so many companies getting tossed, its only a matter of time before most of those "place a banner get paid companies" become completely extinct.
Their business models are often far fetched, marketed with obscurely written hidden agendas to those posting the ads, and there is really no legal measures you can take to defend yourself.
So lets see you place a banner from a company promising x amount of dollars per x amount of hits. Which means unless your pushing mega traffic its usually worthless to the average site. So you now believe you should take them to court, and now have to evaluate the math by doing that. Court costs for instances like this would be astronomical and often cost you more than you would get in return, not to mention drag on for years before you even get anything, PROVIDED, PROVIDED, that the company doesn't go under...
Wow thats a lot to expect to look forward to when dealing with these companies. Maybe some sites should promote advertising to companies on their own. Provide statistical information for their sites, via methods of logging, then promote the sites on their own. You cut out the middle man and the creating of your own banner generating script is not that hard.
Anyways I stay away from all that crap...
Verisign is somewhat of a joke as is PKI (Bruce Schneier doc) but their financial impact is what's going to give them the upper hand no matter what anyone thinks about them. (1)
.biz TLD, so here's an argument for many to think about where naming is concerned since Apple was cited. Why shouldn't that little mom and pop shop in Littleville USA named Apple have rights to register the domain if they beat Apple to the punch doing so? Shouldn't they have the same rights as the bug boys or are you suggesting that if you have money you should be able to buy your way into something just because government is passing cruddy laws allowing you to do so?
.com, .net, org, $INSERT_YOUR_TLD_HERE, when now it seems they want to for some reason have total control of it all, when they're only supposed to be laying down the law. Funny organization. Even funnier arguments.
FUD comes into the game by Congressmen/women who've forgotten to take vitamin clue, and don't fully understand tech, often becoming confused by most of the matters thrown before them. So most are going to be quick to believe the obscure information Verisign throws at them thinking that Verisign is a martyr or meat behind whatever they (Verisign's people) place in their (congressmen/women's) path.
*.Biz I browsed the top post claiming business should have first dibs on registering a
As for ICANN, its truly a shameful organization thats leaning towards catering to their own needs when they had previously set out to make sure no one entity took control of the
venona: hardcore crypto
Join the parade. Macki writes "Three weeks ago, Ford Motor Company sued 2600 over a DNS entry pointing FuckGeneralMotors.com at the Ford website.
Lets get some facts straight here. This is slander which is illegal, not only that but it is a waste of Ford's resources via way of bandwidth which is unfair. Aside from that 2600 may be whoring themselves in too broad fashions nowadays to make some outrageous statements for "the cause" well which cause of Hacking/Phreaking does General Motors fall into?
2600 which is a semi good magazine should be a slight bit more responsible with their actions, especially now that they're under the gun with e DVD case. I believe they should have the right to say whatever they want, its an Amendment, but they have no right to point Fuckgeneralmotors at Ford's website. I'm sure Ford never authorized it. They should have just created a virtual directory on their own sites with their own petty propaganda.
What if it were Apple making a "FuckLinux" website which pointed to Microsoft? I'm sure they'd be an uproar.
Get responsible 2600
Get a DLT (digital linear tape) and create a cron script to run nightly/weekly according to your discretion. DLT's have dropped since there are other alternatives, so their inexpensive (considering you have a 15tb set up) or you could always have a Clariion purchased for this. Even a Netapp using bzip2 on a sys will do more justice than people realize. Many companies don't have any idea how important a backup plan is until the shit hits the fan and they're shit out of luck.
Its always good to have at least 90 days worth of backups in case something may have been corrupted, whats more is the storage of that data. You don't want to just leave it lying around. Consider renting small storage space for a monthly dump of the tapes or keep em locked up in a secure place such as a safe, or encrypt the tapes so the average joe can't read it should they get their hands on them (the tapes)
I hate even thinking about the idea of going to a new company, and having to deal with this since its a painstaking task, but once its done, its all a matter of following up on things, and making it part of daily/weekly/monthly work. It gets easier once you've done it and gotten it over with.
This is one of the topics covered in the CISSP exam, I think the CISA also has it. Methods for disaster recovery, which are often ignored by many companies. Often I wonder how much a company has prepared for a disaster, via way of anything imaginable, hurricanes, fires, break-ins, etc.
