How often does IP spoofing really happen these days on the Internet? Not very often, if ever. Any ISP running routers that don't prevent this should be de-linked.
It's possible that new exploits will come to light, and more IP spoofing will occur, but I don't think it's a major issue.
It's much more likely that someone hacks into Company A and then begins attacking Company B. Is it really a problem if Company B fires back? Even if they don't, both of their connections will already be at full capacity (depending on the type of the attack). The actual machines doing the attacking will be virtually useless for the duration of the attack anyway. Does it matter if Company B takes them down by DoS'ing them?
...the DOS counter-attack would be issued only from the original target's subnet...
Not necessarily.
What stops company X from making a "pact" with company Y? If company X is getting DoS'd, then company Y helps defend by launching their own counter-strike.
Dangerous? Yes.
Liability issues? Yes.
Effictive? Maybe. Probably more than current methods. If it doesn't stop the current DoS, maybe it will prevent them in the future.
Surely someone will implement a counter-strike system in the next 5 years. Let's see what happens!
"8005551212@messaging.nextel.com" works fine for me, and I don't think we need a ".mobile" until someone shows a very good reason to make one.
1) It's a lot of letters to type.
2) http://nextel.mobile/ just looks weird as hell.
3) It will break some applications (more than.info already did possibly)
4) I don't believe that it's necessary (or even convenient for a significant number of people)
Many websites now use an insecure connection (HTTP) to shop, add items to your cart, and process your checkout. Even the final order form page is sent over HTTP, but the form POST is set to use HTTPS.
This is fine by me. Everything up to that point doesn't need to be encrypted. However, the only way to verify that the form (i.e. credit card #) will be sent over HTTPS is to View Source and look for the POST line. And this makes verifying certificates and encryption methods even harder.
Would it make sense for a tooltip over the Submit button to show the destination of the POST? Or at least whether it's secure? How about some useful items on the right-click menu?
While I'm on the topic...When I right-click and hit View Source, why can't the browser open an editor and scroll to the line of code that I right-clicked on? I know Firefox & IE don't, maybe something else does already..
And I hate to break it to everyone, but while $1 doesn't sound like a whole lot, that probably is about right for what carrying Viacom adds to the package price for each customer.
Regardless of this, it's still an insult to anyone who pays for service to watch these channels on a regular basis. If a customer spends $50/mo. for TV and watches CBS 50% of the time, then it's clearly worth more than $1/mo. to him.
The customer doesn't care what's happening at the other end of the wire. If he can't get the channels he wants, he'll switch providers. That's all there is to it.
Maybe their stock price went up because they're going to charge all customers the usual rate for the next month (minus $1), and they're not going to pay Viacom for the next month.
They're clearly saving more than $1 per customer by not paying Viacom. If they quit paying Viacom now and pissed off customers can't cancel until the next month, they're still going to make a lot of extra dough this month. Even if pissed off customers could cancel immediatly, many won't.
I see a "1.., 2.., and 3. Sell Stock & Profit!" coming..
a consumer who goes to the gas station that is selling gas at $1.50 a gallon but ask you to pay $2.00 a gallon and after you buy gas, they ask you to buy carwash and wiper fluids
Clearly there's a reason that Dish Network is being distinguished from the other television providers. They must have some sort of history with Viacom, I just can't dig it up.
That or they just don't have a history with Viacom, like the other providers have...
It's price-fixing if multiple cartridge companies agree to charge the same price.
It's not price fixing if 1 company requires you to buy their cartridges for their printers and set their own price. A monopoly, maybe, but you don't have to buy their printer if you don't want.
Oh boy. Pretty soon you will be able to go to the store and pick up a "free TV." Banner ads the entire time and for every 10 minutes of TV, you have to watch 5 minutes of commercials.
Don't think you can turn it on and walk away, because we'll randomly make you hit buttons on the TV/remote to make sure you're watching. If you continously hit the button and try to screw our scheme, we'll penalize you by making you watch more!
If batteries were taken for granted like that, I imagine that someone will get the bright idea to hulk out AA batteries to put bullets into them and reseal them.
And once you load them full of bullets, the scanner won't recognize them as batteries anymore.
I've gotten all this done to me on a domestic flight where the only thing in my carry-on was clothes. No batteries, no electronics, no metal.
What's your point?
Dust on solar panels issue
on
Mars Rovers Update
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Every "feature" you add to this thing has its tradeoffs.
1. It's going to weight more.
2. It's another potential failure.
3. IF it fails, it can cause other things to fail (say, for example, a switch sticks ON and it drains the battery)
Not installing a wiper or other device to clear the solar panel wasn't an oversight. They made a (probably) well-informed decision not to install such a device. I think the progress so far is remarkable and should be commended. Hopefully they've learned a lot and can make improvements for the next mission.
Slightly offtopic, but speeding tickets in the US are issued to the driver of the vehicle, not the owner of the vehicle (like a parking ticket).
Can they really write you a ticket if they know that your vehicle was speeding, but they don't know who was driving it? It seems they are using cameras to penalize red-light runners in some cities already, but how are they doing this? If the car isn't registered to me, then I don't get the ticket?
Agreed, but once they fix this, googlers will come up with another way to crawl up on the list (no pun intended). At least the domains-with-all-the-words can easily be found and ignored.
