with religous devotion! Tapes have a shelf life measured in decades. Most common (read: IDE and SATA) hard drives have a shelf life of months -- and a run-time life of 3 years tops. I have 8mm tapes from college (15 years old now) that are still perfectly readable (if you can find an exabyte 8200 drive:-)) I don't have a single hard drive from that era with intact data. (there are several SCSI-1 drives that can be low-level formated back into service, but any data that was on them is gone.) Hell, I have pressed CDs and DVDs that haven't survived 15 years.
(Some might say the data I have on tape isn't worth saving for decades.)
Indeed. Take it from someone running a web site on a "Business Cable" connection, it sucks ass. It runs over the exact same system as residential traffic. The only difference... I pay more (a lot more) but get almost exactly the same service. Sure, it says 1M up on paper but they (TW) start dropping traffic at half that -- and that's how they have the network configured.
We switched to a T1 from Speakeasy (resold Covad.) It's 1.5M in both directions all the time; no traffic ever gets dropped. It doesn't drop everytime the power flickers (TW's too cheap and lazy to put(replace) batteries out in the field.) I'll agree it's slow by modern standards, and it's about 3x as expensive, but it works all the time -- and when it doesn't people move their ass to fix it.
Most of what makes a Tivo a Tivo is custom software forwhich there is ZERO legal reason to publish. They make available their changes to the kernel and any other GPL software, as required by the GPL. However, that's not enough to replicate a Tivo. You are perfectly within your rights to remove all the non-GPL, unpublished software from your tivo (which, btw, includes the BIOS) and run your own creation(s) on it. I've done that myself to a old Series 1 -- who's BIOS doesn't check what it's loading. Without Tivo, Inc.'s proprietary parts, it's an expensive doorstop.
Broadcom doesn't release their source code for these devices (wireless radios, switch chips, and SoC's (system-on-chip).) While some versions have floated out into public, they are not 100% complete and are definately NOT current.
Actually, the reason they went back to vxWorks is cost. Linux is not the tiny, simple thing it was a decade ago. A vxWorks system can run in 2M RAM and 1M flash. The most minimal linux system needs twice that -- and 4x for a stable, usable system. The kernel alone won't fit in 1M. (Add IPv6 and you need even more RAM and CPU power.) vxWorks is well designed for small, efficient embeded systems; linux not so much.
One person cannot buy out the entire inventory in one purchase. They get to purchase two then go to the back of the line. Other people will get to purchase one (or two) before you get back to the register to buy another pair.
Actually, that's the entire reason for the txn number. The charge can be fully or partially reversed without knowing the CC number. And it's not necessarily Walmart that kept the txn record; your CC company keeps them for a very long time.
You put that number on file with them; you know it's on file with them. That is a very different situation from storing the number at the point-of-sale without permission. Swiping my card at the register is not permission -- and the PCI rules are very clear on this point. Do you really think Apple is one-way hashing your CC number? I seriously doubt it.
Ah, how quickly people forget the TJ Max fuckup. They were storing every CC number from every transaction as well.
Actually, in typical gov form, they didn't answer the question. Find a lawyer and visit your local law library. At the end of the day, anyone doing business in the USA must accept US currency; you cannot create your own or use any other foreign currency. Limiting denomiations is different from not accepting any at all.
It's prohibited, but that doesn't mean they can't. Just like the locks on your house won't stop a burgler from breaking in.
(Apple should lose their rights to process credit cards (Visa and MasterCard, esp.) But we know nobody will even say anything bad about Apple, much less to them.)
remember that bitch who bought the #1 spot in line in order to buy out the entire stock so she could resell them? How is that fair to the people behind her who waited hours?
Simple. Apple should have learned how to do business by people who've been doing it long before Apple existed... Limit two (2) per person, per purchase. Grocery stores and Walmarts all across the land have been doing this for decades. You can buy as many as you want... 2 at a time. On launch day, that would equate to exactly two -- by the time you got back to the counter the second time, there wouldn't be any left.
The question then becomes who dismantled it? Gizmodo could claim they returned it exactly as they received it. The guy who "found" it could have torn it apart. (I know I'd be tempted to. But I'm not an idiot; I know how much of a pain it is to take apple crap apart with destroying it.)
It's only a "trade secret" as long as reasonable means have been used to keep it a secret. The instant Apple handed it to employees to carry outside the office it ceased to be a trade secret. Hiding it in a fake 3GS case is a nice try, and may work in passing. However, it's instantly outed upon inspection -- even from across the room.
No one is pointing out how the chain of custody is broken, and evidence tampered with, w.r.t. to Apple "inspecting" the phone before handing it over to the police.
Actually, they sorta tried that 10 days ago. 4am May 3rd, they sent a series of "strong signals" at it in an attempt to cause a power failure. It didn't work.
(There was an advisory warning people they'd lose contact with Galaxy 12 from 0400 to 0430 as they did this.)
It's cheaper to do nothing at all -- which is pretty much all that can be done anyway. The disruption to AMC11 will be annoying, but it will only be for a few hours at worst.
