Dunno if they do it on other countries, but here in Down Under Land INGDirect use a technique which would most likely invalidate any keylogger.
display on screen a randomized matrix of the digits from 0-9
force user to mouse-click to select the digits
never display the digits entered
The only information being tracked is "in session XYZ123ABC user clicked buttons 4, 6, 1 and 9". Those buttons mean absolutely nothing outside of this particular session, and what numbers they do mean is only known to the webserver that generated that page for that session for that user.
If you want to be truly paranoid, use a time-based magic passcode generator (eg like the ones recently implemented by PayPal).
Currently my financial transactions are "reasonably secure", INGDirect will *only* transfer funds to/from my designated account, and both the other financial institutions I deal with use time-based hardware passcode generators in addition to some form of username(or accountname)/password(or pincode) authentication.
You would need to know/have:
My username
my account number
my pincode
my passcode generating keyfob
my password
And the keyfob will be needed for every transaction, not just once for the login.
To be significantly more secure would require absolutely unconditionally never conducting transactions via Duh Intarweb.
America may have many things wrong with it, but in this case (pun intended) it's very nice to see a sitting judge wield a powered nail-gun with such accuracy.
unable to afford leaving their contacts Lets just think about what you said for a moment: I for one don't see a problem.
You the carrier refuse to carry my traffic without limiting my throughput, and insist on rewriting the contract so that I have to pay you more for the same service. you have just violated the terms of our existing contract and given me leave to walk away from it without any consequences. In fact, I might just SUE YOU for violation of contract as well, just to rub salt into the wound.
I think it would be fantastic for a website or group of websites (of adequate size) to put their foot down and cut off any ISP who QOSes them and asks for money. Absolutely
Content providers should co-operatively BAN all traffic from any ISP or carrier who intends to extort rampantly excessive fees and/or threaten to QoS traffic to/from content providers.
As a carrier, if you don't carry the content, they why would anybody purchase bandwidth (transit/whatever) from you.
Remember people: CONTENT IS KING.
Seriously, how many customers would you have (er, keep) if you could not get traffic from (for example):
akamai
BBC
slashdot
youtube
google
ebay
et rade
cnn
How hard would it be for the people running
the top 5 search engines
the top 5 news sites
the top 5 video/photo sites
the top 5 financial/share trading sites
the top 5 e-commerce sites
to band together and implement the appropriate blockages?
People would be laughing at you (yes YOU the Carrier with the overinflated sense of your own importance) for YEARS to come.
one definition of insane is doing the exact same thing over and over and expecting different results. So all that v1@gr@ I've been buying from all those emails I've received, even though it's never helped, is a sign of insanity?
And someone always has to post a comment that proves the world is full of complete retards (usually lurking on/.)
Actually yes, I do "use locks" - however I am not in any way caught up in the fantasy world (eg as inhabited by the RIAA, MPAA, etc) of believing that locking my car/house/etc actually prevents any reasonably organised or determined criminal from stealing anything.
Windows can be smashed, locks can be picked, DRM can be broken.
These measures prevent "casual criminals (aka "most basically honest people") from stealing stuff, they do not prevent massive organized theft/copyright violation (eg stuff MPAA,RIAA claim they're trying to prevent).
There's a well known saying "Locks secure you against honest people" (or words to that effect).
The hard-core/organized/professional criminals have the skills, technology and motivation to bypass these "security measures".
Remember people, locks aren't about making you secure, they're about making you FEEL secure.
s/locks/airport security screening procedures/ s/locks/the department of homeland security/ (well, that and political empire-building and creating a police-state by stealth)
Smokey The Bear Says: Only YOU can prevent the violation of your civil rights "in the interest of National Security".
I must say it's amazing to find there's even one country with a worse broadband deployment than Australia.
Oddly enough their deep well of pain and suffering is due to exactly the same problems we are struggling with here in Down Under land.
the cable was supposed to provide cheaper and faster Web access, but so far that has not happened. Prices remain high because the national telecommunications linked to the cable maintain a monopoly over access, squeezing out potential competitors. No surprises there.
Been There, Done That.
Still have the scars to prove it.
Still hoping one day we'll have a government interest in waking our country up from THIS NEVERENDING NIGHTMARE.
So it's basically degenerated to a star/tree topology at the "home" level. Nothing (other than cost and availability of diverse service providers, obviously) prevents you from getting connections from multiple providers and arranging non-zero redundancy.
And it's always been that way.
Leaf nodes are by definition not part of the magically enmeshed atom-bomb resillient topology.
