Wow! Great! What a wonderful way to express a love for theft! Poritsehead [sic], are, I'm quite sure, happy that you went and bought an illegal copy of their music. Wow...you are SO worldly.
Man, I'm glad I don't live somewhere that I would have to listen to 'et al' music. And I'm sure there's a lot of people who agree with me, but don't have the space to be a signatory to that here...
...is a 'Geek-B-Dead' device to use on the asshat who thinks it's funny to use this at a sports bar right at that critical moment during an important play.
Dammit...I had forgotten about the evil bit. Fire me now. Wait...if I promise to adhere to to the 'do not copy' bit, will I be allowed to attend re-education camp?;)
mmhmm. So you sure know your stuff. First of all, a sniffer can 'recognize' any traffic, regardless of whether or not it's encrypted. Secondly, are you seriously implying a company should spend the time and money to make exceptions on a user-by-user basis so that that those that need it can have that access?
Are you advocating firing anyone who even clicks on a link that attempts to open an https connection?
It's not that simple. I have run networks that had tens of thousands of users, with massive turnover on any given day. Do you really advocate a case-by-case basis? If so, you've obviously never worked in a large scale environment, with real world budgets and productivity goals.
All right, fucktard, tell me how you can tell the difference between me tunneling company secrets out over an SSH tunnel using port 25 vs making an encrypted SMTP session with a secure mail server?
I know how to monitor traffic...tell me how you determine what data and purpose that encrypted traffic contains?
I normally don't respond to AC, but...how the hell do you suppose you'll know when/how/what I'm doing? If a port is open, I can tunnel through it.
I am the company network engineer. And the Security Officer. If you know how to discern legitimate traffic from 'bad' traffic over an allowed port, please, do enlighten us all.
And do it as something other than AC. I know all about fingerprinting traffic patterns...but won't take any more crap from someone who says 'make my day', while hiding behind an AC moniker.
I'll give you that...but you also haven't had the collective "might" of the asshats..er...blackhats...dedicated to writing this tripe for Moz.
Trust me...they have enough $$ to hire the talent to focus on the biggest market...which ironically is what will bring them to bear against Moz/FF as its market uptake increases.
parent modded as insightful? Come on, I know you guys love linux, but be realistic...there are plenty of very smart people running windows networks, as well as posting on the 'Microsoft Websites'.
Oh...wait..you're AC...which is even more reason to mod the parent post as troll. sigh.
A lot of people are recommending firefox/mozilla as a solution.
How long do you think it will be (if FF/Moz continue with the market uptake they have enjoyed recently) before folks start writing spyware/adware for it? My guess is not long at all.
Educate your users. Use your NOS to the utmost (AD has some great tools to enforce security policies, and there are extensions even for MAC/Unix now), have strong written (and acknowledged) policies, and, if all else fails, start to make examples of people who just won't listen.
So you'd like to have an admin spend his entire day responding to 'open' requests for every web site that needs to be accessed?
I don't know what you do for a living, or where you work, but the 'www' is NOT just something that 'can be surfed at home on personal time'
For many folks, having access to internet web pages is a critical part of their job.
That said, your response is ludicrous. You are going to block outbound requests to port 80? It will take me all of 30 seconds to setup a proxy on my home machine using a different port.
What's that you say? You're going to block all ports?
Then why have an internet connection at all? Oh yes, because 'work is for work', and no one could possibly have a valid reason to have access to the internet during work hours.
One of the problems here is that people are dismissing the OSI model out of hand. I've read a lot of replies here stating that the OSI 'gibberish' made networking either too complex or too boring to understand.
What people don't understand is that the OSI model breaks networking down into intelligible parts...and that if you can't grasp what each of those layers do, then you probably shouldn't be running any network larger than a few dozen nodes. You certainly won't be capable of troubleshooting a large scale enterprise network to any reasonable degree.
When faced with any problem, you need to be able to isolate it to correct it. The OSI 7 layer model is one of the most fundamental ways to accomplish this.
Go to any of the big geek sites that have network forums...and most of the networking questions you will see are almost impossible to answer at first take, because people don't give the correct information. Why? Because they don't understand the difference between a physical layer problem and a network layer problem. They don't understand the difference between an IP address and a URL, nor how the two are correlated.
Any book that helps someone stop asking the 'simple' questions is fine...but don't pretend it's a solution or workaround to having to understand the OSI model. If you aren't clear on the difference between a frame and a packet, or what the strengths and limitations of each are in any given situation (think broadcast domain vs. collision domain), then you aren't a network technician, much less a network engineer. You *might* be a network administrator, but that's again a completely different thing. Taking care of user accounts and permissions doesn't mean you're engineering anything. It means your administering a namespace on a network operating system.
