I think if the malware gets written to swap, the AV will detect it than, but I could be wrong.
This is the case for most major AV vendors, but depends upon HOW it is written to swap. If it is polymorphic shell code that is stored encrypted in memory, it probably won't trigger a swap scan. If it contains an easy to identify javascript exploit in plain text and is stored at the top of a swap segment or cache file, it will be detected. If you have encryption enabled for your swapfiles and cache files, no AV scanner will detect it.
I pointed this out because I am a rights holder. I do not retain a lawyer or have a publisher, however. For that matter, you are a rights holder too. Pretty much everyone who exists is a rights holder. Villifying rights holders isn't the way to go, neither is implying that only sociopathic corporations are rights holders; this just makes people think less about the rights they are forfeiting on a regular basis.
Once copyright is reduced to a short term, the **AA's of the world will be forced to continually innovate and compete (which was ironically the original purpose of copyright).
Unfortunately, they won't be forced to do this. They will instead re-mix everything they can get their hands on that is out of copyright, a la Disney. They will then increase their advertising budgets and the rates they charge for their products, as they no longer have protection.
End result? They need to spend a bit more money, end up making even more money, the public domain gets swamped with more contentless drivel, and the consumer gets screwed, as usual.
Current systems in place are experiencing an epidemic of abuse by rights holders at the expense of many innocents. The harm this kind of thing causes the many outweighs the convenience and consideration of the many.
Untrue.
Current systems in place are experiencing an epidemic of abuse by lawyers retained by organizations retained by rights-holding warehouse corporations at the expense of humanity, and many corporations. The harm this kind of thing causes the many outweighs the convenience and consideration of the many.
Or, they could just keep sending up a bunch of cheap weather balloons, drones, and other flying devices that are small enough to avoid detection by most systems and redundant enough to provide a continual intelligence net. You could probably do each one for around $80-$125, giving you $105-$150 total for each. Put up 1,000 of these, and you've got decent coverage for a large area area for a month or so, for around $120,000.
This gives the same price as your single carrier solution, with much better short-term resiliency. Still seems pretty expensive to me though; they'd have to be making a LOT of profits on something to afford to maintain this for any length of time.
The bottom line? Come 2013, when the US is mandated to support EMV, card skimming will be a thing of the past. Stick your card wherever you like, nobody can do anything with your bank account*.
*there is, of course, a small caveat to this. As I said, each transaction is unique, so theoretically someone could skim a single offline transaction from you, but if they try to replay that transaction, there's every chance the transaction will then go online (the terminal AND the chip can demand to go online at any point), in which case the host will void it immediately. There's also plenty of upper and lower transaction limits, so for example if a transaction amount is above say $50 or $100, it HAS to go online or will fail outright.
Speaking as someone who was involved in the early NA EMV specs, there is one HUGE caveat to this: All the devices that support EMV have a fallback sequence in case something goes wrong. This comes out of the department of redundancy department, as Visa moved a lot of its processes from back in the dialup authentication days forward into EMV.
End result? it's possible to block the chip slot such that when you insert a card, it reports an error and prompts you to use the magnetic stripe instead... which can be skimmed.
Until they mandate NOT using fallback to track1/track2 data, this avenue will still be possible.
There are also more advanced methods of extracting the customer keys from EMV cards (a German group pulled this off years ago) -- this doesn't give the transport or merchant key, which limits the amount of damage that can be done, but it still means the "private" data can be pulled off an EMV card and then encoded onto T2 on a card with a "damaged" chip.
2 should probably be 3 -- most kids are toilet trained between the ages of 2 and 3. Surprisingly, 17 and 28 still come within 24 hours of each other for a significant number of people. Also, underage sex would be a thing of the past, as by definition you'd be of age. 18 requires you to have access to 4 difficult video games, the ability to actually play them, and the spare time to finish them. In essence, you're allowing only those with money, spare time, and dexterity to vote. Interesting idea. 28 - so people who get married before they are 19 suddenly jump to 28, bypassing legal restrictions that come at the ages of 19 and 21 in many places. 29 - so those who are rich enough or poor enough never to have a mortgage never turn 29 -- that means only the homeowning middle class ever progress towards retirement.
I'm always hearing about how everyone in the US is desperate for talented programmers.
...and there you've hit the nail on the head. The US education system has spent the past 20 years teaching kids that it doesn't matter if you are the best in your class, as long as you try harder than everyone else.
This translates into a workforce that consists of people who don't try to do the best job they can, but instead try to "work as hard as they can" -- which usually means more hours and decreased productivity/talent (less time to learn new things).
