Just ask anyone who works on the frontline (IDS and firewall admins) and they'll tell you that attacks happen all the time. This one made the news because Sun actually told the media. They handled the whole situation very well, IMO.
I don't see what so newsworthy about the article. Companies get attacked all the time. A company, Sun, experienced a DDoS. Ok. They handled it well so what's the story?
I think my comment was valid. Is this newsworthy because it was Sun? I still don't get it.
I don't see what so newsworthy about the article. Companies get attacked all the time. A company, Sun, experienced a DDoS. Ok. They handled it well so what's the story?
I see your joke but it really is pathetic how one study tells you this and another tells you something contrary. I remember when eggs were good for you and then they weren't and now they are good again. Apples were good for you ("An apple a day keeps the doctor away") and then they weren't ("The sugar in an apple can rot your teeth", my dentist told me.). Now, they are good for you again. And there are other examples out there.
And the other thing that should not amaze me as much as it does is grammar. How about "Coffee May Not Be a Health Drink". "Coffee Maybe Not a Health Drink!" sounds like Ebonics.
I never stated that I was for or against Apple in any way. I could have easily said that about Microsoft, Oracle, Google, etc. Your assertion is completely unfounded.
I totally agree with you. This guy is so full of himself that it gets in the way of objectively comparing and contrasting the benefits of iTMS and its proprietary format with regular mp3s without DRM.
Sounds like just another rant from someone who doesn't like the fact that Apple succeeded in something.
I don't see why this is flamebait. EU complaints against Microsoft seems to be a weekly, if not daily, occurance. So the phrase, "What else is new..." is accurate, IMO.
Isn't it then fair to say that the government shouldn't tell "people" how to manage their business?
I agree to an extent. But there are a multitude of cases where the government has to exert some control. For example, if a law exists that states that a certain cryptographic program cannot be exported to foreign countries due to national security concerns (or due to other compelling interests) then companies with file servers should not make it available for download to foreign countries. How they prevent such a thing is up to the company. This is just another way of telling a business how to operate. Whether we agree with it or not is oftentimes irrelevent because the justification for such measures is sometimes classified.
You're probably right about Google not breaking any laws. I think that Google is only getting the focus of the investgation because they have been the most outspolen and because of all the publicity in the past year.
Yahoo! should be the one's getting queried because they have twice disclosed information that directly led to someone's arrest in China. We do have laws concerning this type of governmental policing of free speech.
The fact still remains that anytime an America-based company does business overseas the government will be involved. If, when the overseas, America-based company acts contrary to the laws of America, the government should and will get involved.
Just because you don't observe the US government trying to make change in China doesn't mean it isn't tring to do just that. I would expect an internal, covert change like that would be classified to a very high level.
Private industry is made up of "the people of this country." So in actuality one should not distiguish the two.
Possibly, but the whole point of this code is to be malicious. Why would a program create something that was intended to be executed by the user not set the executable bit? If anything, it could escape to a shell and make it executable, e.g. `chmod +x `. It's trivial.
Slashdot Mirror
Just ask anyone who works on the frontline (IDS and firewall admins) and they'll tell you that attacks happen all the time. This one made the news because Sun actually told the media. They handled the whole situation very well, IMO.
I don't see what so newsworthy about the article. Companies get attacked all the time. A company, Sun, experienced a DDoS. Ok. They handled it well so what's the story?
You maybe not be up to something!
I see your joke but it really is pathetic how one study tells you this and another tells you something contrary. I remember when eggs were good for you and then they weren't and now they are good again. Apples were good for you ("An apple a day keeps the doctor away") and then they weren't ("The sugar in an apple can rot your teeth", my dentist told me.). Now, they are good for you again. And there are other examples out there.
And the other thing that should not amaze me as much as it does is grammar. How about "Coffee May Not Be a Health Drink". "Coffee Maybe Not a Health Drink!" sounds like Ebonics.
That's exactly what I was thinking. Even a used ThinkPad is way out of my price range.
I never stated that I was for or against Apple in any way. I could have easily said that about Microsoft, Oracle, Google, etc. Your assertion is completely unfounded.
I totally agree with you. This guy is so full of himself that it gets in the way of objectively comparing and contrasting the benefits of iTMS and its proprietary format with regular mp3s without DRM.
Sounds like just another rant from someone who doesn't like the fact that Apple succeeded in something.
I don't see why this is flamebait. EU complaints against Microsoft seems to be a weekly, if not daily, occurance. So the phrase, "What else is new..." is accurate, IMO.
What else is new...
As an unrepresented citizen in the state where the Dishonorable Gentlemen from Massachusetts resides, I concur.
You're probably right about Google not breaking any laws. I think that Google is only getting the focus of the investgation because they have been the most outspolen and because of all the publicity in the past year.
Yahoo! should be the one's getting queried because they have twice disclosed information that directly led to someone's arrest in China. We do have laws concerning this type of governmental policing of free speech.
The fact still remains that anytime an America-based company does business overseas the government will be involved. If, when the overseas, America-based company acts contrary to the laws of America, the government should and will get involved.
Just because you don't observe the US government trying to make change in China doesn't mean it isn't tring to do just that. I would expect an internal, covert change like that would be classified to a very high level.
Private industry is made up of "the people of this country." So in actuality one should not distiguish the two.
Possibly, but the whole point of this code is to be malicious. Why would a program create something that was intended to be executed by the user not set the executable bit? If anything, it could escape to a shell and make it executable, e.g. `chmod +x `. It's trivial.
The author specifically deals with this issue in Chapter 8.
A very distinct possibility is that their data collection methodologies are flawed.
Offtopic? That's retarded.
I blame the moderators for posting this dupe.
I would suspect that since Westinghouse Electric Company is 100-percent owned by BNFL Nuclear Services Inc. (BNSI), a wholly owned BNFL Group U.S. subsidiary , that the US Government will be involved at all levels. Probably, DoJ with input from DoD, DoE and the NRC.
Tolkien didn't create all the races found in his books either. He was a giant who stood on the shoulders of lesser known giants.
That's what I'm thinking...