Well, if you're the type that can think of putting access to/etc/passwd into, say, an object that's destroyed just before dropping root, then you can probably think of a way to prevent yourself from calling dangling pointers too. And if you unit test properly, and avoid side-effects, you'll save a whole lot of trouble when you go to integrate, too.
It's just people being lazy, hurried, or in some unfortunate cases, stupid.
Exactly! I'm no fan of C, there's too much I've gotten used to being able to do in C++, but this just goes to show that while you can write crap code in any language, you can write good code too.
Good on ya for putting your lvals on the right of your comparisons, too.
No, this is very little new. It's the same basic programming error that's been made since day one, "whoops, I forgot." Not to mention, there's absolutely no explanation on how they've managed to put code in what's basically an arbitrary memory location.
But man, this type of thing should be a 0.01% of software type of bug. What the hell? Isn't software engineering?
Garbage collected languages is no solution to poor programming. If you can't remember to not call a function pointer that you just freed, you'll probably forget to close/etc/passwd before dropping privs, or something equally stupid.
And this isn't a "use Python" or "use Java" rant, either. I will say, however, UNIT TEST YOUR SHIT! EVERY LINE! Even the little inline function, you need to test it all! Repeat after me: Resource Acquisition Is Initialization. Resource Release Is Destruction. -Wall -Werror, no, warnings aren't OK. No, not even signed vs unsigned comparison warnings, you need to either get your data types straight or wrap that in a partial-specialization template functor that correctly checks that you won't be killed by sign-promotion when you compare int and unsigned long long. strncpy(), not strcpy()! -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage! Valgrind!
I dunno. I manage to write C++ and never overflow a buffer, always release all resources when I'm done with them, and never throw away an error. Why can't the other 95% of the programmers out there do the same thing?
Sounds exactly like the US. I hadn't heard anything about it, but I recently visited a NOC for a large national ISP that I used to work at and they showed me the data retention equipment they were required to install by new government regulations, and the amount of data they keep on us is just insane. Think a full cabinet, every U used, 1/4 rack servers and 3/4 SANs, for a region.
Out of what you've listed, what are we missing here? Only thing I can think of is the media taxes, but we'll have those soon, too. The difference is, it'll be a no-fanfare affair, prices will raise gradually, and by the time anyone realizes it, the laws are already in place.
Nah, it's possible. All you need, and this is really easy--trust me--all your need is to write an application that can run on any weird-endian processor, hundreds of different micro-oses, or in the case of java-supporting phones, break out of the java sandbox, or on brew phones just get yourself the developer certificate from qualcomm and then get the carrier to distribute your app to their customers.
This is going to be huge.
...
Well, there's always BlackBerry and Windows Mobile.
Amazing, I can't believe I've never looked into something like this. Could you recommend a good service or two? I looked around on the web a little, but I'm not sure I know how to evaluate who's a shyster and who's legit.
Aww, man, what the hell! It wasn't even modded funny! My comment's not even worth a one?.
Well, at least I can only lose one more Karma on it. Whatever you do, please, no one mod my previous post funny. I was being totally serious, and it's not funny anyway.
Normally I couldn't care less about grammar mistakes, but people misusing that phrase are in almost all cases just using it to sound smart. The indignance comes from the fact that over the years I (and many like me) have trained myself to use small words to avoid the Poindexter image. Sometimes, I'll get excited about a subject and forget to watch myself when I talk (usually when I'm drunk) and start dropping preternaturally's and vacillate's and if I'm lucky I get blank stares just when I'm really starting to make my point. most of the time it's, "Well here's the problem: you talk like a fag, your shit's all fucked up..."
So yeah, when I hear someone describe a cake as "prolific," or use an ancient phrase completely wrong, just to impress whoever they're speaking to, and it does it makes me grind my teeth a little. Here on Slashdot? Who cares? We all know their shit's all fucked up and they talk like a fag.
And where does a (hilariously) bitter young man who's obsessed with pirates find the time to write crappy movies, take slutty pictures, build broken hard drives and keep a graphics card company who doesn't make a 3D card to speak of alive?
I can see where mush-mouthing catchphrases in a falsetto and slapping each other with a fish wouldn't translate well. Too bad, I hear it's really funny in the original language.
