It's not like you can't already buy software for that. Most of the suppliers for these have a long list of non disclosed governmental agencies of various countries as their customers. I'm fairly certain most will also have sold their product to regimes that were considered "okay" at the time but fell from grace later on.
Losing subs because of a slight malfunction costs too much. It may in theory be a perfect solution, but the chances of the sub getting lost versus the costs of building one, currently make it an unprofitable risk. Even with the significant chance of snapping the umbilical, that is still cheaper than risk losing unmanned crafts. There are frequent stories of research vessels losing an unmanned sub, usually costing six figures or more. You don't hear much about commercial vessels losing subs, but the oil and glass-fiber-cable-on-the-ocean-floor companies have plenty of experience with risk calculations and choosing the cheapest solution to get the job done. They default to cable operation, unless they can't avoid untethered. In that case, they usually outsource the job. The military and secret services know a thing or two about this as well, but won't tell you, even if you ask.
This all being said, it's about time people come up with a more reliable way to control and propel unmanned submarines. Using some form of transmitter station lowered to some place close where the sub is, might make getting signals through easier. However, water isn't as uniform a transmission medium as you might think. Currents and temperature differences make layers that can be reflective to radio and sound waves. It would be kind of embarrassing to lose a submarine because you crossed an inversion and your signal wasn't getting through.
Diving breathing issues aren't about gas pressure, but about saturation of blood and tissue with gasses. At higher pressure, your blood and tissue take up way more gasses than they do at surface pressure. Therefor, if you dive deep, you will become equivalent to a soda bottle. If you surface too quick, it's like someone shakes you and then takes the cap of the bottle. All of a sudden, there will be bubbles in your entire body. Those bubbles will kill your (brain) cells, by oxygen deprivation.
At higher pressures, gasses that are normally "inert" to the human body tissue, will form chemical bonds with your tissues, making the gasses poisonous. That is why there are different gas mixtures used for high pressure (deep) dives.
Even if you can overcome this by using liquids to replace the gasses, it appears that your nerve tissue will have electrical/chemical problems transmitting signals at about 750 meters (75 times atmospheric pressure).
I'd welcome the day that I can block google from my Internet experience. Their insistence on wanting your personal data just because you want to use a smart phone with features and services that are provided by several other parties is annoying me highly. Not to the point that I'd step over to Apple, because they essentially do the same, but to the point that I choose not to use smart phones. If an alternative to android would become available, I'd be more than happy to try it out.
The whole concept of PWNing is that someone comes up with a way to circumvent the security built into that system. Sure, multiple layers like you describe will hopefully catch the intruder at some other point, where they try to do something that triggers an alarm. However, there is nothing you can do against zero-day vulnerabilities, other than multilayer your security and set up proper alerting.
People smart enough to find a zero day in a common and well tested browser, tend to be smart enough to write "payload code" that will not be detected by your virus scanner as well. Most likely, they will disable your local (windows) firewall (the payload would have to be OS specific anyway) and get the information they are after back to themselves some way.
Like others already said, you won't get to hear details on how they got through until after the patch has been rolled out and you can download a fixed version. If you want to learn how to defend yourself against zero-days in general, read what the leak was, do that for as many other zero-day vulnerabilities as you can spend time on and come up with generic defenses that will help against as much of those as possible. Just concentrating on this one won't do you any good.
Since the USA government has taken control of the servers controlling.com,.net and.org, they can now officially be considered Rogue Servers. The common Internet practice is to route around this and tell the root servers that other servers have taken their place. It would be wise to place those servers outside of USA jurisdiction, to prevent a case of takeover in the future. I'm sure RIPE, IANA and other organizations are more than capable of coming up with a technical solution to deal with this.
Sure, data got in, Stuxnet got in. But no data got out. If you want to protect your IP from "theft" (they still have the data, so any file sharing evangelist won't call it theft) landlocking seems like a perfect layer of security. Trusting just the one layer is not very smart, but as security layers come, in this case, it would be quite effective.
Encrypting each individual track and storing the keys on another landlocked location would make it a lot better, but it would make access to the date quite a bit more cumbersome.
It usually is one interest group getting a strategic alliance with some other interest groups, thereby getting themselves a majority of votes. Now the interest groups that each individually represent a minority opinion can have their minority opinion pushed through because they have the backing up of other groups to do so. In practice, most political decisions made, have less than 40% of actual people supporting the decision and over 50% opposing it.
What practical use is a hand gun, apart from killing or wounding people? Hunting isn't practical with a hand gun (you'd rather have a rifle) and "shooting targets" might be a nice hobby, but it's not very practical. Hand guns are made with the only and specific practical purpose of hurting humans. Hand guns are used in a very large percentage of violent interactions causing hospitalization and death of humans in the USA. There is no way that gun manufacturers aren't aware of those statistics, yet they keep on allowing their products being sold in shops. After all, "guns don't kill people, people do". With this jurisprudence, gun manufacturers are just as guilty. Either that, or someone got wrongly convicted here. I can see the weapons manufacturers wanting to see this case appealed, because this is their income at stake.
