Heck, this is nothing new. A blogger in Virginia is being sued by a political candidate who failed to file for a primary because he was distracted by the issues the blogger raised. The story is at http://blackvelvetbrucelee.blogspot.com/
There's a whole other layer to CM, which is the issue tracking, requirements tracking, resource management and documentation management piece that probably is more critical than whether you can checkin/checkout changes and be able to back out a change.
We supported a government client where issues were managed with word document templates and emails. It was a disaster, with things getting lost and weekly meetings being the only times decisions were made. They were spending a boatload of money developing something that looked suspiciously like a hobbled version of bugzilla, so we recommended and got approval to stand up bugzilla for issue tracking. It's been a big success and has been expanded to handle requirements management as well.
The key was to set up "products" that matched operational areas for a product rather than thinking that a "product" was defined as a single deliverable. We set up the standard "product" as deliverable, with subcomponents which somewhat matched the functional areas where developer responsibilities were broken down. Then we established a "product" which was essentially an area where management issues could be handled, and had subcomponents for tester access control, requirements definition, external coordination issues and the like. So when we went into testing and found an issue that we decided to defer to a subsequent release, it was moved to the admin area and the requirements subcomponent. This kept policy and requirements control out of the hair of the developers and allowed parallel workflows for requirements, design, development and testing.
It's not a perfect tool for all of that, but it's pretty close to "good enough", and the price is right.
What would I add to this mix if I were God? I would wiki the work-in-process user's manual so developers could flag issues that should be addressed in documentation rather than in code. I would probably wiki and/or subversion the test plans, as word documents utterly suck for test plan management. And I'd spend some time with wiki "special pages" and bugzilla customized components to integrate it all -- linking and content sharing between a wiki and bugzilla would bring the solution set into the 90%+ range of requirements matching.
Coders rarely are the problem in software CM. It's the management, architects, functionals and tester coordination that really has the potential to kill a project. But if you can coordinate all of them well, the flow of functional requirement - use case - design - develop - test - debug - requirement generation & traceability comes together cleanly and raises a development process into a portfolio management/enterprise architecture execution process.
This address space is APNIC, not just China. It includes Taiwan, Korea and plenty of other countries, but not Australia. If you're looking for just the China netspace, I don't know where to find that info. Even if you found it, it would probably consist of a lot of non-contiguous netblocks which whould be difficult to manage.
Think hard before you use such an imprecise hammer like this.
This is from the IP allocation documentation provided on IANA's website. It is an extremely blunt instrument to employ:
058/8 Apr 04 APNIC
059/8 Apr 04 APNIC
060/8 Apr 03 APNIC
061/8 Apr 97 APNIC
121/8 Jan 06 APNIC
122/8 Jan 06 APNIC
123/8 Jan 06 APNIC
124/8 Jan 05 APNIC
125/8 Jan 05 APNIC
126/8 Jan 05 APNIC
202/8 May 93 APNIC
203/8 May 93 APNIC
210/8 Jun 96 APNIC
211/8 Jun 96 APNIC
218/8 Dec 00 APNIC
219/8 Sep 01 APNIC
220/8 Dec 01 APNIC
221/8 Jul 02 APNIC
222/8 Feb 03 APNIC
There are other ranges where APNIC is interspersed with other stuff, but this list gets you all the/8 space which can be blocked conveniently.
Bill's Blacklist is more extensive and gets into the APNIC space that's wedged within other/8 netblocks, and he also identifies other problem children. His list is probably too agressive for your tastes if you're running a public website, though.
...to netblock APNIC space at your firewall. I'm not happy I need to do it, and I wish it wasn't necessary. This continuing saga is only going to accelerate the growing trend to have the great wall not being an internal firewall, but an external one built over time by individual admins tired of these problems.
I have to wonder whether there is a deliberate strategy by the chinese government to encourage the world to cut off access to western sites. Allow every kind of malware, be entirely unresponsive to abuse requests, and wait for the west to defensively wall China off so the chinese government won't have to do it themselves. Pretty stupid strategy long-term, though, so I can't believe it's deliberate.
1. A ubiquitous sensor network that feeds a pattern analysis engine. It would be able to identify who is doing what and under what context. It would differentiate between smoke from the fireplace as you were trying to start a fire and smoke from an unoccupied room. It would see that you forgot to turn on your alarm clock on a Wednesday night, and that the following day is not scheduled as a day off, and arm the alarm clock for you. There wouldn't be a distinct security system, but a overall sensor system that performs security functions as well as domestic management functions.