If you want that, get multiple connections from diverse providers (preferably via diverse technologies) and a router that'll take at least two BGP feeds without choking.
Nextp time you wanna whine about something buddy, try to make an effort to understand at least something about the topic.
This is true in the real world (builders or decorators) so why shouldn't it be true with MS? Microsoft policies have not historically been in sync with "the real world" so why should this be any different?
Face facts people, by and large, in the majority of cases , for all intents and purposes, the United States of America has jumped the shark.
It was once (a long time ago, relatively speaking) the obvious world leader in technical advances, science and research.
This is no longer the case more often than not.
I'm not saying it's dead, I'm not saying all-y'all should mass-exodus like lemmings, but seriously folks - the US of A is getting a little grey and wrinkly these days.
So far all they've done is purchase a large ad company. Nothing really new for Google, they're already very heavily into the online ad market.
Of course, this does give them greater *potential* to do evil.... But considering their past history, previously stated goals (do no evil) and past history of pretty much adhering to said goals I for one would be willing to wait and see exactly what they do with this.
On the flipside - who's whining about this acquisition?.... Microsoft has been leading a bunch of "the competition" and collectively they've been very vocal. Perhaps this is merely sour-grapes that their bid was not sufficient?
This most recent outcry is nothing more than media hype seeking and emotion saturated hand-wringing....Google's proposed acquisition of DoubleClick will give one company access to more information about the Internet activities of consumers than any other company in the world Seriously folks , there's always going to be some company with more access than the others - nothing has changed.
Move along, move along folks. Nothing to see here, move along please.
It's not as if forking magically gets stuff done...
All things being equal, statistically speaking if you do enough forking you're likely to get pregnant. So if that was a goal then you've gotten something done.
And if it's done right, forking can be pretty magic.
dyslexia Audio pronunciation of "dyslexia" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ds-lks-)
n.
A learning disorder marked by impairment of the ability to recognize and comprehend written words.
And it's relevant because the machine correctly detects people who are TERRIFIED not people who are TERRORISTS.
Someone obviously sent out a memo asking for an invention to detect people who are TERRORISTS, but the dyslexic scientist thought they meant people who are TERRIFIED.
Someone hand me a +5 cluebat plated with SARCASM so I can slap this maroon around the head and shoulders for a while.
... Because reality-checks are always not-for-profit;-)
It's well-and-truly-chiched, but "Only YOU can Save The Internet"(r)(tm)(c)(fubar-blingbling)
Sit on yer ass and whine all you like, meanwhile The Man is busily whoring everything you care about to The Corporate Fat Cats.
Take back the government, make it accountable to YOU (Da Peeple). VOTE their silly asses out of administration and send a big "Fork You, Yuh Bahstid" message to everyone who is actively doing their best to screw over the geeks/nerds/and internet-users in general.
Because if YOU don't fight for what you believe in, then WHO WILL?
The plan and simple fact is that forcing me to download a HUGE and INSANELY BLOATED multimedia advertisement is THEFT of my bandwidth.
I have no issue with "reasonable" levels of advertising (small top or bottom banner, google style text ads). But when some multibilliondollar corporation forces me to download half a terabyte of flash animation in order to let me read a news article I think the capitalist pigs have gone too far.
Evidence that they're all a pack of retarded scumbags is abundant - how on earth they decided that "the reason" they're not getting click-throughs is because we "didn't notice" their obnoxious advertising (and therefore they must overlay the entire page with a huge, animated, multimedia all-singing and all-dancing CPU and RAM annihilating ad) is absolutely beyond the vast majority of rational and thinking humanity.
AdBlockers are a valid and valuable tool for internet use, but that doesn't mean I block *all* advertising. Just obnoxious, bandwidth hogging, audio-visual multimedia resource guzzling, CPU stifling crapola.
The fact that it's actually "advertising" is almost irrelevant - I'm blocking "that content" because it's crap, it's irrelevant, it's bloated, and it's unnecessarily consuming MY resources.
erm yeah - so a bug that microsoft created and then subsequently fixed is somehow not a bug? or is somehow a bug that can be blamed on third parties?
Maybe I'm just missing something here.
Slashdot Mirror
- display on screen a randomized matrix of the digits from 0-9
- force user to mouse-click to select the digits
- never display the digits entered
The only information being tracked is "in session XYZ123ABC user clicked buttons 4, 6, 1 and 9". Those buttons mean absolutely nothing outside of this particular session, and what numbers they do mean is only known to the webserver that generated that page for that session for that user.If you want to be truly paranoid, use a time-based magic passcode generator (eg like the ones recently implemented by PayPal).