The question is, accused by whom? Does the ISP proactively monitor for gigabytes of traffic on, say, port one-nineteen and provide John Doe's name to MAFIAA, who then asks for DPI? Or does the MAFIAA have to say they believe John Doe is downloading before the ISP confirms, without a warrant or court order, that John Doe has lots of traffic coming down from connections he initiated at that port.
It was my understanding that the ISPs mentioned were already doing the second voluntarily, which leads me to believe that they are planning to now take a more active role in monitoring.
Also, try not to actually have pirated software. Even companies that claim in policy not to use pirated software sometimes do. Even those that are really serious about only using licensed software (which includes OSS, by the way) sometimes have bad apples who do it anyway. If you don't want to end up on the wrong end of a lawsuit, don't break the law.
This is not in favor or support of the BSA at all, you just left out the point that actually not breaking the rules they're claiming you're breaking is a good idea.
Considering that if you don't have all your original receipts and licenses, the BSA considers you to have illegal copies of the software, it's not enough just to try not to have pirated software. You have to be able to prove that all the software you've actually got is legitimate. Of course, this is only if you let the BSA in the door in the first place. If you respond with "I have entered no agreements with your partner companies. I refuse your request" there's not much they can do, short of reporting a suspected copyright violation to the police (and for that they'll need the reporter's signed testimony).
One moment here... isn't one of the current arguments of the.*AAs that being in possession of, or initiating the act of downloading a digital copy in itself illegal?
Doesn't that mean that THEY are guilty of multiple acts of trafficking in counterfeit goods?
We say that something is good when it benefits people and evil when it harms people.
I think you'll find that "evil" generally requires intent. The word you are looking for is "bad." We also sometimes anthropomorphise evil onto bad events when there appears to be no balancing good that comes out of the event.
Good (positive) is to Bad as Good (saintly?) is to Evil.
The process sounds interesting but the writer is an idiot.
"we could cut down on electricity usage, CO2 output, and most importantly fresh water, which is growing more scarce by the year."
We're just shooting it all into space, right? It's not the water getting more scarce. It's TOO MANY PEOPLE vying for the same water that causes the issue. Instead of citing the actual problem, overpopulation, writers like this one refer to one of its symptoms, water shortage. As if conservation would do anything but encourage more overpopulation.
Actually, the problem is just like the writer says... fresh water is growing more scarce by the year. Polluted water (water mixed with stuff that's not potable) is increasing by the year. Added to this, we're also space shifting our water reserves from aquifers to rivers and oceans, draining them faster than they can replenish.
We've got a long way to go before the world is overpopulated; however, the current population is doing a great job of making the resources available harder to access. Conservation allows for a HIGHER population; it's not overpopulation unless the population can no longer live within its means (eg, conservation measures can't keep up with demand).
Unless you're really saying that you want to destroy the current ecostructure and get rid of all but a few people, who, even with their machines, are too few to have a lasting impact on the environment.
...but the entire idea with the unprinter is that you can reuse the paper. Can an electron microscope tell if the paper has been unprinted 12 times instead of just 11? Can it tell the date that the paper was unprinted?
It isn't actually regular laser toner, however. Checks are printed with Magnetic Ink Character Recognition (MICR) toner which allows the routing number to be detected by a magnetic scanner.
I think you mist the GP's point... most companies don't print the MICR -- that's done by their bank. They use a regular laser printer to print the date, value and the recipient. If the unprinter doesn't scrub the magnetic toner, that increases the risk of being able to just re-use someone else's cheques with a new date, value and recipient, but keep the signatures and MICR.
Obvious troll as the real Jim from Arkansas would not say "how my pastor says" but "how the Bible says" or "how God says". Attributing the pastor indicates some level of critical thinking that could make this question somewhat legitimate: "Why should I believe NASA? What evidence do they have beyond the circumstantial?"
Slashdot Mirror
ick... reading comprehension out the window. S/javascript/Java
I think if the malware gets written to swap, the AV will detect it than, but I could be wrong.
This is the case for most major AV vendors, but depends upon HOW it is written to swap. If it is polymorphic shell code that is stored encrypted in memory, it probably won't trigger a swap scan. If it contains an easy to identify javascript exploit in plain text and is stored at the top of a swap segment or cache file, it will be detected. If you have encryption enabled for your swapfiles and cache files, no AV scanner will detect it.
This is not a virus, but it does use a command and control server.
I pointed this out because I am a rights holder. I do not retain a lawyer or have a publisher, however.
