There are a number of possible circumstances where a router might try to respond, then tie up resources. Example, if let's say that a routing, ARP, or layer-2 protocol arises inappropriately with distinct, yet smelly malformed garbage as a payload. Or a BGP dump sequence is done that confuses the router or blows its delicate cache tables. Spanning tree malformations can do it. Ooops. Better not say more. Isn't IOS invulnerable or something?
I'm very interested to see what happens. Acer bought Altos long ago, and got a taste of 'nix through a long series of OEM and VAR relationships. That said, many vendors have used Linux adoption as a ruse to solidify their game with Microsoft-- who hates to cave but wants to win at the end of the day, more or less as psychosis.
There becomes a inheritance of other compatibility that will become a nyah-nyah sort of thing, and I hope that instead it becomes a better seed than that.
The difference between fringes on both sides are difficult for even experts to detect, as they're almost the same. It's a circular, rather than directional, politic.
Simplicity may not be bliss. I wonder how many months your ISP will let you deduct the 5e from your bill until they shut you off completely, removing you from consideration.....
The 'news' value is that a huge, major OEM of Windows is drifting towards Linux support, which means that driver availability, support, integration, and application components get a new protagonist, and a powerful one at that.
Ideological reasons aside, it's a major deal for such a huge OEM of Microsoft to have committed to the 'enemy' camp. And as Acer is very influential in Asia, it also means that others will likely follow suit in a 'herd' effect.
1) write a checksum to a page; if it doesn't match (or another hashing method doesn't match) warn the user that the page has been intercepted and corrupted; the code might not be too tough
2) Use page receipts to vet page authentication
3) litigate, especially for copyright violation as the page has been misused by an intermediary for a purpose not intended by the page's author
4) other solutions that someone will think of; stop the page vandals NOW!
It's nice that you found a good free service. It's up to the target of the document to determine its authenticity, by caller-id (yeah, it can be forged, it's just a v.29 encoding trick), or some other mechanism. I fax PDFs frequently. They come from an origin that is also my online fax#. The mere fact that it's being an expected document helps. Of course, more than one prisoner's been released by chicanery in faxes submitted to various police departments. Forgery and fraud are everywhere.... but the caller-id helps.
Using email isn't illegal for sending legal documents. That's a misconception.
The entity requiring documents may not accept email; that's up to them. The emailed document may have no 'standing'. Faxes, by contrast, have standing. Current laws don't make sending emailed documents Illegal. They just have no standing in varying jurisdictions, for various submission requirements. There's a huge difference.
I send a lot of PDFs that are accepted-- generated with my 'rubber stamp' GIF signature file. I've yet to have someone turn it down, but then I'm not a lawyer, and fortunately don't have many dealings needing legal document correspondence.
If I do, I take the PDF, send it through J2 as a fax, and it meets all tests (so far).
There is no vetting methodology for submission of transactional emails. There is a vetting methodology that follows along the line of current document submission/transmission law.
There are methods that prevent non-repudiation, sender authentication, time/date of submission, and content integrity for emails, and some of these are standardized but because there is no consensus or referential agreement, there is no email law that vets the integrity of the process-- as there is for faxes.
In my post, I said no such thing about emails-- just faxes. Email forgery is huge and repudiation is simple. Not so in faxes. Yes, both can be easily misused, but even paper documents have their problems.
The document sent can be doctored in many ways, but there are lots of precedents about misrepresentation, forgery, larceny, and so on. The laws don't need to be changed. If someone forges or misrepresents information, then they're criminally and civilly liable for that action.
We accept and trust people and their submitted documents. Fancy that.
What? They're not real? That's a bad thing. Time to call the prosecutors. Jail for that? Really? Good.
Livable? Wait and see. I get 45 spams/hr because stupid site editors put my email address on them. Address harvestors, usually with Chinese tracerouted addresses, gulp them up. I get the damndest offers, and on weekends, it goes up.
Say I visit a site with a gaudy flash app that chews up bandwidth, download a couple of distros, and have the five people in my house that share my connection get updates, and just do a little bit of surfing, maybe eBay.
5GB sadly, just isn't going to do it. Don't let these cranks spoil your day-- if they try it, consider switching. Like Johnny Carson might have said, may the flies of a thousand camels infest their armpits.