Currently my financial transactions are "reasonably secure", INGDirect will *only* transfer funds to/from my designated account, and both the other financial institutions I deal with use time-based hardware passcode generators in addition to some form of username(or accountname)/password(or pincode) authentication.
You would need to know/have:
- My username
- my account number
- my pincode
- my passcode generating keyfob
- my password
And the keyfob will be needed for every transaction, not just once for the login.To be significantly more secure would require absolutely unconditionally never conducting transactions via Duh Intarweb.
America may have many things wrong with it, but in this case (pun intended) it's very nice to see a sitting judge wield a powered nail-gun with such accuracy.
Lets just think about what you said for a moment: I for one don't see a problem.
You the carrier refuse to carry my traffic without limiting my throughput, and insist on rewriting the contract so that I have to pay you more for the same service. you have just violated the terms of our existing contract and given me leave to walk away from it without any consequences. In fact, I might just SUE YOU for violation of contract as well, just to rub salt into the wound.
Absolutely
Content providers should co-operatively BAN all traffic from any ISP or carrier who intends to extort rampantly excessive fees and/or threaten to QoS traffic to/from content providers.
As a carrier, if you don't carry the content, they why would anybody purchase bandwidth (transit/whatever) from you.
Remember people: CONTENT IS KING.
Seriously, how many customers would you have (er, keep) if you could not get traffic from (for example):
- akamai
- BBC
- slashdot
- youtube
- google
- ebay
- e
t rade - cnn
How hard would it be for the people running- the top 5 search engines
- the top 5 news sites
- the top 5 video/photo sites
- the top 5 financial/share trading sites
- the top 5 e-commerce sites
to band together and implement the appropriate blockages?People would be laughing at you (yes YOU the Carrier with the overinflated sense of your own importance) for YEARS to come.
In case you were wondering, Apophis is the Greek form of the name for the Egyptian Demon Apep.
Otherwise known as the personification of all that is evil.
Of course, in this case it applies even more so.
Never use a 0.01 Release, especially not in a production environment.
- Quote some random blogger
- who quoted from "some random trashy tabloid" (aka The Sun)
- about "some random music industry has-been" who thinks too much of himself just because he has a knighthood (aka Sir Elton)
And of course it's anybody/anything else's fault that "pop music" today pretty much bites much arse and not due to:So all that v1@gr@ I've been buying from all those emails I've received, even though it's never helped, is a sign of insanity?
Maybe Ads in the Cinemas which literally say "so why would you *steal* a movie" and show someone infringing copyright via the internet?
Dunno bout your country, but those ads are *all* over the cinemas Down Under.
And someone always has to post a comment that proves the world is full of complete retards (usually lurking on /.)
Actually yes, I do "use locks" - however I am not in any way caught up in the fantasy world (eg as inhabited by the RIAA, MPAA, etc) of believing that locking my car/house/etc actually prevents any reasonably organised or determined criminal from stealing anything.
Windows can be smashed, locks can be picked, DRM can be broken.
These measures prevent "casual criminals (aka "most basically honest people") from stealing stuff, they do not prevent massive organized theft/copyright violation (eg stuff MPAA,RIAA claim they're trying to prevent).
DRM is just "an electronic lock".
There's a well known saying "Locks secure you against honest people" (or words to that effect).
The hard-core/organized/professional criminals have the skills, technology and motivation to bypass these "security measures".
Remember people, locks aren't about making you secure, they're about making you FEEL secure.
s/locks/airport security screening procedures/
s/locks/the department of homeland security/ (well, that and political empire-building and creating a police-state by stealth)
Smokey The Bear Says: Only YOU can prevent the violation of your civil rights "in the interest of National Security".
Oddly enough their deep well of pain and suffering is due to exactly the same problems we are struggling with here in Down Under land.
the cable was supposed to provide cheaper and faster Web access, but so far that has not happened. Prices remain high because the national telecommunications linked to the cable maintain a monopoly over access, squeezing out potential competitors.
No surprises there.
Been There, Done That.
Still have the scars to prove it.
Still hoping one day we'll have a government interest in waking our country up from THIS NEVERENDING NIGHTMARE.
Nothing (other than cost and availability of diverse service providers, obviously) prevents you from getting connections from multiple providers and arranging non-zero redundancy.
And it's always been that way.
Leaf nodes are by definition not part of the magically enmeshed atom-bomb resillient topology.
If you want that, get multiple connections from diverse providers (preferably via diverse technologies) and a router that'll take at least two BGP feeds without choking.