For that matter, you are a rights holder too. Pretty much everyone who exists is a rights holder. Villifying rights holders isn't the way to go, neither is implying that only sociopathic corporations are rights holders; this just makes people think less about the rights they are forfeiting on a regular basis.
Once copyright is reduced to a short term, the **AA's of the world will be forced to continually innovate and compete (which was ironically the original purpose of copyright).
Unfortunately, they won't be forced to do this. They will instead re-mix everything they can get their hands on that is out of copyright, a la Disney. They will then increase their advertising budgets and the rates they charge for their products, as they no longer have protection.
End result? They need to spend a bit more money, end up making even more money, the public domain gets swamped with more contentless drivel, and the consumer gets screwed, as usual.
Current systems in place are experiencing an epidemic of abuse by rights holders at the expense of many innocents. The harm this kind of thing causes the many outweighs the convenience and consideration of the many.
Untrue.
Current systems in place are experiencing an epidemic of abuse by lawyers retained by organizations retained by rights-holding warehouse corporations at the expense of humanity, and many corporations. The harm this kind of thing causes the many outweighs the convenience and consideration of the many.
Eye Here Yah; its a tuff road to hoe. Your doing ride by it. Keep towing the line.
Or, they could just keep sending up a bunch of cheap weather balloons, drones, and other flying devices that are small enough to avoid detection by most systems and redundant enough to provide a continual intelligence net. You could probably do each one for around $80-$125, giving you $105-$150 total for each. Put up 1,000 of these, and you've got decent coverage for a large area area for a month or so, for around $120,000.
This gives the same price as your single carrier solution, with much better short-term resiliency. Still seems pretty expensive to me though; they'd have to be making a LOT of profits on something to afford to maintain this for any length of time.
The bottom line? Come 2013, when the US is mandated to support EMV, card skimming will be a thing of the past. Stick your card wherever you like, nobody can do anything with your bank account*.
*there is, of course, a small caveat to this. As I said, each transaction is unique, so theoretically someone could skim a single offline transaction from you, but if they try to replay that transaction, there's every chance the transaction will then go online (the terminal AND the chip can demand to go online at any point), in which case the host will void it immediately. There's also plenty of upper and lower transaction limits, so for example if a transaction amount is above say $50 or $100, it HAS to go online or will fail outright.
Speaking as someone who was involved in the early NA EMV specs, there is one HUGE caveat to this:
All the devices that support EMV have a fallback sequence in case something goes wrong. This comes out of the department of redundancy department, as Visa moved a lot of its processes from back in the dialup authentication days forward into EMV.
End result? it's possible to block the chip slot such that when you insert a card, it reports an error and prompts you to use the magnetic stripe instead... which can be skimmed.
Until they mandate NOT using fallback to track1/track2 data, this avenue will still be possible.
There are also more advanced methods of extracting the customer keys from EMV cards (a German group pulled this off years ago) -- this doesn't give the transport or merchant key, which limits the amount of damage that can be done, but it still means the "private" data can be pulled off an EMV card and then encoded onto T2 on a card with a "damaged" chip.
2 should probably be 3 -- most kids are toilet trained between the ages of 2 and 3.
Surprisingly, 17 and 28 still come within 24 hours of each other for a significant number of people. Also, underage sex would be a thing of the past, as by definition you'd be of age.
18 requires you to have access to 4 difficult video games, the ability to actually play them, and the spare time to finish them. In essence, you're allowing only those with money, spare time, and dexterity to vote. Interesting idea.
28 - so people who get married before they are 19 suddenly jump to 28, bypassing legal restrictions that come at the ages of 19 and 21 in many places.
29 - so those who are rich enough or poor enough never to have a mortgage never turn 29 -- that means only the homeowning middle class ever progress towards retirement.
It would definitely alter society :D
I'm always hearing about how everyone in the US is desperate for talented programmers.
...and there you've hit the nail on the head. The US education system has spent the past 20 years teaching kids that it doesn't matter if you are the best in your class, as long as you try harder than everyone else.
This translates into a workforce that consists of people who don't try to do the best job they can, but instead try to "work as hard as they can" -- which usually means more hours and decreased productivity/talent (less time to learn new things).
This has been rubbing off on Canada too.
The question is, accused by whom? Does the ISP proactively monitor for gigabytes of traffic on, say, port one-nineteen and provide John Doe's name to MAFIAA, who then asks for DPI? Or does the MAFIAA have to say they believe John Doe is downloading before the ISP confirms, without a warrant or court order, that John Doe has lots of traffic coming down from connections he initiated at that port.