2. Energy usage optimizing systems. It would know that certain rooms are less frequently occupied and tune HVAC to keep these areas comfortable during periods of expected activity. It would automatically power low-level nighttime lighting when kids wake up in the middle of the night so they can see where they're walking without throwing on full-power illumination. HVAC, lighting and other infrastructure would give you only what you need, only when you need it, and only where you need it.
3. Integrated information management. It would keep a family schedule and keep forgetful husbands from screwing up planning. It would let me know when I'm about to blow a milestone for getting airfare booked. It would track all the precursor requirements for an event and help me stay on track. It would adjust automatically to an email from my mother saying she got sick and we should postpone a visit before I have the chance to check my email myself. It should handle dinnertime phone calls for me and not let the phone ring. If it looks like I'm going to forget to take out the garbage, I'd appreciate a gentle reminder.
4. Alert differentiation. If the dog gets in the garbage and no one happens to notice, fido should get a little jolt from his collar. If the baby exits the crib on her own power, I should get woken up. If there's some knucklehead teenager putting a ladder against my daughter's windowsill, I should get a different warning than if there's a knucklehead trying to get himself shot by breaking in through the back door. Not everything warrants a screaming siren, and when that screaming siren goes off I need to tell me what the problem is.
5. Integrated Context-sensitive Intelligent Agents. I don't have the time to watch everything. Keep an eye on things and give me a summary, or let me know sooner if it's impact is more than informational.
Whois on witlog.com -- shouldn't be too hard for authorities to find this guy -- provided the information was correct in the first place, which it probably isn't. Let's see what else we can dig up...
Domain ID: D3421420-CNO Domain Name: witlog.com Domain Name IDN: witlog.com Creation Date: 2000-09-26 19:18:08 UTC Expiration Date: 2007-09-26 19:18:08 UTC Last Modification Date: 2004-11-26 05:07:14 UTC Sponsoring Registrar: CORE-51 Created by: CORE-51 Updated by: CORE-51 Last Updated By Registrar: CORE-51 Maintainer: 51 Registrant ID: COCO-746754 Registrant Name: Timothy Burke Registrant Organization: Timothy Burke Registrant Address: 8952 S. Kittiwake Street Registrant City: Highlands Ranch Registrant State/Province: Colorado Registrant Postal Code: 80126-5252 Registrant Country: US Registrant Phone Number: +30.34711986 Registrant Fax Number: +. Registrant Email: tburke@ecentral.com Admin ID: COCO-746754 Admin Name: Timothy Burke Admin Organization: Timothy Burke Admin Address: 8952 S. Kittiwake Street Admin City: Highlands Ranch Admin State/Province: Colorado Admin Postal Code: 80126-5252 Admin Country: US Admin Phone Number: +30.34711986 Admin Fax Number: +. Admin Email: tburke@ecentral.com Tech ID: COCO-457403 Tech Name: Marcus Faure Tech Organization: OzNic GmbH Tech Address: Mehrumer Str. 16 Tech City: Voerde Tech State/Province: VIC Tech Postal Code: 46562 Tech Country: DE Tech Phone Number: +49.285596510 Tech Fax Number: +49.2855965117 Tech Email: hostmaster@oznic.de Zone ID: COCO-457402 Zone Name: Marcus Faure Zone Organization: OzNic GmbH Zone Address: Mehrumer Str. 16 Zone City: Voerde Zone State/Province: VIC Zone Postal Code: 46562 Zone Country: DE Zone Phone Number: +49.285596510 Zone Fax Number: +49.2855965117 Zone Email: hostmaster@oznic.de Name Server: ns1.namehost.com Name Server: ns2.namehost.com
Require handing out paper receipts to voters, and make the information on those receipts intelligible to voters so they can easily understand what that receipt means and can compare it to their intent. After all, an unintelligible receipt that the voter can't understand is no better than no receipt at all.
Then set up a table just outside of the polling station, offering to purchase those receipts at the rate of $10 for every receipt showing Democratic party-line voting and $5 for any receipt showing a vote for a Democratic candidate. Have a big sign on the table saying "We'll buy your vote!". Call the press, which is probably unnecessary. Wait for the firestorm to erupt as you overtly demonstrate thwarting the democratic process in an entirely legal manner. You're not REALLY buying votes, you're buying receipts! For extra fun, wear an AFL-CIO jacket while doing this.