Were it new.... but flash has been around for a while. Write-cycle fatigue is well known, as are the work-arounds. As ROM, it's unmatched. As RAM, it's defeatable, but the defeats are the crux of many patents, and it's a patent war that will ensue, for a while.
Uh, no. Tubes were once used in almost every radio and TV set before transistors, and then integrated circuits. I'm not talking about audio-frequency rise-time characteristics to transformers in push-pull circuits.
We're talking about spindles balancing platters at 15Krpm and slower, attempting to over a long life cycle, correctly position a head over a platter using the Bernoulli Effect to prevent skinning the magnetic substrate of the platter.
Tubes aren't electro-mechanical, while drives are.
And I have a couple of old RCA 6L6GC matched pairs sitting on my shelf next to the 1-bit IBM-pull ring tubes. Then there's the 16GB flash drive in my computer, dangling like some sort of pack of chewing gum. Spinning disk drives had their place, and now SSD designs will supplant them. Digital is digital, and so analog references aren't much use here.
Spinning hard disks will go the way of tubes in ten years, more likely faster than that. Scaling the manufacturing up will drive SSD drive costs down. There are long-life reasons why:
- SSDs aren't as vibration sensitive (both will not take a bullet, but only SSD can likely survive a normal drop of 2M on to concrete) - SSDs don't have the temperature/altitude constraints - SSDs don't have latency and no rise/shutdown time for green needs, in fact, they use hardly any power at all - SSDs are generally faster, although there are algorithms needed in flash to prevent bucket overuse because reads are almost infinite, but writes are not - SSDs take less in terms of precious metals and present fewer QA problems - No electromechanicals to wear out.
The price point? Going down. It's an obvious solution to a long time problem. Magnetic versus flash storage will tend to favor flash, as magnetism decays sooner than flash will-- when flash is written to correctly.
We would hope that the Smith Act would be struck down, but it's survived so far. Seditious libel goes far back in history, and I cite it as an example of how suppression of hostile speech against governments serves the governments, and not necessarily the aims of its citizenry.
A paranoid presidency has been known to do many things. Sedition isn't protected.... yet. During the 1960's, seditious speech was real and we were at a similar tipping point in history after a failed war, a rattled economy, and the threats of violence from equality movements. We had riots. Things burned. People were in fear. Governments became paranoid, and they did stupid things. The governmental reaction against perceived sedition can happen again.
I'm not in denial over the fact that it's a well-funded operation. I also know that it's been dealt blows. Its figurehead remains, as do its splintered cells.
It's a bunch of bad guys. We've spent over a trillion dollars, and have little but enmity to show for it, that and the lives of dedicated servicemen and women. My ancestors fought for a free society, not one where you nearly have to undress to get on an airliner because of airline-hires that didn't do their jobs on 9/11. They didn't fight so that some bonehead can search you before you go into a minor league baseball game. They didn't fight so that the government could listen in on just about all of the communications that you do. They fought for liberty, and these thefts of liberty don't come at the price of security-- that's foolishness that's long been cited by various real patriots.
Gitmo is a travesty of justice. It's a dubious legal ruse. It's a place where we *torture* people, as we've done across the Middle East and EU. We're subscribers to the UN writs of human rights, signators and progenitors on pacts that forbid this.
How silly we've gotten can be easily manifested in the arrests of the hapless bunch in Florida. If every group that bitched and threatened to do something negative towards the government were incarcerated, it would far exceed the toll in prisons now-- the highest in the 'civilized' world.
I feel for the families of those who've been killed in this war that was based on oil-- for if it were based on dissolving terrorist threats, it would have been far less expensive and far more effective. Instead, it was based on a ruse, continues to be a ruse, and the fear-mongering that led to these wars must be ended.
Uh, no it's not. The Smith Act is still on the books, although not enforced. Other sedition laws have been thrown out by the courts, but The Smith Act can still be used. It just isn't. Common sense warrants someone to advocate removing this Act, but there are no guts in the legislatures.
This is about security theater-- the kind where a fellow with a tin-badge, unsworn, wants to examine you more than superficially. This isn't about a direct attack on US resources.