This one is, in fact, orbiting at 22,230 miles (based on NASA tracking info.) It's enough of pain in the ass to get a 2ton satellite out there. The shuttle can barely reach a 300 mile orbit. There is simple NO WAY to get out there to fetch it. And since it isn't answering commands, it cannot be de-orbited.
The problem isn't that it's going to smash into anything -- it's drifting at about 1.6mph; you can walk out of it's way. The problem is that it's transponders are still active. It's going to cause multipath issues as it passes through AMC11's orbital slot @ 131W -- there's a window of a few hours (at worst) where ground based systems won't be able to differintiate between the two.
To be fair, Cisco doesn't "cut off" access. You never had access in the first place without a service contract. And that contract includes access to everything -- not just updates and patches but completely new versions and completely different feature sets. Sure Cisco could lock that down a lot more than they ever have, but I don't think there's a need or any finacial motivation.
He wasn't handing over anything to the "cleaning guy". He was asked to give other people access. He was asked to hand over his access (as it was the only one) and refused. On a phone call with God knows who listening, sure, respectfully decline and hand them over in person to known people. If the COO (boss's boss who does get to say who is authorized) asks for the passwords with HR and police in the room, refusing is a bad idea. And there's nothing to suggest he was being ordered to reveal sensitive information to anyone other than the COO -- i.e. write the passwords down and hand them to the COO. After all, that's exactly what he did with the mayor.
the whole point here is that this is a catastrophic management failure
Yes. Yes, it is. He doesn't deserve to be a felon or spend years in jail. The city managers should be taking some of the heat for letting this mess happen in the first place. Specifically, his boss played into his ego by letting him be the network god. I can see Childs' side... the network is his creation; he's put a lot of time an energy into it, and doesn't want to see it ruined. He sees the "reassignment" as a prelude to firing him, and knows they cannot do that while he holds all the cards.
Paranoia. Panic. And a change in the free rein he's had for years. "caused him to panic into error", to quote The Princess Bride.
The passwords were not retrievable. Someone as paranoid as Childs would never store cisco type 7 reversable passwords on the router, even with password recovery disabled.
The configurations are recoverable from systems with password recovery disabled, however it is a complex, disruptive process (read: voids warranty.) (this is not a Cisco approved process. *grin*)
What part of return ALL city property do you not understand? The system passwords ARE city property as much as printed network diagrams, business cards, cellphones, etc. Passwords may not be something that can be returned in the same maner as a cellphone, but that doesn't make them any less of an asset.
Slashdot Mirror
with religous devotion! Tapes have a shelf life measured in decades. Most common (read: IDE and SATA) hard drives have a shelf life of months -- and a run-time life of 3 years tops. I have 8mm tapes from college (15 years old now) that are still perfectly readable (if you can find an exabyte 8200 drive :-)) I don't have a single hard drive from that era with intact data. (there are several SCSI-1 drives that can be low-level formated back into service, but any data that was on them is gone.) Hell, I have pressed CDs and DVDs that haven't survived 15 years.
(Some might say the data I have on tape isn't worth saving for decades.)
Indeed. Take it from someone running a web site on a "Business Cable" connection, it sucks ass. It runs over the exact same system as residential traffic. The only difference... I pay more (a lot more) but get almost exactly the same service. Sure, it says 1M up on paper but they (TW) start dropping traffic at half that -- and that's how they have the network configured.
We switched to a T1 from Speakeasy (resold Covad.) It's 1.5M in both directions all the time; no traffic ever gets dropped. It doesn't drop everytime the power flickers (TW's too cheap and lazy to put(replace) batteries out in the field.) I'll agree it's slow by modern standards, and it's about 3x as expensive, but it works all the time -- and when it doesn't people move their ass to fix it.
Most of what makes a Tivo a Tivo is custom software forwhich there is ZERO legal reason to publish. They make available their changes to the kernel and any other GPL software, as required by the GPL. However, that's not enough to replicate a Tivo. You are perfectly within your rights to remove all the non-GPL, unpublished software from your tivo (which, btw, includes the BIOS) and run your own creation(s) on it. I've done that myself to a old Series 1 -- who's BIOS doesn't check what it's loading. Without Tivo, Inc.'s proprietary parts, it's an expensive doorstop.
Broadcom doesn't release their source code for these devices (wireless radios, switch chips, and SoC's (system-on-chip).) While some versions have floated out into public, they are not 100% complete and are definately NOT current.
Actually, the reason they went back to vxWorks is cost. Linux is not the tiny, simple thing it was a decade ago. A vxWorks system can run in 2M RAM and 1M flash. The most minimal linux system needs twice that -- and 4x for a stable, usable system. The kernel alone won't fit in 1M. (Add IPv6 and you need even more RAM and CPU power.) vxWorks is well designed for small, efficient embeded systems; linux not so much.
(And yes, I deal with both.)
One person cannot buy out the entire inventory in one purchase. They get to purchase two then go to the back of the line. Other people will get to purchase one (or two) before you get back to the register to buy another pair.
Actually, that's the entire reason for the txn number. The charge can be fully or partially reversed without knowing the CC number. And it's not necessarily Walmart that kept the txn record; your CC company keeps them for a very long time.