;) ... For those with higher ranking positions I suggest you go out and get the "Information Management Handbook -- Tipton/Krauss" which has tons of informative information regarding safeguarding data, disaster recovery techniques, etc. Its one of the best books I ever bought.
Personally I think companies grow too fast and focus on growing, growing, growing, rarely stopping to take the time to implement measures against disaster recovery.
One of the things we do @ my place is once every other month we have a sit in with beers, pizza, etc., and focus on security via way of games. Why do you need a safe password is based on a guess your co-workers info to see how much we can gather by knowing them to see if we could guess their pw's, we also have a twist on Jeopardy where we use the names obtained from Attrition.org, and make a question about the company, so we could say "yes this company was owned this/last month" in order to make our workers aware of the risks involved on the `net'.
Its better than ramming security down their throats and constantly lecturing people. We also have little twists on dealing with all sorts of issues, voicemail management to avoid having pw's cracked, social engineering games, and makeshift scenarios where someone comes in to social engineer their way into information.
keep us on our toes
Thats what filtering is for. Use a firewall to block it all its still not a big deal. People overhype everything and its mother. See the "reality check time" post for what I think is insightful information on what should be done.
It isn't a big deal since any skilled network administrator should have enough of a clue when it comes to blocking spammers. I would hope at least
Joe Average User lets his ISP deal with the spam issue -- filtering, etc. -- and the costs of such services are passed along to him.
So what makes you think ISP's would want spam eliminated if this were the case. Rather they'd look forward to making more money at any cost (remember their a business not your friends) Its the ISP's faults from the get go, since they should be responsible to set up their networks free from the ability of having users send spam via way of "spoofing" or other methods
used by spammers. Set up their networks correctly with the proper outgoing and incoming filters.
If spam was effectively eliminated, either through a technological or legislative solution, these costs would disappear, and either ISPs could pass along the savings to the customer.
Uh... Think about what your saying here. Create a "one rule fits all" situation which would create more chaos then it would help. Why should the US follow laws created in West Bubblefuck and vice versa? Then what? I think you should look into a cybercrime bill the EU is trying to pass which is right along the lines of this... Meaning officials down with the cybercrime law would be able to serve a warrant in their country and have another country honor that warrant. Don't you see the possible abuse of ideas such as yours?
# !/bin/sh
/tmp/morons
/tmp/morons` ; do echo ipf block in on all from $i/24 to any port = 25 >> /etc/ipf.rules ; done
/tmp/morons
/etc/ipf.rules
# Assholes v.1
echo enter assholes name
read asshole
asshole=$ashole
nslookup $assholes | grep Address | awk '{print $2}' | grep -v YOUR-NAME-SERVER-GOES-HERE >
for i in `cat
rm
Or... you could just...
echo ipf block in on all from $assholes/24 to any port = 25 >>
I've blocked tons of unwanted shit with little scripts like this... I never understood whats so damn bad about just creating something similar... Besides most of the spam I receive is from completely worthless mail servers that I barely know anyone at. If they need to reach me I'm sure they'll find a way...
Sorry not to troll here, but everyone receives spam. Yes its annoying, no it won't be stopped no matter what many think since laws here, won't apply elsewhere, and vice versa.
When I receive spam takes me about 5 muscles to hit the down arrow, then hit the d key to delete it in mutt. Not a big deal at all. One of the things I do it firewall repetitive hosts that the message traversed through via ipf and its very simple to create a script to just block it via ipf as well or any other firewall your using.
Sorry I know it sounds trollish to post this but the fact remains, spam will always be around on the net simply because you cannot regulate the entire world with a "one rule fits all" scheme.
Personally to me crypto its not a matter of "hiding criminal evidence from the feds" which is the basis of every single argument they'll thwo into the loop. As a citizen of the US you should be entitled as Amended to your right to privacy. What people rarely see is the level of abuse the Feds partake in regarding technology nowadays, abuse that happens on a scale that is barely told out of fear from sounding like an "anti-government" looney ranting about rights.
As I posted in a prior thread, taking a look at some of the cases going down with tech (Jerome Hackenkamp, Jim Bell, and others) its regretful to see no one has truly questioned the methods of the FBI regarding tech. What we do hear about are overhyped situations fed to the media, in order for Big Brother to look like a martyr. (e.g. Notice every month they announce a so called "cyberwar", or expected DoS attacks?) Rarely does any media outlet post situations like the Hackenkamp situation or the Max Vision situation, and the judge flat out gagged the media on the Jim Bell case.
