Spyware basically is malware takes advantage of a poorly architected Windows environment.
That's just plain wrong. I'm a Linux user and I'm no Microsoft fan but to be fair, spyware isn't Microsoft's fault. If a malicious programmer wants to write a program to say, monitor your keystrokes, or send your computer ads, and a user willingly installs it, there's really nothing Microsoft can do to stop it short of prohibiting the user from running any and all programs.
According to MacAfee its: It is a modified derivative of the Linux/Slapper...
And according to a 2002 cert advisory the slapper worm appears to work only on Linux systems running Apache with the OpenSSL module (mod_ssl) on Intel architect..
Surprisingly their seem to be no mention of it a apache.org which leads me to think it's pretty benign and not wide spread. I could be wrong.
"But if a customer modifies the source code, [Red Hat] can't help you [without charging you extra]. They have to lock things down to provide value," Matusow said. "As open source becomes commercialized, it becomes less open."
He's wrong. It's still just as "open". Besides, he's descibing a sitution that's unlikey to happen.
If you know enough to make changes to the source code you probably don't need Red Hat.
Don't know why the TV producers don't embed their their content with some kind of banner advertising (that's either difficult of not worth the effort of removing) and distribute the content themselves over the net using P2P (like bittorrent). Thus bypassing Tivo, Microsoft, Yahoo and all the others and letting consumers decide how they watch it (big screen, laptop, mobile phone, etc.). Presumably they'd reach a wider audience and make more from advertising.
Of course this would also bypass the current Neilsen rating system and confuse advertisers but I'm sure they could find another method of rating popularity (e.g. number of hits/downloads, etc.).
Damien Conway, who trains programmers through his business Thoughtstream, said: "I think the most successful of those is definitely licensing support; providing the software and then saying: 'if you want to buy a support contract, here's what it will cost you on an ongoing basis'.
There's more than just support:
There's also building and designing systems using open source. Like backup and mail systems, for example. It can sometimes be a lot cheaper (in savings on proprietory licenses) for a company to hire someone to implement an open source solution.
Then there's customization. Sendmail does X and Y but some company wants it to also do Z. They hire a programmer to write an add-on or a module. Again it can be less than buying proprietory licenses.
I've been implementing Linux systems for nearly 10 years doing just this and I've made a lot of money by helping companies save money.
Because Apple is a Hardware and Software Business, unlike Microsoft. 80% of Apple's profits come from their hardware.
Well said. You've hit the nail on the head. If Microsoft is any indication, that's not where the profits lie. There's a lot more money to be made in selling your OS than there is in selling hardware. Apple has a great OS. Way better than Windows (IMHO). Perhaps the only reason Macs aren't more popular is because of price. Even if Apple wants to control the hardware. There's no reason Macs should cost more than PCs. There's nothing inherently more costly in Mac arhitecture over PC architecture. Is there? I'm not really sure about any of this. Just asking that's all.
sources familiar with Apple's Macintosh hardware roadmap say the company is striving to unveil a completely redesigned set of Intel iBook laptops...
Why does Apple still want to control the hardware? Why don't they just port to Intel and let vendors sell Intel machinces with licensed versions of Mac OS. It'll be cheaper.
I've often heard it said that Apple has priced itself out of the market. If they want a bigger market share they'll need to take advantage of cheaper prices that come through competition. My guess is that if Apple is allowing only specific hardware to run their OS it'll envitably be more expensive.
Sorry for being so brash. I just woke up. Yeah, I understand what you're saying. But it's apparently going to an illegal and finable offense. I mean why not just send the guy with the open network and informational letter regarding security. I run an open experimental network with no firewall. Should that be illegal?
"somebody parked in the street or sitting in a neighboring building could hack into the network and steal your most confidential data," County Executive Andy Spano said in a statement.
That's all well and good, Andy but I run an open network and frankly, if somebody breaks into my network that's my problem. I don't need people like you to tell me what to do.
The draft proposal offered this week would compel all "commercial businesses" with an open wireless access point to have a "network gateway server" outfitted with a software or hardware firewall.
I recently convinced a company to share some of its unused DS3 with the community. Yeah, I put it in the DMZ but again, we don't need you to tell us how to design our network.
I've also worked on slfan who objective is to purposely build open networks that are easy to access. If these big-brother laws start to take off around the country you can say goodbye to freedom.
We could go back to the way it used to be done before the credit reporting bureaus. If somebody wants to give you a credit card or a loan they can ask you for a reference. You go to your bank or your current creditors and authorize them to give the you a reference in the form of a summary of your financial history or whaterver they need that you're prepared to give.
We could close all the other agencies down and the system would still work.
I can't see the advantage of having this funcationality on the desktop as opposed to a browser except it may be easier for hackers writing third party apps that take advantage of unsforeen secuirty problems which then reflect badly on google. What are they thinking? More ads?
I found the SQL syntax more difficult and less intuitive and to learn
than bash. Thus for small databases I often pipe the entire
contents into something like awk and grep.
I'd like to see an interface that's easier and more efficient to use.
Having to keep typing select, from, where, etc., seems redundant.