Or let's say that the receipt is gobbledygook. Scan the receipt with an imager and have a laptop "decode" what the data means and provide a varying arbitrary value for the receipt. People would think you managed to crack the receipt code and are paying based on how they actually voted. That might ignite an even more significant firestorm.
The other thing open source has on commercial software is speed. Not in the sense that it runs faster, but in the sense of from decision to deployment, it blows commercial software out of the water.
Example: our government client had a roll-your-own configuration management process that involved a hamstrung issue tracking system, emails, emailed spreadsheets and frequent teleconferences. They never were able to complete the test/fix/test/fix release process for software on time without deciding to let some things go unfixed, or hacking out functionality that couldn't make it through the QA process in time. We stood up a linux server running bugzilla on a machine no longer capable of being used as a desktop in a day, the client saw it, loved it, and it's been in production ever since replacing the custom system they spent gobs and gobs of money on.
Why did we win? Because accounting didn't have to get involved to approve a purchase of hardware and/or software. Because something "good enough" could be pulled from apt-get in two minutes rather than having to go through a purchase cycle. If there's an existing solution with some degree maturity out there on sourceforge, from the word "go" to "done" is one heck of a lot faster with open source, largely because the bean counters are eliminated from the cycle.
At least in our shop, the biggest chunk of time spent getting anything done is in obtaining the approvals required in order to spend money. I would imagine that's often encountered elsewhere.
No, the tag construct that I know do not identify a particular database. I can confirm that the following constructs do not contain a database identifier:
EPCglobal
DOD-64 and DOD-96
GID-96
SGTIN-64 and SGTIN-96
SSCC-64 and SSCC-96
SGLN-64 and SGLN-96
GRAI-64 and GRAI-96
GIAI-64 and GIAI-96
I challenge you to identify a tag encoding construct that does have a field that identifies a database.
Actually it would not be. If you understood the construct, then you could derive what the key is. Don't confuse a tag encoding construct with a primary key value.
I was similarly baffled. I work with DoD to develop and implement RFID solutions for transportation and asset accountability, and I've never heard of anyone trying to encrypt the data on an RFID tag. The DOD-64 and DOD-96 passive RFID constructs aren't encrypted, and those are the two DoD-specific constructs used in logistics. It seems like he's talking out of his posterior -- sure it's easy to "crack" the data on an RFID tag, because what is encoded there is not encrypted at all. That's by intentional design.
In the commercial workd, with Wal-Mart and Target the EPC constructs are also undencrypted. So when he talks about 'the most popular tag', I'm really wondering what he thinks that might be. Low-frequency livestock tags? 13.56 MHz access control badges? 900MHz passive Alien squiggle tags? Savi active tags? What the heck is this guy talking about, because none of these "popular" implementations encrypt the data on their tags?
But let's say you managed to "crack" a tag. You got '2F0103047541A430000001F9' (yes, this is a valid construct with minimally munged data). Ok, how about someone tell me how that constitutes a breach of security.
They're both open source, so just create a fork that's API compatible if you really want to. You don't need to use InnoDB's codebranch, you can make your own.
I'm not entirely sure why Oracle decided it needed these storage technologies. Perhaps it's because their failure to develop native storage of numeric datatypes and their other glaring architectural weaknesses are catching up with them, and they want to have a leagl means of rearchitecting their physical storage with third-party code. Maybe they want to take the flagging Oracle Lite product and reengineer it so it'll actually be useful and reliable. There could be all sorts of non-threatening reasons why Oracle might do this.
One thing they can't do is take the open source code away from you and MySQL. What is open source and in the public now, will always be there. What happens to development of these codebases does depend a lot on Oracle, but you have the freedom to make sure it doesn't entirely depend on them. All it takes is some effort on your part.
We can't possibly be responsible for the consequences of our own decisions, eh? Next there's going to be another new dubious reason to herd us all into pay-by-the-hour psychotherapy and expensive brain-altering prescriptions to help us, because we can't possibly freely make a choice of our own free will. Cripes.