You put that number on file with them; you know it's on file with them. That is a very different situation from storing the number at the point-of-sale without permission. Swiping my card at the register is not permission -- and the PCI rules are very clear on this point. Do you really think Apple is one-way hashing your CC number? I seriously doubt it.
Ah, how quickly people forget the TJ Max fuckup. They were storing every CC number from every transaction as well.
Actually, in typical gov form, they didn't answer the question. Find a lawyer and visit your local law library. At the end of the day, anyone doing business in the USA must accept US currency; you cannot create your own or use any other foreign currency. Limiting denomiations is different from not accepting any at all.
It's prohibited, but that doesn't mean they can't. Just like the locks on your house won't stop a burgler from breaking in.
(Apple should lose their rights to process credit cards (Visa and MasterCard, esp.) But we know nobody will even say anything bad about Apple, much less to them.)
Which would be a PCI violation -- vendors are NOT allowed to store the CC number any longer than required to execute the transaction.
Simple. Apple should have learned how to do business by people who've been doing it long before Apple existed... Limit two (2) per person, per purchase . Grocery stores and Walmarts all across the land have been doing this for decades. You can buy as many as you want... 2 at a time. On launch day, that would equate to exactly two -- by the time you got back to the counter the second time, there wouldn't be any left.
Where? I've not seen those -- and if they're smart, they've been deleted.
The question then becomes who dismantled it? Gizmodo could claim they returned it exactly as they received it. The guy who "found" it could have torn it apart. (I know I'd be tempted to. But I'm not an idiot; I know how much of a pain it is to take apple crap apart with destroying it.)
All easily obtainable items to begin with. Of course, who would want to steal their identity now?
It's only a "trade secret" as long as reasonable means have been used to keep it a secret. The instant Apple handed it to employees to carry outside the office it ceased to be a trade secret. Hiding it in a fake 3GS case is a nice try, and may work in passing. However, it's instantly outed upon inspection -- even from across the room.
No one is pointing out how the chain of custody is broken, and evidence tampered with, w.r.t. to Apple "inspecting" the phone before handing it over to the police.
Actually, they sorta tried that 10 days ago. 4am May 3rd, they sent a series of "strong signals" at it in an attempt to cause a power failure. It didn't work.
(There was an advisory warning people they'd lose contact with Galaxy 12 from 0400 to 0430 as they did this.)
It's cheaper to do nothing at all -- which is pretty much all that can be done anyway. The disruption to AMC11 will be annoying, but it will only be for a few hours at worst.
This one is, in fact, orbiting at 22,230 miles (based on NASA tracking info.) It's enough of pain in the ass to get a 2ton satellite out there. The shuttle can barely reach a 300 mile orbit. There is simple NO WAY to get out there to fetch it. And since it isn't answering commands, it cannot be de-orbited.
The problem isn't that it's going to smash into anything -- it's drifting at about 1.6mph; you can walk out of it's way. The problem is that it's transponders are still active. It's going to cause multipath issues as it passes through AMC11's orbital slot @ 131W -- there's a window of a few hours (at worst) where ground based systems won't be able to differintiate between the two.
And you honestly think he'd accept anyone else as "qualified"? I don't.
You're lucky. I cannot even login. Their "maintenance" has all sorts of shit broken.
To be fair, Cisco doesn't "cut off" access. You never had access in the first place without a service contract. And that contract includes access to everything -- not just updates and patches but completely new versions and completely different feature sets. Sure Cisco could lock that down a lot more than they ever have, but I don't think there's a need or any finacial motivation.
He wasn't handing over anything to the "cleaning guy". He was asked to give other people access. He was asked to hand over his access (as it was the only one) and refused. On a phone call with God knows who listening, sure, respectfully decline and hand them over in person to known people. If the COO (boss's boss who does get to say who is authorized) asks for the passwords with HR and police in the room, refusing is a bad idea. And there's nothing to suggest he was being ordered to reveal sensitive information to anyone other than the COO -- i.e. write the passwords down and hand them to the COO. After all, that's exactly what he did with the mayor.
Yes. Yes, it is. He doesn't deserve to be a felon or spend years in jail. The city managers should be taking some of the heat for letting this mess happen in the first place. Specifically, his boss played into his ego by letting him be the network god. I can see Childs' side... the network is his creation; he's put a lot of time an energy into it, and doesn't want to see it ruined. He sees the "reassignment" as a prelude to firing him, and knows they cannot do that while he holds all the cards.
Paranoia. Panic. And a change in the free rein he's had for years. "caused him to panic into error", to quote The Princess Bride.
The passwords were not retrievable. Someone as paranoid as Childs would never store cisco type 7 reversable passwords on the router, even with password recovery disabled.
The configurations are recoverable from systems with password recovery disabled, however it is a complex, disruptive process (read: voids warranty.) (this is not a Cisco approved process. *grin*)
What part of return ALL city property do you not understand? The system passwords ARE city property as much as printed network diagrams, business cards, cellphones, etc. Passwords may not be something that can be returned in the same maner as a cellphone, but that doesn't make them any less of an asset.