This incident reminds us of the importance of password security. It is sad to see one weak password responsible for such a breach. I think that it would be a good idea for the future to move away from the traditional unix password. An appropriate replacement would be something similar to RSA passphrase mechanism used by secure shell. A random passphrase with a minimum lenght would be idea. The user is the greatest security hole.
It is foolish to code code dependencies on servers in firmware. There are two problems that result from this. The first is that specified in the article, the denial of service. The second is the high potential for broken network dependencies if, for example the hardcoded site goes offline or the ip address changes. Technically each site should be running their own ntpd to ease the load on the primary servers. ntp syncronization should not be the job of the router, but instead the job of the network administrator.
This is a breach of civil liberties because it is inappropriate search and seizure. People would be forced to undergo medical examinations. People would have their natural freedom seized through tracking. This also has the possibility to eliminate freedom of speech of those tracked. Political gatherings would be infultrated by the Big Brother. Social functions would be infultrated in addition. This may be a part of the unconstitutional war on drugs. This is classism, which is closely intertwined with racism and the family.
But aren't these arguments subjective in nature? Ownership and rights are not natural properties; they are not objectively and discretely embodied truths. The following are the true (albeit complicated) properties of ownership and copyright: "association by cause of modification" (true ownership) and "capability to modify" (true rights). This means that if you modify something you NATURALLY become associated with the said object (source code) and, thus, partake of its ownership. This also menas that you have the right to change what you are capable of changing by any means desired. How would you define evil? In your context it appears as evil is defined as restriction and denial of rights. Copyrights restrict and deny rights to those not holding the copyright, violating natural, unchangeable rights. This is therefore a true "evil". (I wont even bother with the counterpoint (copyright holders deserve to own what they create) as it will take many paragraphs to explain and recounter). What is so insane about a different viewpoint? What is the complete reasoning for each your arguments?
PS. Sorry about being so philosophical but objective logic can be rather verbose:)
Open source is real, it is here, and it works. This sight is of course going to be filled with advocates of open source because it is part of the open source community. Open source in general has no universal agenda that is being "sold." Though slashdot is not quite a serious site, I doubt that they would post biased studies and false statistics (besides the polls). OSS is not nirvana, though Free Software comes closer. It must be acknowledged that there are universal problems with software development that cannot be solved with either OSS or proprietary methods. If you look closely at the history and accomplishments of OSS/Free Software then you will see its value. Not everyone is rich enough to buy quality proprietary software, nor does everyone want to do such.
Slashdot Mirror
This incident reminds us of the importance of password security. It is sad to see one weak password responsible for such a breach. I think that it would be a good idea for the future to move away from the traditional unix password. An appropriate replacement would be something similar to RSA passphrase mechanism used by secure shell. A random passphrase with a minimum lenght would be idea. The user is the greatest security hole.
It is foolish to code code dependencies on servers in firmware. There are two problems that result from this. The first is that specified in the article, the denial of service. The second is the high potential for broken network dependencies if, for example the hardcoded site goes offline or the ip address changes. Technically each site should be running their own ntpd to ease the load on the primary servers. ntp syncronization should not be the job of the router, but instead the job of the network administrator.
This is a breach of civil liberties because it is inappropriate search and seizure. People would be forced to undergo medical examinations. People would have their natural freedom seized through tracking. This also has the possibility to eliminate freedom of speech of those tracked. Political gatherings would be infultrated by the Big Brother. Social functions would be infultrated in addition. This may be a part of the unconstitutional war on drugs. This is classism, which is closely intertwined with racism and the family.
Im in Rhode Island. Its funny to see the blackout stop short of us :)
But aren't these arguments subjective in nature? Ownership and rights are not natural properties; they are not objectively and discretely embodied truths. The following are the true (albeit complicated) properties of ownership and copyright: "association by cause of modification" (true ownership) and "capability to modify" (true rights). This means that if you modify something you NATURALLY become associated with the said object (source code) and, thus, partake of its ownership. This also menas that you have the right to change what you are capable of changing by any means desired. How would you define evil? In your context it appears as evil is defined as restriction and denial of rights. Copyrights restrict and deny rights to those not holding the copyright, violating natural, unchangeable rights. This is therefore a true "evil". (I wont even bother with the counterpoint (copyright holders deserve to own what they create) as it will take many paragraphs to explain and recounter). What is so insane about a different viewpoint? What is the complete reasoning for each your arguments?
:)
PS. Sorry about being so philosophical but objective logic can be rather verbose
Open source is real, it is here, and it works. This sight is of course going to be filled with advocates of open source because it is part of the open source community. Open source in general has no universal agenda that is being "sold." Though slashdot is not quite a serious site, I doubt that they would post biased studies and false statistics (besides the polls). OSS is not nirvana, though Free Software comes closer. It must be acknowledged that there are universal problems with software development that cannot be solved with either OSS or proprietary methods. If you look closely at the history and accomplishments of OSS/Free Software then you will see its value. Not everyone is rich enough to buy quality proprietary software, nor does everyone want to do such.