I am listening, and I do understand that the license is what allows you to distribute it and not the other way around, but I still don't see how a kernel modification (GPL2 code) requires you to give out the keys to that kernel just because there happens to be some GPL3 code on the device too. Yes, the GPL3 blocks this type of behavior, but not for projects that aren't licensed under GPL3. Implementing DRM doesn't require any modifications to Samba, therefore you can give away every last line of Samba code, but there are no Samba keys to give away.
At this point I think we're beyond agreeing that the GPL3 is supposed to block this (but only for the project you license!), hell, I said it just a couple posts up. What I want to know now is, how is it that the GPL3 is jumping from one project to another?
They don't have to put any kind of DRM into Samba to still make the Samba server subject to DRM. Put it in the kernel, and if the kernel's key doesn't match the one in the firmware, and the file "shouldn't" be opened, the kernel denies access to the file. Samba is completely unmodified, they don't have to give out the keys because the kernel is under GPL2, and their modified kernel is the only one that can read the FS because it's encrypted. You aren't being blocked from using Samba in any way.
I highly doubt it. I don't know the legalese well enough (or law) to say for sure, but one of the main purposes of the GPL3 is to prevent exactly that.
Now, they could modify the kernel to implement the DRM, and release an unmodified Samba >=3.2. Since you could implement pretty much any DRM system in the kernel (and it's probably the best way to do it, short of hardware measures), Samba doing this stops very little. But it is cool, I think. Even though we may not be able to circumvent the DRM, we're free to do something I've wanted to do to half the electronics I own, and make modifications to it that have nothing to do with circumventing DRM, and just lets me use the product the way I want.
Wow, they just make it real easy to shoot yourself in the foot, huh? I guess banks are like Unix then. One that gives you a loaded shotgun and tells you to shoot yourself in the foot.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, if you're the type that can think of putting access to /etc/passwd into, say, an object that's destroyed just before dropping root, then you can probably think of a way to prevent yourself from calling dangling pointers too. And if you unit test properly, and avoid side-effects, you'll save a whole lot of trouble when you go to integrate, too.
It's just people being lazy, hurried, or in some unfortunate cases, stupid.
Exactly! I'm no fan of C, there's too much I've gotten used to being able to do in C++, but this just goes to show that while you can write crap code in any language, you can write good code too.
Good on ya for putting your lvals on the right of your comparisons, too.
No, this is very little new. It's the same basic programming error that's been made since day one, "whoops, I forgot." Not to mention, there's absolutely no explanation on how they've managed to put code in what's basically an arbitrary memory location.
But man, this type of thing should be a 0.01% of software type of bug. What the hell? Isn't software engineering?
Garbage collected languages is no solution to poor programming. If you can't remember to not call a function pointer that you just freed, you'll probably forget to close /etc/passwd before dropping privs, or something equally stupid.
Now all you need to do is be a real fool and try to call that dangling pointer.
And this isn't a "use Python" or "use Java" rant, either. I will say, however, UNIT TEST YOUR SHIT! EVERY LINE! Even the little inline function, you need to test it all! Repeat after me: Resource Acquisition Is Initialization. Resource Release Is Destruction. -Wall -Werror, no, warnings aren't OK. No, not even signed vs unsigned comparison warnings, you need to either get your data types straight or wrap that in a partial-specialization template functor that correctly checks that you won't be killed by sign-promotion when you compare int and unsigned long long. strncpy(), not strcpy()! -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage! Valgrind!
I dunno. I manage to write C++ and never overflow a buffer, always release all resources when I'm done with them, and never throw away an error. Why can't the other 95% of the programmers out there do the same thing?
Sounds exactly like the US. I hadn't heard anything about it, but I recently visited a NOC for a large national ISP that I used to work at and they showed me the data retention equipment they were required to install by new government regulations, and the amount of data they keep on us is just insane. Think a full cabinet, every U used, 1/4 rack servers and 3/4 SANs, for a region.
Out of what you've listed, what are we missing here? Only thing I can think of is the media taxes, but we'll have those soon, too. The difference is, it'll be a no-fanfare affair, prices will raise gradually, and by the time anyone realizes it, the laws are already in place.
Well, there's always BlackBerry and Windows Mobile.
Dude, I know.
BlackBerry? No, never heard of it.