How about some of us make good choices, and some of us make not so good choices, and we have to live with the consequences. Unless we're screwing up our neighbor's peace in the process, we can alternatively be left alone to behave wisely or not. Having some shill whining about how we're addicted to having fun, eating things others disapprove of, listening to crap, wearing stupid clothing, or are duped into thinking that Emacs is better than vi.
Any medical X-ray will fry the chip. It's likely that the scatter from a dental X-ray would as well. So get thee to the doctor, and see what happens when the management encounters an unexpected failure. Bound to happen. Frequently. It can't be abused if it isn't working.
This is going to be one of those LF tags, not the 900 MHz passive tags more commonly used, because fluids block those pretty well. Those LF tags are used to track livestock and help figure out who a lost pet belongs to. Reliability there is pretty decent, although livestock dosen't get exposed to the same EMR we humans get.
Easy. Carry a battery-powered baby monitor that uses the 900MHz band in your pocket. Those things are wonderfully capable of farking up any and all passive RFID tag reads. Just about anything that uses the 900MHz band will do. The reflective signal of a passive tag is extremely weak, and any powered emissions source at close proximity will mask an RFID tag's signal. Chances are that since there's no error correction in Gen 1 and Gen 2 tag constructs, the signals from any baby monitor will cause numerous phantom reads as well.
Look at the biggest challenges in passive RFID today, and it'll show you exactly where the vulnerabilities are. Proxomity to metal, proximity to liquids, proximity to other tags, false reads frequency, sensitivity to interference and tag failure rates provide all sorts of opportunities for general mayhem. It don't take much.
Every piece of clothing sold has an ultra thin RFID chip imbeded in the hem. You purchase said clothing with a credit card now said clothing is linked to your name. Now all thats needed is to install scanners at stratigic locations and wham they know who and where you are.
Phooey.
And just how and where does this "linking" happen? Do you think the cash register is going to have an embedded EPC Class 1 Generation 2 RFID tag writer which will for convenience's sake rewrite the tag to include a credit card number? Or would Wal-Mart decide it makes good business sense to host petrabytes of pretty useless data linking credit cards and EPCglobal RFID tag values?
All of these scenarios have a box in the middle of their systems architecture that reads "A miracle occurrs here" where data integration supposedly happens. Until someone figures out a way to perform such miracles, this dog won't hunt.
The scan rate likely isn't the problem -- I've seen scan rates in the several hundreds per second without trouble. In this application it's likely the proximity of the tags to each other that's the hurdle. If the tags have the necessary separation from each other, this could be done fairly easily.
or worse yet, duplicate its data
This is much harder to do. Normally the tags are pretty dumb, they have a hard-coded serial number and that's about it. My understanding is changing it after manufacture is not feasible. Is it possible? Probably. I think there are easier weaknesses to attack though. Social engineering comes to mind.
Devices that can encode Matrics 0+ and Gen 2 tags (which are rewritable) run about $8000. Sure you can duplicate a tag. Problem is getting Gen 2 RFID tags in small quantities is tough. Minimum order for Symbol Squiggle tags is 7,500 at $0.39 a unit for us right now. So you invest about $11,000 so you can counterfeit an RFID tag -- for what???
It's more useful to counterfit UPC barcodes on retail products -- tape over a barcode on an expensive item with the barcode of a less expensive product, and likely the checkout person will not notice. You can do that with an inkjet printer and a shareware 3of9 barcode font today. Don't see a lot of that happening these days. So if that's not a big fraud issue right now, what makes anyone think RFID will be a huge fraud problem in the future with an enormously higher barrier to entry?
There are numerous constructs for the data stored on RFID chips. One of the most popular is to give a gajillion dollars to EPCglobal in order to obtain an EPC Manager Code, which you can then concatenate with a locally-assigned sequence in order to have a globally unique value.
Most of the other constructs work pretty much the same way with:
[construct identification]
[entity identifier]
[sometimes:locally assigned product code] [always:locally assigned serial number]
So for the most part, unless you are a part of the entity that established the last two values, or pay another gajillion dollars to get access to an EPCglobal network which will let you query within that enterprise, or you have some special relationship with that entity and they decide to share data with you, you stand precious little chance of figuring out what the heck that 128 bit value actually represents.
And will the console jockeys recognize the humanity of those they sentence to death?
