SIP is an open protocol, Skype's protocol is (at least partly) proprietary.
Yes, but the Skype protocol is not used for terminating a call between providers, SIP is used for such termination - I don't get the argument.
The Skype protocol it self is used on the user end and has many benefits such as being capable of working around networking issues with a combination of methods such as creating 'false' open/active sessions (hole punching) in TCP and UDP to open a socket for users who for example, can't open incoming ports themselves on their Internet exposed address, capable of using peer to peer communications for communicating with the master server if there is connectivity issues etc. Which are things that a SIP client cannot do if it were following the SIP specifications.
Yes, but that's the point... a true SIP endpoint should work with any provider.
But most major telecommunications providers don't have SIP points for just anyone. They're locked down just for terminating between each other, just like Skype's.
This video is blocked in Germany because supposedly it infringes Sony BMG's copyright. That's right. The whole video. Not just the sound. Not to mention the sound was not added but rather played during the performance.
OSX's unix lineage wouldn't allow malware the same freedom it has on a poorly set up XP system.
That's not really true. The BSD subsystem provides a not very POSIX compliant interface to the kernel, and they have a few BSD usermode applications, but the XNU (X is Not Unix) kernel certainly does not use the same security scheme Unix uses.
Wrong. QQ actually means rage quit, it's from battlenet when ALT+Q+Q immediately quited the match and program. It is a form of telling people to rage quit. It's origin is unfortunately usually mistaken as crying eyes by what people on battlenet call 'noobs'.
To build a solar farm that outputs the same power a nuclear power station does, the costs are insane and this is without the enormous amount of land required, ignoring the fact it can't generate power at night and the high maintenance, inefficient power distribution (due to the low level of power it provides per unit).
Rather than point the finger at an 'ignorant' public, this article chastises the scientists for a poor understanding of how to communicate with non-technical people. With a look at the issues of climate change
Plus one can argue the iOS is much less invasive than Android as Apple doesn't seem to have the capability to do anything to apps already installed on your iPhone.
Which you prefer depends on how much you expect third parties' willingness to exploit you (in the business sense) for money and whether you consider safety a more important feature than the ability to install arbitrary software.
Of course, the advantage with Android is that if you don't like your current setup at all, you can install one of the many other rom modifications out there available that are to your liking.
What happens when some not-so-savvy user gets an app, and the developer's info about the app says "Ignore the warning, that's a bug we're fixing in the next version"... hmmmm
The not so savvy user 'ignores' the warning and clicks cancel, since that's ignoring to a not so savvy user, right?
I'd think it's quite reasonable to assume - beyond the need for citation - that if you execute a MITM attack and someone's private banking details are compromised because of it that indeed some serious questions would be leveled at you.
If it's network policy that all data gets processed through a device that ensures filters are working properly like in big corporations and that device gets compromised - I'm not convinced anything negative would go against the IT guy as much as trying to find out who the culprit is.
Moreover citation would be needed he were suggesting the concrete legality of such actions
Legality wise, it was determined that companies are free to enforce policies on their networks, including installing SSL transparent proxies which many corporations use for enhanced filtering. There are privacy laws in the UK (example) where automated systems are fine for performing analysis, but human observing private information is not. In such instances I don't see how this is any different. Of course, it's a bit of a catch 22 when employers are getting sued for not monitoring communications.
With regards to information disclosure of bank account details because a system was hacked. It doesn't matter if the system was intended to perform MITM or not (such as a router that isn't designed to do so, but it ends up getting flashed with a new rom from dd-wrt.com that performs the intended malicious operation), only that the unauthorized person was using MITM attack to intercept the data and use it unlawfully. It maybe the fault of the IT department for not securing the system better, but the blame generally goes on the malicious person who exploited the system.
I'm not citing any facts, I am expressing an opinion.
Oh, so this was just an opinion, no real facts or anything to back it up - Understood. Your comment did not seem to present it self as an opinion to me, sorry for the miss-interpretation.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but the Skype protocol is not used for terminating a call between providers, SIP is used for such termination - I don't get the argument.