Nah, it's possible. All you need, and this is really easy--trust me--all your need is to write an application that can run on any weird-endian processor, hundreds of different micro-oses, or in the case of java-supporting phones, break out of the java sandbox, or on brew phones just get yourself the developer certificate from qualcomm and then get the carrier to distribute your app to their customers.
This is going to be huge.
...
Well, there's always BlackBerry and Windows Mobile.
Amazing, I can't believe I've never looked into something like this. Could you recommend a good service or two? I looked around on the web a little, but I'm not sure I know how to evaluate who's a shyster and who's legit.
Dynamic DHCP! Wow! Now that's dynamic!
As an update to my tongue-in-cheek comment, maybe they really are getting it:
Stylesheet
They're trying anyway--fails, but it's actually not that bad, looks like just typos.
You can tell Intel is sincere because they've followed the Linux naming convention... and come up with one that sucks :P
Aww, man, what the hell! It wasn't even modded funny! My comment's not even worth a one?.
Well, at least I can only lose one more Karma on it. Whatever you do, please, no one mod my previous post funny. I was being totally serious, and it's not funny anyway.
Normally I couldn't care less about grammar mistakes, but people misusing that phrase are in almost all cases just using it to sound smart. The indignance comes from the fact that over the years I (and many like me) have trained myself to use small words to avoid the Poindexter image. Sometimes, I'll get excited about a subject and forget to watch myself when I talk (usually when I'm drunk) and start dropping preternaturally's and vacillate's and if I'm lucky I get blank stares just when I'm really starting to make my point. most of the time it's, "Well here's the problem: you talk like a fag, your shit's all fucked up..."
So yeah, when I hear someone describe a cake as "prolific," or use an ancient phrase completely wrong, just to impress whoever they're speaking to, and it does it makes me grind my teeth a little. Here on Slashdot? Who cares? We all know their shit's all fucked up and they talk like a fag.
And it takes a bigger man to laugh at that man.
And where does a (hilariously) bitter young man who's obsessed with pirates find the time to write crappy movies, take slutty pictures, build broken hard drives and keep a graphics card company who doesn't make a 3D card to speak of alive?
I can see where mush-mouthing catchphrases in a falsetto and slapping each other with a fish wouldn't translate well. Too bad, I hear it's really funny in the original language.
I am listening, and I do understand that the license is what allows you to distribute it and not the other way around, but I still don't see how a kernel modification (GPL2 code) requires you to give out the keys to that kernel just because there happens to be some GPL3 code on the device too. Yes, the GPL3 blocks this type of behavior, but not for projects that aren't licensed under GPL3. Implementing DRM doesn't require any modifications to Samba, therefore you can give away every last line of Samba code, but there are no Samba keys to give away.
At this point I think we're beyond agreeing that the GPL3 is supposed to block this (but only for the project you license!), hell, I said it just a couple posts up. What I want to know now is, how is it that the GPL3 is jumping from one project to another?
They don't have to put any kind of DRM into Samba to still make the Samba server subject to DRM. Put it in the kernel, and if the kernel's key doesn't match the one in the firmware, and the file "shouldn't" be opened, the kernel denies access to the file. Samba is completely unmodified, they don't have to give out the keys because the kernel is under GPL2, and their modified kernel is the only one that can read the FS because it's encrypted. You aren't being blocked from using Samba in any way.
I highly doubt it. I don't know the legalese well enough (or law) to say for sure, but one of the main purposes of the GPL3 is to prevent exactly that.
Now, they could modify the kernel to implement the DRM, and release an unmodified Samba >=3.2. Since you could implement pretty much any DRM system in the kernel (and it's probably the best way to do it, short of hardware measures), Samba doing this stops very little. But it is cool, I think. Even though we may not be able to circumvent the DRM, we're free to do something I've wanted to do to half the electronics I own, and make modifications to it that have nothing to do with circumventing DRM, and just lets me use the product the way I want.
Come shoot me, douchebag.
Just remember, if you try and fail, I'm going to fuck you in the ass for hours on end. Good luck!
Really? According to their website, it's $80. Is there another way to download it that's legal?
Wow, they just make it real easy to shoot yourself in the foot, huh? I guess banks are like Unix then. One that gives you a loaded shotgun and tells you to shoot yourself in the foot.