Japan was the country that attacked Pearl. A small group of extremists attacked NY, the Pentagon, as well as Madrid and London. It wasn't a country, it wasn't even much of a region. And we haven't found the perps, only mislabeled many groups as being "them". The clear enemy you cite was Japan. The clear enemy I cite is the group calling themselves 'Al Qaeda'.
Chinese weren't responsible in WW2, even though they look like they're the Japanese ethnically. It was the Japanese. In the case of Al Qaeda, they're the guilty parties, not the Iraqi, not the Afghani, not the Syrians, although none of them were particularly splendid by US values, quite the contrary.
The word terrorist is a widely cast net. We know specifically who these individuals are. We've paid immense amounts of money to Pakistan, yet the Pakistani governments haven't allowed us the ability to get at the supposed hideouts in NW Pakistan.
Summary: get your enemies right, and punish them. Use the rule of law, not the rule of the bullet. If the bullet is the result of the rule of law, then use the bullet but not until then.
Yes, I'm a researcher. I don't pick and choose my views, rather, they're the culmination of vetted research rather than innuendo. The great conspiracies have been debunked. Yes, there are groups out there with bad intentions, but they don't warrant what the administration has done to civil rights. They have, however, allowed their aggressive and boorish behavior to motivate a lot of people that weren't interested before, in doing the US harm.
Today, Scott McClellan's new book of revelations of the Bush Administration became available. It outlines much of what's been feared about this administration. Before, I thought McClellan was merely a stooge and mouthpiece. He admitted as much, and regrets it.
In a fit of heretofore unrecognized honesty, he reveals what he believes to be the truth; he borders on seditious speech, but sometimes sedition is a component of truth and change for the better.
So twice today, I violate my own policy: first by replying to an AC, and secondly by having praise for a member of the Bush administration. Beware of meteor strikes, odd lottery ticket wins, and perhaps blue moons..... this won't happen again soon, I fear.
Slashdot Mirror
There are a number of possible circumstances where a router might try to respond, then tie up resources. Example, if let's say that a routing, ARP, or layer-2 protocol arises inappropriately with distinct, yet smelly malformed garbage as a payload. Or a BGP dump sequence is done that confuses the router or blows its delicate cache tables. Spanning tree malformations can do it. Ooops. Better not say more. Isn't IOS invulnerable or something?
too much work. imagine the possibilities and the parser you'd have to write to do that.
I'm very interested to see what happens. Acer bought Altos long ago, and got a taste of 'nix through a long series of OEM and VAR relationships. That said, many vendors have used Linux adoption as a ruse to solidify their game with Microsoft-- who hates to cave but wants to win at the end of the day, more or less as psychosis.
There becomes a inheritance of other compatibility that will become a nyah-nyah sort of thing, and I hope that instead it becomes a better seed than that.
The difference between fringes on both sides are difficult for even experts to detect, as they're almost the same. It's a circular, rather than directional, politic.
Mod parent up.
Consolidation during periods of lax regulation and other useful negligence will continue. So will the price of gas/fuel.
Watch Revol merge with T-Mobile, Virgin Mobile, and produced RevolTing Virgin Mobile.
Write back when you get sober....
Or when Limbaugh fires you....
Simplicity may not be bliss. I wonder how many months your ISP will let you deduct the 5e from your bill until they shut you off completely, removing you from consideration.....
The 'news' value is that a huge, major OEM of Windows is drifting towards Linux support, which means that driver availability, support, integration, and application components get a new protagonist, and a powerful one at that.
Ideological reasons aside, it's a major deal for such a huge OEM of Microsoft to have committed to the 'enemy' camp. And as Acer is very influential in Asia, it also means that others will likely follow suit in a 'herd' effect.
1) write a checksum to a page; if it doesn't match (or another hashing method doesn't match) warn the user that the page has been intercepted and corrupted; the code might not be too tough
2) Use page receipts to vet page authentication
3) litigate, especially for copyright violation as the page has been misused by an intermediary for a purpose not intended by the page's author
4) other solutions that someone will think of; stop the page vandals NOW!
It's nice that you found a good free service. It's up to the target of the document to determine its authenticity, by caller-id (yeah, it can be forged, it's just a v.29 encoding trick), or some other mechanism. I fax PDFs frequently. They come from an origin that is also my online fax#. The mere fact that it's being an expected document helps. Of course, more than one prisoner's been released by chicanery in faxes submitted to various police departments. Forgery and fraud are everywhere.... but the caller-id helps.