Probably just as much as the 11B busy pointing his M4 at the enemy and pulling the trigger as much as he can. Do you seriously believe that combat soldiers wrestle with philosophical dilemnas during the heat of combat, and that by doing so they are more perfect members of the human species?
So Lincoln "expressing his hope" in the Gettysburg Address somehow establishes binding law? If you think that presidential edict can replace legislative prerogative, I gotta see what version of the Constitution you're working with.
If you're right though, GWB just made a host of new laws last night with the State of the Union address, which is equivalent in legal authority to the Gettysburg Address. That concept would probably make you a little, er, grumpy I suppose, which might explain this thread a bit.
I really don't think you understand what you're talking about here. You can't take "evasive action" with a TOW or a Dragon in order to prevent the missle from somehow being shot down in flight and have a prayer of hitting your target. Besides, the defensive countermeasure generally used with ATGMs is to lay down suppressive fire in the hopes of distracting the operator. I am unaware of any practice or doctrine that attempts to ballistically intercept an ATGM. There's no specific "technology" used to prevent ATGMs from being intercepted. They just have very short flight times, and have somewhat erratic flight paths (more of a design flaw than a feature -- the more erratic the path is, the harder it is to hit your target).
ATGMs are as related to a ballistic missile as a tricycle is related to a dump truck.
Similarly, a cruise missle such as a tomohawk, which has no evasive capabilities either, is irrelevant to a discussion of ballistic missle interception. The problem there is little different from shooting down a small, low level, and relatively low-speed jet aircraft, and there are plenty of SAM and AAM systems that can do an excellent job of shoooting these down. What parallels you can draw between a tomohawk and a free-flight hypersonic payload entering the atmosphere are fanciful at best.
Amementment 1, United States Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Seems to me that the prohibition on the abridgement of free speech falls on Congress, and the First Amendment does not apply here. You are either in need of reviewing the actual text of the First Amendment, or proposing a rather novel way of interpreting that "Congress" means "The People".
Not that such confusion is absent in discussions regarding other amendments...
Slashdot Mirror
Heck, this is nothing new. A blogger in Virginia is being sued by a political candidate who failed to file for a primary because he was distracted by the issues the blogger raised. The story is at http://blackvelvetbrucelee.blogspot.com/
There's a whole other layer to CM, which is the issue tracking, requirements tracking, resource management and documentation management piece that probably is more critical than whether you can checkin/checkout changes and be able to back out a change.
We supported a government client where issues were managed with word document templates and emails. It was a disaster, with things getting lost and weekly meetings being the only times decisions were made. They were spending a boatload of money developing something that looked suspiciously like a hobbled version of bugzilla, so we recommended and got approval to stand up bugzilla for issue tracking. It's been a big success and has been expanded to handle requirements management as well.
The key was to set up "products" that matched operational areas for a product rather than thinking that a "product" was defined as a single deliverable. We set up the standard "product" as deliverable, with subcomponents which somewhat matched the functional areas where developer responsibilities were broken down. Then we established a "product" which was essentially an area where management issues could be handled, and had subcomponents for tester access control, requirements definition, external coordination issues and the like. So when we went into testing and found an issue that we decided to defer to a subsequent release, it was moved to the admin area and the requirements subcomponent. This kept policy and requirements control out of the hair of the developers and allowed parallel workflows for requirements, design, development and testing.
It's not a perfect tool for all of that, but it's pretty close to "good enough", and the price is right.
What would I add to this mix if I were God? I would wiki the work-in-process user's manual so developers could flag issues that should be addressed in documentation rather than in code. I would probably wiki and/or subversion the test plans, as word documents utterly suck for test plan management. And I'd spend some time with wiki "special pages" and bugzilla customized components to integrate it all -- linking and content sharing between a wiki and bugzilla would bring the solution set into the 90%+ range of requirements matching.
Coders rarely are the problem in software CM. It's the management, architects, functionals and tester coordination that really has the potential to kill a project. But if you can coordinate all of them well, the flow of functional requirement - use case - design - develop - test - debug - requirement generation & traceability comes together cleanly and raises a development process into a portfolio management/enterprise architecture execution process.
Think hard before you use such an imprecise hammer like this.