Google seems to have a strict policy on altering results provided by the algorithm, which I think is a wonderful policy and shouldn't be changed without much consideration.
I have the power to track people through P2P, too.
You can get an IP and a P2P nickname. Without a prior relationship (i.e. an email from them), you can't get a name, address, or anything else useful. Without a subpeona for their ISP at least.
If you have the keys and are in the car, you've demonstrated your intention to drive.
And if I'm in my RV passed out on the couch with my keys in my pocket? And it takes the cop 5 minutes to wake me up? Did I still "demonstrate intention to drive"?
Slashdot Mirror
It's possible that new exploits will come to light, and more IP spoofing will occur, but I don't think it's a major issue.
It's much more likely that someone hacks into Company A and then begins attacking Company B. Is it really a problem if Company B fires back? Even if they don't, both of their connections will already be at full capacity (depending on the type of the attack). The actual machines doing the attacking will be virtually useless for the duration of the attack anyway. Does it matter if Company B takes them down by DoS'ing them?
Not necessarily.
What stops company X from making a "pact" with company Y? If company X is getting DoS'd, then company Y helps defend by launching their own counter-strike.
Dangerous? Yes.
Liability issues? Yes.
Effictive? Maybe. Probably more than current methods. If it doesn't stop the current DoS, maybe it will prevent them in the future.
Surely someone will implement a counter-strike system in the next 5 years. Let's see what happens!
"8005551212@messaging.nextel.com" works fine for me, and I don't think we need a ".mobile" until someone shows a very good reason to make one.
1) It's a lot of letters to type. .info already did possibly)
2) http://nextel.mobile/ just looks weird as hell.
3) It will break some applications (more than
4) I don't believe that it's necessary (or even convenient for a significant number of people)
This is absolutely beautiful. Where do I send the check for the number of hours you're going to save me over the next 50 years?
THANKS!
The simple answer: NO.
The sophisticated answer: Many years of schooling, and I'm still working on it...I'll keep you updated.
This is fine by me. Everything up to that point doesn't need to be encrypted. However, the only way to verify that the form (i.e. credit card #) will be sent over HTTPS is to View Source and look for the POST line. And this makes verifying certificates and encryption methods even harder.
Would it make sense for a tooltip over the Submit button to show the destination of the POST? Or at least whether it's secure? How about some useful items on the right-click menu?
While I'm on the topic...When I right-click and hit View Source, why can't the browser open an editor and scroll to the line of code that I right-clicked on? I know Firefox & IE don't, maybe something else does already..
Regardless of this, it's still an insult to anyone who pays for service to watch these channels on a regular basis. If a customer spends $50/mo. for TV and watches CBS 50% of the time, then it's clearly worth more than $1/mo. to him.
The customer doesn't care what's happening at the other end of the wire. If he can't get the channels he wants, he'll switch providers. That's all there is to it.
They're clearly saving more than $1 per customer by not paying Viacom. If they quit paying Viacom now and pissed off customers can't cancel until the next month, they're still going to make a lot of extra dough this month. Even if pissed off customers could cancel immediatly, many won't.
I see a "1.., 2.., and 3. Sell Stock & Profit!" coming..
Clearly there's a reason that Dish Network is being distinguished from the other television providers. They must have some sort of history with Viacom, I just can't dig it up.
That or they just don't have a history with Viacom, like the other providers have...
---name censored---
Dish Network Executive
It's not price fixing if 1 company requires you to buy their cartridges for their printers and set their own price. A monopoly, maybe, but you don't have to buy their printer if you don't want.
Don't think you can turn it on and walk away, because we'll randomly make you hit buttons on the TV/remote to make sure you're watching. If you continously hit the button and try to screw our scheme, we'll penalize you by making you watch more!
It doesn't discuss plans to release it in the future. They could be simply cutting their losses...
Seems to me that if you're not going to make a profit you should cease & desist before you lose more money.
If so, please share. If not, you're not giving the FCC the credit they deserve for all of their hard work.
Here's something new and innovative. Where are the patent freaks?
And if so, can I tune to the "mirror" channel so I can use the mirror and watch TV at the same time?
Now that would be cool...
And once you load them full of bullets, the scanner won't recognize them as batteries anymore.
What's your point?
1. It's going to weight more.
2. It's another potential failure.
3. IF it fails, it can cause other things to fail (say, for example, a switch sticks ON and it drains the battery)
Not installing a wiper or other device to clear the solar panel wasn't an oversight. They made a (probably) well-informed decision not to install such a device. I think the progress so far is remarkable and should be commended. Hopefully they've learned a lot and can make improvements for the next mission.
Hindsight is always 20/20...
Can they really write you a ticket if they know that your vehicle was speeding, but they don't know who was driving it? It seems they are using cameras to penalize red-light runners in some cities already, but how are they doing this? If the car isn't registered to me, then I don't get the ticket?
Certainly not the case with a closed-source OS like Windows...
Google seems to have a strict policy on altering results provided by the algorithm, which I think is a wonderful policy and shouldn't be changed without much consideration.
You can get an IP and a P2P nickname. Without a prior relationship (i.e. an email from them), you can't get a name, address, or anything else useful. Without a subpeona for their ISP at least.
How is this considered tracking?
And if I'm in my RV passed out on the couch with my keys in my pocket? And it takes the cop 5 minutes to wake me up? Did I still "demonstrate intention to drive"?
Where do you draw the line?