Using email isn't illegal for sending legal documents. That's a misconception.
The entity requiring documents may not accept email; that's up to them. The emailed document may have no 'standing'. Faxes, by contrast, have standing. Current laws don't make sending emailed documents Illegal. They just have no standing in varying jurisdictions, for various submission requirements. There's a huge difference.
I send a lot of PDFs that are accepted-- generated with my 'rubber stamp' GIF signature file. I've yet to have someone turn it down, but then I'm not a lawyer, and fortunately don't have many dealings needing legal document correspondence.
If I do, I take the PDF, send it through J2 as a fax, and it meets all tests (so far).
There is no vetting methodology for submission of transactional emails. There is a vetting methodology that follows along the line of current document submission/transmission law.
There are methods that prevent non-repudiation, sender authentication, time/date of submission, and content integrity for emails, and some of these are standardized but because there is no consensus or referential agreement, there is no email law that vets the integrity of the process-- as there is for faxes.
In my post, I said no such thing about emails-- just faxes. Email forgery is huge and repudiation is simple. Not so in faxes. Yes, both can be easily misused, but even paper documents have their problems.
The document sent can be doctored in many ways, but there are lots of precedents about misrepresentation, forgery, larceny, and so on. The laws don't need to be changed. If someone forges or misrepresents information, then they're criminally and civilly liable for that action.
We accept and trust people and their submitted documents. Fancy that.
What? They're not real? That's a bad thing. Time to call the prosecutors. Jail for that? Really? Good.
It's a setup. This is the leading edge. Best to tamp it now.
OTOH, something needs to be done about the efficiency of torrent-like distribution methods. There has to be a better way.
As long as our legislature is as bribed by lobbyists and campaign contributors, we have no voice-- money is louder than votes.
Livable? Wait and see. I get 45 spams/hr because stupid site editors put my email address on them. Address harvestors, usually with Chinese tracerouted addresses, gulp them up. I get the damndest offers, and on weekends, it goes up.
Say I visit a site with a gaudy flash app that chews up bandwidth, download a couple of distros, and have the five people in my house that share my connection get updates, and just do a little bit of surfing, maybe eBay.
5GB sadly, just isn't going to do it. Don't let these cranks spoil your day-- if they try it, consider switching. Like Johnny Carson might have said, may the flies of a thousand camels infest their armpits.
Think meters.
Were it new.... but flash has been around for a while. Write-cycle fatigue is well known, as are the work-arounds. As ROM, it's unmatched. As RAM, it's defeatable, but the defeats are the crux of many patents, and it's a patent war that will ensue, for a while.
Uh, no. Tubes were once used in almost every radio and TV set before transistors, and then integrated circuits. I'm not talking about audio-frequency rise-time characteristics to transformers in push-pull circuits.
We're talking about spindles balancing platters at 15Krpm and slower, attempting to over a long life cycle, correctly position a head over a platter using the Bernoulli Effect to prevent skinning the magnetic substrate of the platter.
Tubes aren't electro-mechanical, while drives are.
And I have a couple of old RCA 6L6GC matched pairs sitting on my shelf next to the 1-bit IBM-pull ring tubes. Then there's the 16GB flash drive in my computer, dangling like some sort of pack of chewing gum. Spinning disk drives had their place, and now SSD designs will supplant them. Digital is digital, and so analog references aren't much use here.
Spinning hard disks will go the way of tubes in ten years, more likely faster than that. Scaling the manufacturing up will drive SSD drive costs down. There are long-life reasons why:
- SSDs aren't as vibration sensitive (both will not take a bullet, but only SSD can likely survive a normal drop of 2M on to concrete)
- SSDs don't have the temperature/altitude constraints
- SSDs don't have latency and no rise/shutdown time for green needs, in fact, they use hardly any power at all
- SSDs are generally faster, although there are algorithms needed in flash to prevent bucket overuse because reads are almost infinite, but writes are not
- SSDs take less in terms of precious metals and present fewer QA problems
- No electromechanicals to wear out.
The price point? Going down. It's an obvious solution to a long time problem. Magnetic versus flash storage will tend to favor flash, as magnetism decays sooner than flash will-- when flash is written to correctly.