Meh...I don't have anything against people trying to learn...but it's like saying that just because you can drive a car that you're now a certified mechanic. It just isn't so....to be a certified mechanic, you have to demonstrate actual knowledge of certain fundamental prinicples, as well as apply them in a real world situation. If you don't understand the concept of internal combustion, I doubt you're going to be a competent auto mechanic, even though you can put gas in the car, change the oil and tires, etc.
Many of beer variants are sweet. This is mostly related to the fact that all of them start with some form of sugar as a base to feed the yeast.
Meads and Barleywines are typically quite sweet, and also have a much higher alcohol content than beer. Mead, of course, using honey as it's sugar base, as opposed to using grains. (hot water convertes the starches in grains into sugars)
If you want beer with caffeine that isn't sweet, just drink any of the numerous coffee-based stouts or porters.
What if you work for the USPS? What if you work for the DoD? The NSA?
You're missing the point. Government collection of data has been going on for a very long time, and it's getting much worse. Did you know that Nixon tried to have John Lennon deported....twice....because he was considered subversive? The FBI had a file on John Lennon...which detailed exactly the kind of information we are talking about.
John Lennon was no terrorist...and not really even a decent subversive, and the most likely criminal thing he did was smoke pot. But he was STILL harasssed and intimidated by a government who, in their own arrogance and fear, thought him to be a threat.
I can cite numerous examples of exactly this type of behavior...in the US....not Stalinist Russia.
How about instead of slinging mud at me, you take a moment to do some research. Further, I'm fine with it if you want to throw away your freedom and privacy...just don't drag me down with you....move to some other country where the citizens have already been stripped of their rights.
not doing anything I shouldn't be doing, nor going anywhere I shouldn't be going
According to YOU you're not. What happens when the government decides differently? What if going to an AA meeting is suddenly grounds for a background check, and then that information is suddenly available to your employer, who doesn't want any 'freakin' alcoholics' on the payroll?
Or what about attending that civil-rights protest? Or the million man march? Or your wife/girlfriend/daughter going to an abortion clinic? See what I mean? Just assuming you aren't doing anything wrong doesn't mean that the gov can't decide otherwise.
As already mentioned, I see great things ahead for prosthetics. If this is a first shot at 16sensors/cm^2, surely it will be easy to make advances in not only materials but simple manufacturing processes that could greatly increase that.
It looks like the first in a long series of hurdles may just about be cleared.
There are also numerous industrial/scientific/sporting applications for something like this...imagine having NFL sidelines undercoated with this stuff...no more debate or bad vision angles....he was in or he was out. Or what about measuring even more precisely the impact at each discreet point on a runners feet? Or the force of a boxer's punch? Or the accuracy of a baseball bat or golf club as it comes into contact with the ball?
Actually, there are plenty of reasons to measure bandwidth in bits not bytes.
When I size/plan/order circuits, I need to know raw throughput in bits/sec, because I may be ordering that circuit for a dedicated purpose, which can have significantly different overhead and efficiency than a different purpose.
Whenever you see bandwidth measured in Bps (bytes per second) you are seeing, at best, an estimate. The reason is that people are concerned about *payload* when you mention bytes, not raw throughput.
As overheard increases or decreases per packet (which can be caused by fragmentation, poor application design, etc), then the amount of payload data per packet changes, while the raw throughput does not. Try this as an exercise. Open up an FTP sire via MSIE, and transfer a large file from a decent server near you. Note how long it takes, and the data rate MSIE tells you that it comes in at. Now, open up an MS command prompt, and ftp to that same site, get the same file, and note how long it takes, and the data rate it tells you.
Same site, same link, same file, same OS...two completely different download times/rates.
When I order any circuit...I want to know what the actual bit rate of the line is. I don't want some marketing mumbo-jumbo about 'bytes per second'...I may not even use an 8 bit byte, or, they may use a different interpretation of 'kilo' and 'mega' when quoting data rates. Bit-rate is pure...because a bit is a bit is a bit, and a second is a second is a second.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow! Great! What a wonderful way to express a love for theft! Poritsehead [sic], are, I'm quite sure, happy that you went and bought an illegal copy of their music. Wow...you are SO worldly.
because they are heartless, soul-sucking, brain-numbing Bastards.
`Especially that 'et al' type of music.
Man, I'm glad I don't live somewhere that I would have to listen to 'et al' music. And I'm sure there's a lot of people who agree with me, but don't have the space to be a signatory to that here...
Does this mean that the fatter I get, the less complex I am? Wow...that should make my wife happy. ;)
Sir, I can't believe I wasted mod points on something else yesterday.