058/8 Apr 04 APNIC
059/8 Apr 04 APNIC
060/8 Apr 03 APNIC
061/8 Apr 97 APNIC
121/8 Jan 06 APNIC
122/8 Jan 06 APNIC
123/8 Jan 06 APNIC
124/8 Jan 05 APNIC
125/8 Jan 05 APNIC
126/8 Jan 05 APNIC
202/8 May 93 APNIC
203/8 May 93 APNIC
210/8 Jun 96 APNIC
211/8 Jun 96 APNIC
218/8 Dec 00 APNIC
219/8 Sep 01 APNIC
220/8 Dec 01 APNIC
221/8 Jul 02 APNIC
222/8 Feb 03 APNIC
There are other ranges where APNIC is interspersed with other stuff, but this list gets you all the /8 space which can be blocked conveniently.
Bill's Blacklist is more extensive and gets into the APNIC space that's wedged within other /8 netblocks, and he also identifies other problem children. His list is probably too agressive for your tastes if you're running a public website, though.
...to netblock APNIC space at your firewall. I'm not happy I need to do it, and I wish it wasn't necessary. This continuing saga is only going to accelerate the growing trend to have the great wall not being an internal firewall, but an external one built over time by individual admins tired of these problems.
I have to wonder whether there is a deliberate strategy by the chinese government to encourage the world to cut off access to western sites. Allow every kind of malware, be entirely unresponsive to abuse requests, and wait for the west to defensively wall China off so the chinese government won't have to do it themselves. Pretty stupid strategy long-term, though, so I can't believe it's deliberate.
1. A ubiquitous sensor network that feeds a pattern analysis engine. It would be able to identify who is doing what and under what context. It would differentiate between smoke from the fireplace as you were trying to start a fire and smoke from an unoccupied room. It would see that you forgot to turn on your alarm clock on a Wednesday night, and that the following day is not scheduled as a day off, and arm the alarm clock for you. There wouldn't be a distinct security system, but a overall sensor system that performs security functions as well as domestic management functions.
2. Energy usage optimizing systems. It would know that certain rooms are less frequently occupied and tune HVAC to keep these areas comfortable during periods of expected activity. It would automatically power low-level nighttime lighting when kids wake up in the middle of the night so they can see where they're walking without throwing on full-power illumination. HVAC, lighting and other infrastructure would give you only what you need, only when you need it, and only where you need it.
3. Integrated information management. It would keep a family schedule and keep forgetful husbands from screwing up planning. It would let me know when I'm about to blow a milestone for getting airfare booked. It would track all the precursor requirements for an event and help me stay on track. It would adjust automatically to an email from my mother saying she got sick and we should postpone a visit before I have the chance to check my email myself. It should handle dinnertime phone calls for me and not let the phone ring. If it looks like I'm going to forget to take out the garbage, I'd appreciate a gentle reminder.
4. Alert differentiation. If the dog gets in the garbage and no one happens to notice, fido should get a little jolt from his collar. If the baby exits the crib on her own power, I should get woken up. If there's some knucklehead teenager putting a ladder against my daughter's windowsill, I should get a different warning than if there's a knucklehead trying to get himself shot by breaking in through the back door. Not everything warrants a screaming siren, and when that screaming siren goes off I need to tell me what the problem is.
5. Integrated Context-sensitive Intelligent Agents. I don't have the time to watch everything. Keep an eye on things and give me a summary, or let me know sooner if it's impact is more than informational.
Whois on witlog.com -- shouldn't be too hard for authorities to find this guy -- provided the information was correct in the first place, which it probably isn't. Let's see what else we can dig up...
Domain ID: D3421420-CNO
Domain Name: witlog.com
Domain Name IDN: witlog.com
Creation Date: 2000-09-26 19:18:08 UTC
Expiration Date: 2007-09-26 19:18:08 UTC
Last Modification Date: 2004-11-26 05:07:14 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar: CORE-51
Created by: CORE-51
Updated by: CORE-51
Last Updated By Registrar: CORE-51
Maintainer: 51
Registrant ID: COCO-746754
Registrant Name: Timothy Burke
Registrant Organization: Timothy Burke
Registrant Address: 8952 S. Kittiwake Street
Registrant City: Highlands Ranch
Registrant State/Province: Colorado
Registrant Postal Code: 80126-5252
Registrant Country: US
Registrant Phone Number: +30.34711986
Registrant Fax Number: +.