We would hope that the Smith Act would be struck down, but it's survived so far. Seditious libel goes far back in history, and I cite it as an example of how suppression of hostile speech against governments serves the governments, and not necessarily the aims of its citizenry.
A paranoid presidency has been known to do many things. Sedition isn't protected.... yet. During the 1960's, seditious speech was real and we were at a similar tipping point in history after a failed war, a rattled economy, and the threats of violence from equality movements. We had riots. Things burned. People were in fear. Governments became paranoid, and they did stupid things. The governmental reaction against perceived sedition can happen again.
I'm not in denial over the fact that it's a well-funded operation. I also know that it's been dealt blows. Its figurehead remains, as do its splintered cells.
It's a bunch of bad guys. We've spent over a trillion dollars, and have little but enmity to show for it, that and the lives of dedicated servicemen and women. My ancestors fought for a free society, not one where you nearly have to undress to get on an airliner because of airline-hires that didn't do their jobs on 9/11. They didn't fight so that some bonehead can search you before you go into a minor league baseball game. They didn't fight so that the government could listen in on just about all of the communications that you do. They fought for liberty, and these thefts of liberty don't come at the price of security-- that's foolishness that's long been cited by various real patriots.
Gitmo is a travesty of justice. It's a dubious legal ruse. It's a place where we *torture* people, as we've done across the Middle East and EU. We're subscribers to the UN writs of human rights, signators and progenitors on pacts that forbid this.
How silly we've gotten can be easily manifested in the arrests of the hapless bunch in Florida. If every group that bitched and threatened to do something negative towards the government were incarcerated, it would far exceed the toll in prisons now-- the highest in the 'civilized' world.
I feel for the families of those who've been killed in this war that was based on oil-- for if it were based on dissolving terrorist threats, it would have been far less expensive and far more effective. Instead, it was based on a ruse, continues to be a ruse, and the fear-mongering that led to these wars must be ended.
Uh, no it's not. The Smith Act is still on the books, although not enforced. Other sedition laws have been thrown out by the courts, but The Smith Act can still be used. It just isn't. Common sense warrants someone to advocate removing this Act, but there are no guts in the legislatures.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_Act.
You miss the context.
This is about security theater-- the kind where a fellow with a tin-badge, unsworn, wants to examine you more than superficially. This isn't about a direct attack on US resources.
Japan was the country that attacked Pearl. A small group of extremists attacked NY, the Pentagon, as well as Madrid and London. It wasn't a country, it wasn't even much of a region. And we haven't found the perps, only mislabeled many groups as being "them". The clear enemy you cite was Japan. The clear enemy I cite is the group calling themselves 'Al Qaeda'.
Chinese weren't responsible in WW2, even though they look like they're the Japanese ethnically. It was the Japanese. In the case of Al Qaeda, they're the guilty parties, not the Iraqi, not the Afghani, not the Syrians, although none of them were particularly splendid by US values, quite the contrary.
The word terrorist is a widely cast net. We know specifically who these individuals are. We've paid immense amounts of money to Pakistan, yet the Pakistani governments haven't allowed us the ability to get at the supposed hideouts in NW Pakistan.
Summary: get your enemies right, and punish them. Use the rule of law, not the rule of the bullet. If the bullet is the result of the rule of law, then use the bullet but not until then.
Yes, I'm a researcher. I don't pick and choose my views, rather, they're the culmination of vetted research rather than innuendo. The great conspiracies have been debunked. Yes, there are groups out there with bad intentions, but they don't warrant what the administration has done to civil rights. They have, however, allowed their aggressive and boorish behavior to motivate a lot of people that weren't interested before, in doing the US harm.
Today, Scott McClellan's new book of revelations of the Bush Administration became available. It outlines much of what's been feared about this administration. Before, I thought McClellan was merely a stooge and mouthpiece. He admitted as much, and regrets it.
In a fit of heretofore unrecognized honesty, he reveals what he believes to be the truth; he borders on seditious speech, but sometimes sedition is a component of truth and change for the better.
So twice today, I violate my own policy: first by replying to an AC, and secondly by having praise for a member of the Bush administration. Beware of meteor strikes, odd lottery ticket wins, and perhaps blue moons..... this won't happen again soon, I fear.