I'd prefer a command line utility with switches like s, f, w, etc.
Claiming that he isn't liable because his grandson was the one doing it, not him, is about as rediculous as saying that he's not liable if someone cracks their head open on faulty steps in his house because his grandson lives there not him.
Maybe not. If someone steals your credit card and runs up a debt you're not liable that (CHAP. 41, SUBCHAP VI, sections b and e of U.S. Code TITLE 15).
Similary if someone uses your computer to commit fraud, you wouldn't necessarily be liable.
It's a basic tenet of law that goes back to Magna Carta. If you didn't do it, your not responsible.
"Sprint is first carrier in the US to deliver what customers want most in a wireless music store - the instant gratification of downloading and owning their own personal collection of high-quality songs on a device that is always with them," said Len Lauer, chief operating officer for Sprint Nextel.
I have a Sprint Treo 650 and access to the Internet so I can already download music.
When Sprint offers broadband expect them to bundle the service somehow. This might be a bit off topic but it gives you some insight into how they operate. I'm a Sprint customer and I tried to email a video using their email service that came with the phone and I got some bullshit message saying I could purchase the ability to email video for extra $$ -- special offer, etc. You know the kinda of crap. Anyway, I just downloaded a third party email client and sent it to my regular mail. But they try this kinda stuff constantly.
And judging by the complexity of their service plans I guess they'll be trying to charge extra for nothing to unsuspecting idiots. Pretty sure they spend more on marketing than technology.
"A very nasty bundle is downloaded to your machine" when you click on the worm link...
Why with anyone write a chat program where you can install (and obviously run) a program just by clicking on a link?
Besides that, in Windows isn't there a way to run programs (like chat) as an innocuous (nobody) user limited only to that user's home directory and with limited write capabilities?
Slashdot Mirror
Spyware basically is malware takes advantage of a poorly architected Windows environment.
That's just plain wrong. I'm a Linux user and I'm no Microsoft fan but to be fair, spyware isn't Microsoft's fault. If a malicious programmer wants to write a program to say, monitor your keystrokes, or send your computer ads, and a user willingly installs it, there's really nothing Microsoft can do to stop it short of prohibiting the user from running any and all programs.
From the Security Focus article: Affected systems will need to be wiped and have the OS reinstalled, in most cases.
/tmp.
Apche usually runs as user nobody with very limited privileges. I doubt you'd need to wipe and reinstall the OS. That's why lupper runs in
According to MacAfee its: It is a modified derivative of the Linux/Slapper ...
And according to a 2002 cert advisory the slapper worm appears to work only on Linux systems running Apache with the OpenSSL module (mod_ssl) on Intel architect..
Surprisingly their seem to be no mention of it a apache.org which leads me to think it's pretty benign and not wide spread. I could be wrong.
"But if a customer modifies the source code, [Red Hat] can't help you [without charging you extra]. They have to lock things down to provide value," Matusow said. "As open source becomes commercialized, it becomes less open."
He's wrong. It's still just as "open". Besides, he's descibing a sitution that's unlikey to happen. If you know enough to make changes to the source code you probably don't need Red Hat.
Don't know why the TV producers don't embed their their content with some kind of banner advertising (that's either difficult of not worth the effort of removing) and distribute the content themselves over the net using P2P (like bittorrent). Thus bypassing Tivo, Microsoft, Yahoo and all the others and letting consumers decide how they watch it (big screen, laptop, mobile phone, etc.). Presumably they'd reach a wider audience and make more from advertising.
Of course this would also bypass the current Neilsen rating system and confuse advertisers but I'm sure they could find another method of rating popularity (e.g. number of hits/downloads, etc.).
Damien Conway, who trains programmers through his business Thoughtstream, said: "I think the most successful of those is definitely licensing support; providing the software and then saying: 'if you want to buy a support contract, here's what it will cost you on an ongoing basis'.
There's more than just support:
There's also building and designing systems using open source. Like backup and mail systems, for example. It can sometimes be a lot cheaper (in savings on proprietory licenses) for a company to hire someone to implement an open source solution.
Then there's customization. Sendmail does X and Y but some company wants it to also do Z. They hire a programmer to write an add-on or a module. Again it can be less than buying proprietory licenses.
I've been implementing Linux systems for nearly 10 years doing just this and I've made a lot of money by helping companies save money.
The plan was prompted by a female employee whose constant complaining prompted the other staff to complain about her complaining.
Wonder why they felt it relevant to point out it was a woman?
Because Apple is a Hardware and Software Business, unlike Microsoft. 80% of Apple's profits come from their hardware.
Well said. You've hit the nail on the head. If Microsoft is any indication, that's not where the profits lie. There's a lot more money to be made in selling your OS than there is in selling hardware. Apple has a great OS. Way better than Windows (IMHO). Perhaps the only reason Macs aren't more popular is because of price. Even if Apple wants to control the hardware. There's no reason Macs should cost more than PCs. There's nothing inherently more costly in Mac arhitecture over PC architecture. Is there? I'm not really sure about any of this. Just asking that's all.
Google is not necessarily evil for doing taking out a patent. We live in a world of IP and patents. They probably have to do this for protection.