Registrant Email: tburke@ecentral.com
Admin ID: COCO-746754
Admin Name: Timothy Burke
Admin Organization: Timothy Burke
Admin Address: 8952 S. Kittiwake Street
Admin City: Highlands Ranch
Admin State/Province: Colorado
Admin Postal Code: 80126-5252
Admin Country: US
Admin Phone Number: +30.34711986
Admin Fax Number: +.
Admin Email: tburke@ecentral.com
Tech ID: COCO-457403
Tech Name: Marcus Faure
Tech Organization: OzNic GmbH
Tech Address: Mehrumer Str. 16
Tech City: Voerde
Tech State/Province: VIC
Tech Postal Code: 46562
Tech Country: DE
Tech Phone Number: +49.285596510
Tech Fax Number: +49.2855965117
Tech Email: hostmaster@oznic.de
Zone ID: COCO-457402
Zone Name: Marcus Faure
Zone Organization: OzNic GmbH
Zone Address: Mehrumer Str. 16
Zone City: Voerde
Zone State/Province: VIC
Zone Postal Code: 46562
Zone Country: DE
Zone Phone Number: +49.285596510
Zone Fax Number: +49.2855965117
Zone Email: hostmaster@oznic.de
Name Server: ns1.namehost.com
Name Server: ns2.namehost.com
Database last updated on 2006-02-28 18:44:44 UTC
CORE - [Internet Council of Registrars]
Require handing out paper receipts to voters, and make the information on those receipts intelligible to voters so they can easily understand what that receipt means and can compare it to their intent. After all, an unintelligible receipt that the voter can't understand is no better than no receipt at all.
Then set up a table just outside of the polling station, offering to purchase those receipts at the rate of $10 for every receipt showing Democratic party-line voting and $5 for any receipt showing a vote for a Democratic candidate. Have a big sign on the table saying "We'll buy your vote!". Call the press, which is probably unnecessary. Wait for the firestorm to erupt as you overtly demonstrate thwarting the democratic process in an entirely legal manner. You're not REALLY buying votes, you're buying receipts! For extra fun, wear an AFL-CIO jacket while doing this.
Or let's say that the receipt is gobbledygook. Scan the receipt with an imager and have a laptop "decode" what the data means and provide a varying arbitrary value for the receipt. People would think you managed to crack the receipt code and are paying based on how they actually voted. That might ignite an even more significant firestorm.
What a hoot.
Example: our government client had a roll-your-own configuration management process that involved a hamstrung issue tracking system, emails, emailed spreadsheets and frequent teleconferences. They never were able to complete the test/fix/test/fix release process for software on time without deciding to let some things go unfixed, or hacking out functionality that couldn't make it through the QA process in time. We stood up a linux server running bugzilla on a machine no longer capable of being used as a desktop in a day, the client saw it, loved it, and it's been in production ever since replacing the custom system they spent gobs and gobs of money on.
Why did we win? Because accounting didn't have to get involved to approve a purchase of hardware and/or software. Because something "good enough" could be pulled from apt-get in two minutes rather than having to go through a purchase cycle. If there's an existing solution with some degree maturity out there on sourceforge, from the word "go" to "done" is one heck of a lot faster with open source, largely because the bean counters are eliminated from the cycle.
At least in our shop, the biggest chunk of time spent getting anything done is in obtaining the approvals required in order to spend money. I would imagine that's often encountered elsewhere.
EPCglobal
DOD-64 and DOD-96
GID-96
SGTIN-64 and SGTIN-96
SSCC-64 and SSCC-96
SGLN-64 and SGLN-96
GRAI-64 and GRAI-96
GIAI-64 and GIAI-96
I challenge you to identify a tag encoding construct that does have a field that identifies a database.
Actually it would not be. If you understood the construct, then you could derive what the key is. Don't confuse a tag encoding construct with a primary key value.
In the commercial workd, with Wal-Mart and Target the EPC constructs are also undencrypted. So when he talks about 'the most popular tag', I'm really wondering what he thinks that might be. Low-frequency livestock tags? 13.56 MHz access control badges? 900MHz passive Alien squiggle tags? Savi active tags? What the heck is this guy talking about, because none of these "popular" implementations encrypt the data on their tags?
But let's say you managed to "crack" a tag. You got '2F0103047541A430000001F9' (yes, this is a valid construct with minimally munged data). Ok, how about someone tell me how that constitutes a breach of security.