It was my understanding that the ISPs mentioned were already doing the second voluntarily, which leads me to believe that they are planning to now take a more active role in monitoring.
Pretty much what I said after I hit post and realized I'd mist the typo....
Assuming people use SSL or something similar, how will ISPs know when someone is violating copyrights?
All they need for suspicion of violation is your DNS lookup records, routing table history, and protocol volume history.
There's a LOT of data that gets passed through your ISP that's below/beside the TLS layer.
They'll look for things like: Spewing torrent connections but not connected to an OSS or MMORPG server? You're getting investigated.
Also, try not to actually have pirated software. Even companies that claim in policy not to use pirated software sometimes do. Even those that are really serious about only using licensed software (which includes OSS, by the way) sometimes have bad apples who do it anyway. If you don't want to end up on the wrong end of a lawsuit, don't break the law.
This is not in favor or support of the BSA at all, you just left out the point that actually not breaking the rules they're claiming you're breaking is a good idea.
Considering that if you don't have all your original receipts and licenses, the BSA considers you to have illegal copies of the software, it's not enough just to try not to have pirated software. You have to be able to prove that all the software you've actually got is legitimate. Of course, this is only if you let the BSA in the door in the first place. If you respond with "I have entered no agreements with your partner companies. I refuse your request" there's not much they can do, short of reporting a suspected copyright violation to the police (and for that they'll need the reporter's signed testimony).
What if you fax them? No illegal printing/copying on your side, just theirs.
One moment here... isn't one of the current arguments of the .*AAs that being in possession of, or initiating the act of downloading a digital copy in itself illegal?
Doesn't that mean that THEY are guilty of multiple acts of trafficking in counterfeit goods?
Bzzt! Wrong!
We say that something is good when it benefits people and evil when it harms people.
I think you'll find that "evil" generally requires intent. The word you are looking for is "bad." We also sometimes anthropomorphise evil onto bad events when there appears to be no balancing good that comes out of the event.
Good (positive) is to Bad as Good (saintly?) is to Evil.
Now this is odd... why does something factual and completely on-topic get modded overrated?
Likely because it actually says the opposite of what people like to believe -- that politicians don't actually pay attention to people.
Either that, or it was due to the fact that the parent "nobody is listening" that I'm rebutting was downmodded for trolling in the first place.
Now THIS message should rightfully be downmodded.
Yes yes but how does it taste?
With its tongue and nose, of course.
Now they need a charged drum that collects the vaporized toner and puts it in cartridges....
The process sounds interesting but the writer is an idiot.
"we could cut down on electricity usage, CO2 output, and most importantly fresh water, which is growing more scarce by the year."
We're just shooting it all into space, right? It's not the water getting more scarce. It's TOO MANY PEOPLE vying for the same water that causes the issue. Instead of citing the actual problem, overpopulation, writers like this one refer to one of its symptoms, water shortage. As if conservation would do anything but encourage more overpopulation.
Actually, the problem is just like the writer says... fresh water is growing more scarce by the year. Polluted water (water mixed with stuff that's not potable) is increasing by the year. Added to this, we're also space shifting our water reserves from aquifers to rivers and oceans, draining them faster than they can replenish.
We've got a long way to go before the world is overpopulated; however, the current population is doing a great job of making the resources available harder to access. Conservation allows for a HIGHER population; it's not overpopulation unless the population can no longer live within its means (eg, conservation measures can't keep up with demand).
Unless you're really saying that you want to destroy the current ecostructure and get rid of all but a few people, who, even with their machines, are too few to have a lasting impact on the environment.
...but the entire idea with the unprinter is that you can reuse the paper. Can an electron microscope tell if the paper has been unprinted 12 times instead of just 11? Can it tell the date that the paper was unprinted?
It isn't actually regular laser toner, however. Checks are printed with Magnetic Ink Character Recognition (MICR) toner which allows the routing number to be detected by a magnetic scanner.
I think you mist the GP's point... most companies don't print the MICR -- that's done by their bank. They use a regular laser printer to print the date, value and the recipient. If the unprinter doesn't scrub the magnetic toner, that increases the risk of being able to just re-use someone else's cheques with a new date, value and recipient, but keep the signatures and MICR.
Obvious troll as the real Jim from Arkansas would not say "how my pastor says" but "how the Bible says" or "how God says". Attributing the pastor indicates some level of critical thinking that could make this question somewhat legitimate: "Why should I believe NASA? What evidence do they have beyond the circumstantial?"