However, if Google starts using this patent to thwart their competition then they'll be making a mockery of their own do-no-evil slogan.
Where is the profit in letting vendors sell Intel machines with Mac OS X?
Same place the profit is for Microsoft letting vendors sell Windows on Intel machines. No?
sources familiar with Apple's Macintosh hardware roadmap say the company is striving to unveil a completely redesigned set of Intel iBook laptops ...
Why does Apple still want to control the hardware? Why don't they just port to Intel and let vendors sell Intel machinces with licensed versions of Mac OS. It'll be cheaper.
I've often heard it said that Apple has priced itself out of the market. If they want a bigger market share they'll need to take advantage of cheaper prices that come through competition. My guess is that if Apple is allowing only specific hardware to run their OS it'll envitably be more expensive.
I could be completely wrong.
Sorry for being so brash. I just woke up. Yeah, I understand what you're saying. But it's apparently going to an illegal and finable offense. I mean why not just send the guy with the open network and informational letter regarding security. I run an open experimental network with no firewall. Should that be illegal?
"somebody parked in the street or sitting in a neighboring building could hack into the network and steal your most confidential data," County Executive Andy Spano said in a statement.
That's all well and good, Andy but I run an open network and frankly, if somebody breaks into my network that's my problem. I don't need people like you to tell me what to do.
The draft proposal offered this week would compel all "commercial businesses" with an open wireless access point to have a "network gateway server" outfitted with a software or hardware firewall.
I recently convinced a company to share some of its unused DS3 with the community. Yeah, I put it in the DMZ but again, we don't need you to tell us how to design our network.
I've also worked on slfan who objective is to purposely build open networks that are easy to access. If these big-brother laws start to take off around the country you can say goodbye to freedom.
Not necessarily.
We could go back to the way it used to be done before the credit reporting bureaus. If somebody wants to give you a credit card or a loan they can ask you for a reference. You go to your bank or your current creditors and authorize them to give the you a reference in the form of a summary of your financial history or whaterver they need that you're prepared to give.
We could close all the other agencies down and the system would still work.
Not yet but,
Before a patent will issue, however, the application must overcome the hurdles of utility, novelty, and nonobviousness found in U.S. patent laws.
Which means if the idea has utility, novelty, and is nonobvious a patent can be issued.
And if the same guy who issued the Amazon cookie patent is working that day, this guys idea for a story may well be patented.
I can't see the advantage of having this funcationality on the desktop as opposed to a browser except it may be easier for hackers writing third party apps that take advantage of unsforeen secuirty problems which then reflect badly on google. What are they thinking? More ads?
I found the SQL syntax more difficult and less intuitive and to learn than bash. Thus for small databases I often pipe the entire contents into something like awk and grep.
I'd like to see an interface that's easier and more efficient to use.
Having to keep typing select, from, where, etc., seems redundant.
I'd prefer a command line utility with switches like s, f, w, etc.
Do what MS and Apple do? Spend most of our resoures on marketing and PR?
Claiming that he isn't liable because his grandson was the one doing it, not him, is about as rediculous as saying that he's not liable if someone cracks their head open on faulty steps in his house because his grandson lives there not him.
Maybe not. If someone steals your credit card and runs up a debt you're not liable that (CHAP. 41, SUBCHAP VI, sections b and e of U.S. Code TITLE 15).
Similary if someone uses your computer to commit fraud, you wouldn't necessarily be liable.
It's a basic tenet of law that goes back to Magna Carta. If you didn't do it, your not responsible.
each shop or chain has to sign an agreement saying that they will sell out of all 20 consoles on the release date (which is December 2 over there).
Wonder what the penalty is if the retailer can't sell them all?
I've had a Sprint cell phone account with a fake SSN for two years.
When you open a bank account do they check that your SSN matches your name?
I often give a fake SSN especially when I think the organization asking for it shouldn't, like when I get cell phone service for example.
Wonder why they don't use HTML?
"Sprint is first carrier in the US to deliver what customers want most in a wireless music store - the instant gratification of downloading and owning their own personal collection of high-quality songs on a device that is always with them," said Len Lauer, chief operating officer for Sprint Nextel.
I have a Sprint Treo 650 and access to the Internet so I can already download music.
When Sprint offers broadband expect them to bundle the service somehow. This might be a bit off topic but it gives you some insight into how they operate. I'm a Sprint customer and I tried to email a video using their email service that came with the phone and I got some bullshit message saying I could purchase the ability to email video for extra $$ -- special offer, etc. You know the kinda of crap. Anyway, I just downloaded a third party email client and sent it to my regular mail. But they try this kinda stuff constantly.
And judging by the complexity of their service plans I guess they'll be trying to charge extra for nothing to unsuspecting idiots. Pretty sure they spend more on marketing than technology.
"A very nasty bundle is downloaded to your machine" when you click on the worm link ...
Why with anyone write a chat program where you can install (and obviously run) a program just by clicking on a link?
Besides that, in Windows isn't there a way to run programs (like chat) as an innocuous (nobody) user limited only to that user's home directory and with limited write capabilities?
What gives?