I'm not entirely sure why Oracle decided it needed these storage technologies. Perhaps it's because their failure to develop native storage of numeric datatypes and their other glaring architectural weaknesses are catching up with them, and they want to have a leagl means of rearchitecting their physical storage with third-party code. Maybe they want to take the flagging Oracle Lite product and reengineer it so it'll actually be useful and reliable. There could be all sorts of non-threatening reasons why Oracle might do this.
One thing they can't do is take the open source code away from you and MySQL. What is open source and in the public now, will always be there. What happens to development of these codebases does depend a lot on Oracle, but you have the freedom to make sure it doesn't entirely depend on them. All it takes is some effort on your part.
How about some of us make good choices, and some of us make not so good choices, and we have to live with the consequences. Unless we're screwing up our neighbor's peace in the process, we can alternatively be left alone to behave wisely or not. Having some shill whining about how we're addicted to having fun, eating things others disapprove of, listening to crap, wearing stupid clothing, or are duped into thinking that Emacs is better than vi.
Useless.
This is going to be one of those LF tags, not the 900 MHz passive tags more commonly used, because fluids block those pretty well. Those LF tags are used to track livestock and help figure out who a lost pet belongs to. Reliability there is pretty decent, although livestock dosen't get exposed to the same EMR we humans get.
I doubt this is really workable.
Look at the biggest challenges in passive RFID today, and it'll show you exactly where the vulnerabilities are. Proxomity to metal, proximity to liquids, proximity to other tags, false reads frequency, sensitivity to interference and tag failure rates provide all sorts of opportunities for general mayhem. It don't take much.
Phooey.
And just how and where does this "linking" happen? Do you think the cash register is going to have an embedded EPC Class 1 Generation 2 RFID tag writer which will for convenience's sake rewrite the tag to include a credit card number? Or would Wal-Mart decide it makes good business sense to host petrabytes of pretty useless data linking credit cards and EPCglobal RFID tag values?
All of these scenarios have a box in the middle of their systems architecture that reads "A miracle occurrs here" where data integration supposedly happens. Until someone figures out a way to perform such miracles, this dog won't hunt.
PM greg_dot_letiecq_yat_wfinet_dot_com.
It's more useful to counterfit UPC barcodes on retail products -- tape over a barcode on an expensive item with the barcode of a less expensive product, and likely the checkout person will not notice. You can do that with an inkjet printer and a shareware 3of9 barcode font today. Don't see a lot of that happening these days. So if that's not a big fraud issue right now, what makes anyone think RFID will be a huge fraud problem in the future with an enormously higher barrier to entry?
Most of the other constructs work pretty much the same way with:
[construct identification]
[entity identifier]
[sometimes:locally assigned product code] [always:locally assigned serial number]
So for the most part, unless you are a part of the entity that established the last two values, or pay another gajillion dollars to get access to an EPCglobal network which will let you query within that enterprise, or you have some special relationship with that entity and they decide to share data with you, you stand precious little chance of figuring out what the heck that 128 bit value actually represents.
Probably just as much as the 11B busy pointing his M4 at the enemy and pulling the trigger as much as he can. Do you seriously believe that combat soldiers wrestle with philosophical dilemnas during the heat of combat, and that by doing so they are more perfect members of the human species?
My guess is that you never wore a kevlar.
If you're right though, GWB just made a host of new laws last night with the State of the Union address, which is equivalent in legal authority to the Gettysburg Address. That concept would probably make you a little, er, grumpy I suppose, which might explain this thread a bit.
ATGMs are as related to a ballistic missile as a tricycle is related to a dump truck.
Similarly, a cruise missle such as a tomohawk, which has no evasive capabilities either, is irrelevant to a discussion of ballistic missle interception. The problem there is little different from shooting down a small, low level, and relatively low-speed jet aircraft, and there are plenty of SAM and AAM systems that can do an excellent job of shoooting these down. What parallels you can draw between a tomohawk and a free-flight hypersonic payload entering the atmosphere are fanciful at best.
What technology would that be which 'prevents' TOW and Dragon missles from being shot down? Suppressive fire?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Seems to me that the prohibition on the abridgement of free speech falls on Congress, and the First Amendment does not apply here. You are either in need of reviewing the actual text of the First Amendment, or proposing a rather novel way of interpreting that "Congress" means "The People".
Not that such confusion is absent in discussions regarding other amendments...