Applause. No Bullshit...Serious, solemn, applause.
How many Libraries of Arabidopsis are there in one cubic Iota of Reasonable Doubt?
:)
Just Curious.
Somewhat on, and somewhat off--topic, I'm reading a novel by Greag Bear called Darwin's Children. And it's pretty deep...if not totally engrossing.
It has a lot to do with viruses (especially 'ancient' viruses) being part and parcel of the process of human evolution.
...is a 'Geek-B-Dead' device to use on the asshat who thinks it's funny to use this at a sports bar right at that critical moment during an important play.
Dammit...I had forgotten about the evil bit. Fire me now. Wait...if I promise to adhere to to the 'do not copy' bit, will I be allowed to attend re-education camp? ;)
mmhmm. So you sure know your stuff. First of all, a sniffer can 'recognize' any traffic, regardless of whether or not it's encrypted. Secondly, are you seriously implying a company should spend the time and money to make exceptions on a user-by-user basis so that that those that need it can have that access?
Are you advocating firing anyone who even clicks on a link that attempts to open an https connection?
It's not that simple. I have run networks that had tens of thousands of users, with massive turnover on any given day. Do you really advocate a case-by-case basis? If so, you've obviously never worked in a large scale environment, with real world budgets and productivity goals.
I'm done feeding this particular troll.
All right, fucktard, tell me how you can tell the difference between me tunneling company secrets out over an SSH tunnel using port 25 vs making an encrypted SMTP session with a secure mail server?
I know how to monitor traffic...tell me how you determine what data and purpose that encrypted traffic contains?
I normally don't respond to AC, but...how the hell do you suppose you'll know when/how/what I'm doing? If a port is open, I can tunnel through it.
I am the company network engineer. And the Security Officer. If you know how to discern legitimate traffic from 'bad' traffic over an allowed port, please, do enlighten us all.
And do it as something other than AC. I know all about fingerprinting traffic patterns...but won't take any more crap from someone who says 'make my day', while hiding behind an AC moniker.
I'll give you that...but you also haven't had the collective "might" of the asshats..er...blackhats...dedicated to writing this tripe for Moz.
Trust me...they have enough $$ to hire the talent to focus on the biggest market...which ironically is what will bring them to bear against Moz/FF as its market uptake increases.
parent modded as insightful? Come on, I know you guys love linux, but be realistic...there are plenty of very smart people running windows networks, as well as posting on the 'Microsoft Websites'.
Oh...wait..you're AC...which is even more reason to mod the parent post as troll. sigh.
A lot of people are recommending firefox/mozilla as a solution.
How long do you think it will be (if FF/Moz continue with the market uptake they have enjoyed recently) before folks start writing spyware/adware for it? My guess is not long at all.
Educate your users. Use your NOS to the utmost (AD has some great tools to enforce security policies, and there are extensions even for MAC/Unix now), have strong written (and acknowledged) policies, and, if all else fails, start to make examples of people who just won't listen.
sigh.
So you'd like to have an admin spend his entire day responding to 'open' requests for every web site that needs to be accessed?
I don't know what you do for a living, or where you work, but the 'www' is NOT just something that 'can be surfed at home on personal time'
For many folks, having access to internet web pages is a critical part of their job.
That said, your response is ludicrous. You are going to block outbound requests to port 80? It will take me all of 30 seconds to setup a proxy on my home machine using a different port.
What's that you say? You're going to block all ports?
Then why have an internet connection at all? Oh yes, because 'work is for work', and no one could possibly have a valid reason to have access to the internet during work hours.
Of course, we aren't ALL janitors.
A "Centar" being someone over 100 years of age?
Or a "Centaur" being a mythical beast, half-man and half-horse, being over 100 years of age?
One of the problems here is that people are dismissing the OSI model out of hand. I've read a lot of replies here stating that the OSI 'gibberish' made networking either too complex or too boring to understand.
What people don't understand is that the OSI model breaks networking down into intelligible parts...and that if you can't grasp what each of those layers do, then you probably shouldn't be running any network larger than a few dozen nodes. You certainly won't be capable of troubleshooting a large scale enterprise network to any reasonable degree.
When faced with any problem, you need to be able to isolate it to correct it. The OSI 7 layer model is one of the most fundamental ways to accomplish this.
Go to any of the big geek sites that have network forums...and most of the networking questions you will see are almost impossible to answer at first take, because people don't give the correct information. Why? Because they don't understand the difference between a physical layer problem and a network layer problem. They don't understand the difference between an IP address and a URL, nor how the two are correlated.