The Skype protocol it self is used on the user end and has many benefits such as being capable of working around networking issues with a combination of methods such as creating 'false' open/active sessions (hole punching) in TCP and UDP to open a socket for users who for example, can't open incoming ports themselves on their Internet exposed address, capable of using peer to peer communications for communicating with the master server if there is connectivity issues etc. Which are things that a SIP client cannot do if it were following the SIP specifications.
But most major telecommunications providers don't have SIP points for just anyone. They're locked down just for terminating between each other, just like Skype's.
Skype does use SIP for termination with certain telecommunications providers.
It's too late to take the blue pill now. You have to see how deep the rabbit hole goes.
Different laws in Germany.
Here is an article for you:
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/6/26/focus/4197991&sec=focus
That's not really true. The BSD subsystem provides a not very POSIX compliant interface to the kernel, and they have a few BSD usermode applications, but the XNU (X is Not Unix) kernel certainly does not use the same security scheme Unix uses.
I generally don't believe "I've been hacked!" stories of any sort.
Wrong. QQ actually means rage quit, it's from battlenet when ALT+Q+Q immediately quited the match and program. It is a form of telling people to rage quit. It's origin is unfortunately usually mistaken as crying eyes by what people on battlenet call 'noobs'.
I have no idea where you got this from?
To build a solar farm that outputs the same power a nuclear power station does, the costs are insane and this is without the enormous amount of land required, ignoring the fact it can't generate power at night and the high maintenance, inefficient power distribution (due to the low level of power it provides per unit).
And how is this flamebait? I provided some reasonable information where you can find evidence, no countering points have.
Yes, and as shown in those videos, the real science says there is no issue.
Well, let's take a look at climate change:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8NFoaClXH0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svsSon9_zL4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYvbibO-SlI
Well, no wonder why they aren't reaching people really - It's mostly bullshit science.
Google talk uses encrypted XMPP, a few of my friends started using it with their android phones. I have no idea how widespread it is though.
Actually yahoo is still the largest webmail provider out there. Tencent QQ however is the most popular instant messenger out there.
Why did you lie to me? :(
The privacy setting is called "log out".
Why do you hate freedom, gig?
Actually Apple can blacklist certain applications from running if they wanted - This has been mentioned before.
Of course, the advantage with Android is that if you don't like your current setup at all, you can install one of the many other rom modifications out there available that are to your liking.
Well, I for one intend to start a U-rated picture colouring website on the .xxx tld. So, this statement would be wrong.
When .xxx becomes available, I am going to start a U-rated picture colouring website on that tld.
Pay no notice to the above comment, it used the S word too!
Kill the children before it's too late!
The not so savvy user 'ignores' the warning and clicks cancel, since that's ignoring to a not so savvy user, right?
If it's network policy that all data gets processed through a device that ensures filters are working properly like in big corporations and that device gets compromised - I'm not convinced anything negative would go against the IT guy as much as trying to find out who the culprit is.
Legality wise, it was determined that companies are free to enforce policies on their networks, including installing SSL transparent proxies which many corporations use for enhanced filtering. There are privacy laws in the UK (example) where automated systems are fine for performing analysis, but human observing private information is not. In such instances I don't see how this is any different. Of course, it's a bit of a catch 22 when employers are getting sued for not monitoring communications.
With regards to information disclosure of bank account details because a system was hacked. It doesn't matter if the system was intended to perform MITM or not (such as a router that isn't designed to do so, but it ends up getting flashed with a new rom from dd-wrt.com that performs the intended malicious operation), only that the unauthorized person was using MITM attack to intercept the data and use it unlawfully. It maybe the fault of the IT department for not securing the system better, but the blame generally goes on the malicious person who exploited the system.
Oh, so this was just an opinion, no real facts or anything to back it up - Understood. Your comment did not seem to present it self as an opinion to me, sorry for the miss-interpretation.