Nextp time you wanna whine about something buddy, try to make an effort to understand at least something about the topic.
Microsoft policies have not historically been in sync with "the real world" so why should this be any different?
You would be surprised what I'd do for "a little sugar" these days.
Then again, being slashdot'ers, you probably know exactly where I'm coming from.
Face facts people, by and large, in the majority of cases , for all intents and purposes, the United States of America has jumped the shark.
It was once (a long time ago, relatively speaking) the obvious world leader in technical advances, science and research.
This is no longer the case more often than not.
I'm not saying it's dead, I'm not saying all-y'all should mass-exodus like lemmings, but seriously folks - the US of A is getting a little grey and wrinkly these days.
So far all they've done is purchase a large ad company. Nothing really new for Google, they're already very heavily into the online ad market.
.... But considering their past history, previously stated goals (do no evil) and past history of pretty much adhering to said goals I for one would be willing to wait and see exactly what they do with this.
.... Microsoft has been leading a bunch of "the competition" and collectively they've been very vocal. Perhaps this is merely sour-grapes that their bid was not sufficient?
....Google's proposed acquisition of DoubleClick will give one company access to more information about the Internet activities of consumers than any other company in the world Seriously folks , there's always going to be some company with more access than the others - nothing has changed.
Of course, this does give them greater *potential* to do evil
On the flipside - who's whining about this acquisition?
This most recent outcry is nothing more than media hype seeking and emotion saturated hand-wringing
Move along, move along folks.
Nothing to see here, move along please.
It's not as if forking magically gets stuff done...
All things being equal, statistically speaking if you do enough forking you're likely to get pregnant. So if that was a goal then you've gotten something done.
And if it's done right, forking can be pretty magic.
dyslexia Audio pronunciation of "dyslexia" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ds-lks-) n.
A learning disorder marked by impairment of the ability to recognize and comprehend written words.
And it's relevant because the machine correctly detects people who are TERRIFIED not people who are TERRORISTS.
Someone obviously sent out a memo asking for an invention to detect people who are TERRORISTS, but the dyslexic scientist thought they meant people who are TERRIFIED.
Someone hand me a +5 cluebat plated with SARCASM so I can slap this maroon around the head and shoulders for a while.
The software in the detector picks up uncontrollable tremors in the voice
In plainspeak what this means is the software detects someone who is terrified (terror-fied), as opposed to detecting terrorists.
Sounds like the bastard child of a dyslexic inventor and a paranoid politician to me.
... Because reality-checks are always not-for-profit ;-)
It's well-and-truly-chiched, but "Only YOU can Save The Internet"(r)(tm)(c)(fubar-blingbling)
Sit on yer ass and whine all you like, meanwhile The Man is busily whoring everything you care about to The Corporate Fat Cats.
Take back the government, make it accountable to YOU (Da Peeple). VOTE their silly asses out of administration and send a big "Fork You, Yuh Bahstid" message to everyone who is actively doing their best to screw over the geeks/nerds/and internet-users in general.
Because if YOU don't fight for what you believe in, then WHO WILL?
The plan and simple fact is that forcing me to download a HUGE and INSANELY BLOATED multimedia advertisement is THEFT of my bandwidth.
I have no issue with "reasonable" levels of advertising (small top or bottom banner, google style text ads). But when some multibilliondollar corporation forces me to download half a terabyte of flash animation in order to let me read a news article I think the capitalist pigs have gone too far.
Evidence that they're all a pack of retarded scumbags is abundant - how on earth they decided that "the reason" they're not getting click-throughs is because we "didn't notice" their obnoxious advertising (and therefore they must overlay the entire page with a huge, animated, multimedia all-singing and all-dancing CPU and RAM annihilating ad) is absolutely beyond the vast majority of rational and thinking humanity.
AdBlockers are a valid and valuable tool for internet use, but that doesn't mean I block *all* advertising. Just obnoxious, bandwidth hogging, audio-visual multimedia resource guzzling, CPU stifling crapola.
The fact that it's actually "advertising" is almost irrelevant - I'm blocking "that content" because it's crap, it's irrelevant, it's bloated, and it's unnecessarily consuming MY resources.
erm yeah - so a bug that microsoft created and then subsequently fixed is somehow not a bug? or is somehow a bug that can be blamed on third parties?
Maybe I'm just missing something here.
And to start the ball officially rolling we have the well publicised recent GDI/JPEG vulnerability
Let me be the first to reply to Billy G
You sir, are a liar.