Any book that helps someone stop asking the 'simple' questions is fine...but don't pretend it's a solution or workaround to having to understand the OSI model. If you aren't clear on the difference between a frame and a packet, or what the strengths and limitations of each are in any given situation (think broadcast domain vs. collision domain), then you aren't a network technician, much less a network engineer. You *might* be a network administrator, but that's again a completely different thing. Taking care of user accounts and permissions doesn't mean you're engineering anything. It means your administering a namespace on a network operating system.
Meh...I don't have anything against people trying to learn...but it's like saying that just because you can drive a car that you're now a certified mechanic. It just isn't so....to be a certified mechanic, you have to demonstrate actual knowledge of certain fundamental prinicples, as well as apply them in a real world situation. If you don't understand the concept of internal combustion, I doubt you're going to be a competent auto mechanic, even though you can put gas in the car, change the oil and tires, etc.
Many of beer variants are sweet. This is mostly related to the fact that all of them start with some form of sugar as a base to feed the yeast.
Meads and Barleywines are typically quite sweet, and also have a much higher alcohol content than beer. Mead, of course, using honey as it's sugar base, as opposed to using grains. (hot water convertes the starches in grains into sugars)
If you want beer with caffeine that isn't sweet, just drink any of the numerous coffee-based stouts or porters.
How stupid is it?
What if you work for the USPS? What if you work for the DoD? The NSA?
You're missing the point. Government collection of data has been going on for a very long time, and it's getting much worse. Did you know that Nixon tried to have John Lennon deported....twice....because he was considered subversive? The FBI had a file on John Lennon...which detailed exactly the kind of information we are talking about.
John Lennon was no terrorist...and not really even a decent subversive, and the most likely criminal thing he did was smoke pot. But he was STILL harasssed and intimidated by a government who, in their own arrogance and fear, thought him to be a threat.
I can cite numerous examples of exactly this type of behavior...in the US....not Stalinist Russia.
How about instead of slinging mud at me, you take a moment to do some research. Further, I'm fine with it if you want to throw away your freedom and privacy...just don't drag me down with you....move to some other country where the citizens have already been stripped of their rights.
what windows machine doesn't have an FTP client? AFAIK, there has been command line FTP since Win95.
According to YOU you're not. What happens when the government decides differently? What if going to an AA meeting is suddenly grounds for a background check, and then that information is suddenly available to your employer, who doesn't want any 'freakin' alcoholics' on the payroll?
Or what about attending that civil-rights protest? Or the million man march? Or your wife/girlfriend/daughter going to an abortion clinic? See what I mean? Just assuming you aren't doing anything wrong doesn't mean that the gov can't decide otherwise.
As already mentioned, I see great things ahead for prosthetics. If this is a first shot at 16sensors/cm^2, surely it will be easy to make advances in not only materials but simple manufacturing processes that could greatly increase that.
It looks like the first in a long series of hurdles may just about be cleared.
There are also numerous industrial/scientific/sporting applications for something like this...imagine having NFL sidelines undercoated with this stuff...no more debate or bad vision angles....he was in or he was out. Or what about measuring even more precisely the impact at each discreet point on a runners feet? Or the force of a boxer's punch? Or the accuracy of a baseball bat or golf club as it comes into contact with the ball?
Cool stuff.
Actually, there are plenty of reasons to measure bandwidth in bits not bytes.
When I size/plan/order circuits, I need to know raw throughput in bits/sec, because I may be ordering that circuit for a dedicated purpose, which can have significantly different overhead and efficiency than a different purpose.
Whenever you see bandwidth measured in Bps (bytes per second) you are seeing, at best, an estimate. The reason is that people are concerned about *payload* when you mention bytes, not raw throughput.
As overheard increases or decreases per packet (which can be caused by fragmentation, poor application design, etc), then the amount of payload data per packet changes, while the raw throughput does not. Try this as an exercise. Open up an FTP sire via MSIE, and transfer a large file from a decent server near you. Note how long it takes, and the data rate MSIE tells you that it comes in at. Now, open up an MS command prompt, and ftp to that same site, get the same file, and note how long it takes, and the data rate it tells you.
Same site, same link, same file, same OS...two completely different download times/rates.
When I order any circuit...I want to know what the actual bit rate of the line is. I don't want some marketing mumbo-jumbo about 'bytes per second'...I may not even use an 8 bit byte, or, they may use a different interpretation of 'kilo' and 'mega' when quoting data rates. Bit-rate is pure...because a bit is a bit is a bit, and a second is a second is a second.
AJ did not 'ripoff' google...it was around before google, IIRC.
They had their little butler dude logo (Jeeves himself) back in 96/97, I'm almost certain.
I did just go check it out, and they have simplified the main page a bit, but I wouldn't say that's a 'lame ripoff' of google.