So why is this done? Simple government does not want you to have the right to privacy when it comes to encryption, should they want to screw you as they have others, crypto makes everything more difficult for them to do so. Now when I say screw I literally mean screw. For those who have read the cases what happens is, when gov wants someone they'll use every resource in the book to get them. Even if its something as minimal as spitting on the floor. So to proactive people like Jim Bell, and Max Vision, who are likely to use crypto this makes their job that mich harder, so they take a "crypto is for criminals" attitude on the situation in hopes of proving that because some have used crypto for bad purposes in the past, everyone will as well. Argumentative however this isn't done when dealing with issues such as firearms. Why? Because when you have people like the NRA to voice out and pay politicians off, the situation quickly gets hushed, as opposed to tech where you have a handful of associations which attempt to help but are understaffed/underfunded/underadmined such as EPIC, EFF, and others.
Privacy for life
With a UID of 300k that means you've most likely taken another account, or you just opened that up last year around August/September, and if thats the case quit your yapping.
/. or are you just being a troll for the hell of it? Don't cry for me Argentina I troll every so often, but all this whining shit, spork, goatse.cx shit is just lame on any level, and especially the whiney little bitches complaining about the content here.
Solution click on another link if the content doesn't appeal to you. So many people whine about the content and articles here, yet the same ones who complain have yet to submit an article they found interesting.
So why are you bitching in reality? How much did it cost you in life to visit this site? Did you have to pay to get here? Did you lose some blood somewhere down the line reading
Shame on the moderator who +1'ed this up, and shame on the one who -1'ses this one down.
If it doesn't appeal to you, then don't bother visiting, you'd save bandwidth when I read here, and alleviate the load on the servers when die harders post.
Could it be the author wrote this book left it on the shelf and avoided the problems which are plaguing the industry at this current time?
This is a future in which the sovereign individual is freed to become as much as she allows.
Wrong, this is a future where many are going to have to tiptoe through all sorts of scenarios to avoid having a future littered with legal worries from all sides of the spectrum. How can you become "freed" from anything when at the rate the tech field is going, we've seen a surge of lawsuits from all walks of life ranging from patents, to copyrights, to any other fabled scenario a company wants to spend money litigating?
Looking at that aspect, I'd say many would become rather restricted and reluctant to promote "the next best thing", or even themselves out of fear of retribution.
Secondly amidst all that nonsense, for those who either don't notice, or ignore the warnings, taking a look at the legal system itself regarding tech, it will only get worse, as laws (which are often so broad and obsolete to a circumstances) prohibits many from acting. (e.g. Jerome Hackenkamp, Max Vision, Keith Henson, Napster [corporations aren't free from actions either], Jim Bell and the list goes on) to promote or revolutionize, or even speak in today's world.
What world is the author living in I'd like to visit?
However, Gilder does miss one important point; in the abundance of bandwidth, there becomes a new scarcity of content. In the end, Gilder's book
may best be thought of as a call to arms: start wasting bandwidth, and start working on solving the next problem -- one of novel creation.
How can you expect to solve the next problem when the ones in front of you are ignored? What about taking a realistic approach to focusing on whats on the table now before crying over spilled milk later?
Microsoft has hired Al Gore as a consultant while they plan on having TPC recount the benchmarking process which they labeled as unfair.
"This is ludicrous, no way are those results in any way proof of anything more, and with a 52 billion dollar budget allocated to marketing we'll prove it." stated an anonymous Microsoft spokesperson.
According to an insider, MS is also planning on declaring war on SGI for not using their ZX-10 servers for the test. An SGI spokesperson simply states, "We tried to use the fucking server, but the shit just bluescreened before we even turned the son of bitch on, so we kicked it a few times and chucked that shitty OS for the benchmarking test. Look, in all fairness we tried, but until Microsoft gets their shit together, we're going to try to capitalize on using a free OS such as Linux. Our company isn't do so great anyways so Microsoft can take their licensing and shove it."
After conceding to SGI, Microsoft then contacted Mr. Gore in efforts to gain insight on what not to do when asking for a recount. "We called Al to see where he screwed up asking for a recount so we don't fall victim to the same outcomes. We then tried to have him sell XP licenses at Columbia, but he conceded when pushed too hard." stated the anonymous MS employee.
Stay tuned as things get ugly
AO -- removing the dot in dot com
http://www.patentinfo.com/patentinfosearch.htmn t_ search.html (Best of two)
http://www.gibbsgroup.com/patents_etc_cafe/pate
So why didn't I hyperlink it... Because I didnt want to type much nor did I want some retarded goatse.cx forker to ramble on.
I'm still waiting on the consortium between the NSA, IBM, Microsoft and Sun to form so I could have a 1gig chip implanted in my head that plugs into any outlet which is connected to a 1terrabit drive created by clustered Clariion's which stores the data in my head for STORAGE PURPOSES ONLY thank you.
;)
Analysis By People We Trust II: Bruce Schneier
from: sci.crypt
subject: NSA and MS windows
A few months ago in my newsletter Crypto-Gram, I talked about Microsoft's system for digitally signing cryptography suits that go into its operating system. The point is that only approved crypto suites can be used, which makes thing like export control easier. Annoying as it is, this is the current marketplace.
Microsoft has two keys, a primary and a spare. The Crypto-Gram article talked about attacks based on the fact that a crypto suite is considered signed if it is signed by EITHER key, and that there is no mechanism for transitioning from the primary key to the backup. It's stupid cryptography, but the sort of thing you'd
expect out of Microsoft.
Suddenly there's a flurry of press activity because someone notices that the second key is called "NSAKEY" in the code. Ah ha! The NSA
can sign crypto suites. They can use this ability to drop a Trojaned crypto suite into your computers. Or so the conspiracy theory goes.
I don't buy it.
First, if the NSA wanted to compromise Microsoft's Crypto API, it would be much easier to either 1) convince MS to tell them the secret key for MS's signature key, 2) get MS to sign an NSA-compromised module, 3) install a module other than Crypto API to break the encryption (no other modules need signatures). It's always easier to break good encryption.
Second, NSA doesn't need a key to compromise security in Windows. Programs like Back Orifice can do it without any keys. Attacking the Crypto API still requires that the victim run an executable (even a Word macro) on his computer. If you can convince a victim to run an untrusted macro, there are a zillion smarter ways to
compromise security.
Third, why in the world would anyone call a secret NSA key "NSAKEY." Lots of people have access to source code within Microsoft; a conspiracy like this would only be known by a few people. Anyone
with a debugger could have found this "NSAKEY." If this is a covert mechanism, it's not very covert.
I see two possibilities. One, that the backup key is just as Microsoft says, a backup key. It's called "NSAKEY" for some dumb reason, and that's that.
Two, that it is actually an NSA key. If the NSA is going to use Microsoft products for classified traffic, they're going to install their own cryptography. They're not going to want to show it to anyone, not even Microsoft. They are going to want to sign their own modules. So the backup key could also be an NSA internal key, so that they could install strong cryptography on Microsoft products for their own internal use.
But it's not an NSA key so they can secretly install weak cryptography on the unsuspecting masses. There are just too many smarter things they can do to the unsuspecting masses.
Theres a company who's owned by the same investors that own GT Interactive (Doom and others), who have something in the works. I wish I remembered their name off hand. Using something that resembles sort of a voting booth, they're able to project an extremely high quality 3d image using mirrors, and something reminiscent of one of the old screen televisions, rgb colored lights from 4 angles that get color and depth values from computer generated output run on I think it was an SGI =( fuck I wish I could remember the name of the company offhand.
Anyways the original intent for these gizmos were for use in trade shows, and things of that nature. On the way out from consulting at the company my friend and I were speaking to some of the game developers at GTI, who stated that they were supposedly slated to do something with the company in the future. (this is rumored so don't quote me)
When I saw the gizmo's though I was impressed as all hell by the images though, and unfortunately the techies responsible for its creation were pricks who didn't care to shred any kind of info on how exactly its run... Anyways I'm hoping someone would have seen something similar at a Linuxworld expo or some other conference, I'm sure its been seen, maybe not payed attention to though.
Oh well as for this company their PDF's tell nothing, but they look colorful, they do say they run an PII @ 800mhz but no words on OS or anything else. And they're huge files for such little information. Will this be another one of those "smell the internet" schemes?