Until very recently, it was very hard to get private data on anyone else than the roughly 500 people you would encounter most of your life. If you'd move to the next town, only a few people would know just a little about you. If you moved a bit further, you'd be a stranger amongst strangers. It's not since we started automating our records that we have had a real serious problem.
Keeping records may sound nice, but what purpose does the record hold? If you don't really absolutely need the information, you may want to reconsider. Modern history has plenty of proof where "innocent data" has been used by people for not-so-innocent purposes. The first true example in my countries history, sorry to Godwin here, is in World War II. The Dutch were very meticulous about registering everyone in local government administration, including their religion. Once the Germans got here, it was a breeze for them to single out every Jew, go to their home and put them on a deportation train to the camps. It hasn't been the only example in history and it won't be the last.
Keeping records and tabs on everyone will not be purely beneficial. Sooner or later, giving up the data might just not be a benefit to you anymore and you regret you gave it up in exchange for something trivial. The more we do it, the bigger the chance that we get hurt. E-mail spam has grown to such a level that it takes an enormous effort just to keep e-mail as a system practical and controllable. The more data you leak, the more targeted spam you'll get. Not just in e-mail, but your phone, you IM, your social networks, everything is spammed to bits.
It's not just spam. How would you like to have to pay more for your health insurance, because your insurance company found on your FaceBook that you practice a sport that they think is risky? How about paying more for your car insurance, because you know how to properly use your car and the black box put there by the company registers your higher curve velocity as "dangerous driving"? How about being fired for results from a medical test taken in a hospital for something unrelated showing you have been smoking something your employer disagrees with? I can keep on giving examples and sooner or later, there will be one where even you will say "Sorry, but that is just too much invasion of my privacy".
Writing tools to configure cable modems is what he got convicted for. He just wrote some tools so you could BOOTP your cable modem with a "valid" MAC and uncapped access speed. The cable companies knew they were putting the security in the dynamically configured end user device. They didn't fix the security flaw after it was publicly known. All the guy did was write an exploit for a publicly known bug, others (end users) were the ones that abused it.
Oh well, at least now there is jurisprudence to put gun manufacturers into jail. After all, they make the tools that others use to commit crimes, which is what this guy is going to do hard time for.
Try running FireFox 10 on a Windows XP 32 bit system. Everything works, until you hit the Gbyte RAM mark. Yes, you can put more than 2G of RAM in your machine, but PAE on XP/32 with FireFox, will stall your entire machine for seconds more than once a minute. Given the fact that XP/32 is still the most used OS on the planet, arguments like "RAM is cheap" simply don't hold up. Making sotware work on systems that are common 5 years from now is very future proof, but you have to make it work on today's systems if you want anyone to use it at all.
Hunter gatherers would have had plenty of use for a wheel, if you were to use your argument. Mankind may have settled down into small villages eventually, but they still went on days/weeks long hunting trips. You wouldn't want to carry a large prey with you on a sled or on your shoulders, if you would have a cart of some sort to transport it on. I'd say your argument doesn't really hold up if you look at it a bit more closely.
This is a disclaimer for damages occurring due to interruption of service. The service wasn't interrupted at all. This is a break-in due to bad security and in my opinion, not covered in this disclaimer. No, I am not a lawyer, but this disclaimer is rather explicit about what Linode is is not responsible or accountable and data theft due to bad security is not excluded from liability in this piece of text.
In Europe, there are regulations, which get adjusted every few years, that mandate car manufacturers to limit the blind spots for their vehicles to "smaller than regulation" areas around the vehicle. Some countries go beyond that and have stricter demands than EU-wide. This means that a manufacturer can't just fabricate any vehicle, put some "regulation size rear view mirrors" on and have it approved for road use. You have to be able to see outside the vehicle, behind the vehicle and to the side to a certain amount of it before it gets approval. Mandating workarounds like a camera instead of mandating the proper design sounds short sighted (pun intended).
Granted, for those situations where you back up in a residential area or parking spot, these don't apply, but people tend to use the screen to replace their mirrors:
Have you tried focusing your eyes on anything 15" away from you and then again 100 foot in front of you 4 times a minute? How long do you think you spend focusing your eyes on average? That's over 10% of the time you are effectively blind, unless you are too young to drive or have eyes that focus faster than the vast majority of drivers. Mirrors don't have this problem, since you're focusing on the object way behind your car, not on the mirror surface. screens are close to your eyes and require a lot of work for the muscles in your eyes to focus.
Camera's, unless full HD and equipped with "retina" monitors offer less detail than a rear view mirror. That means you have to look longer to conclude what you are seeing, or to assess you don't get to see it any clearer and ignore the fact you don't get your data.
In unlit road situations, any light source inside the car will deteriorate your night vision, making it harder for you to see what's happening in front of you. This means you can't use it as a rear view mirror when driving forwards. Regardless, many people leave it on and get horrible night vision, causing accidents. The same applies for personal navigation devices.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not like you can't already buy software for that. Most of the suppliers for these have a long list of non disclosed governmental agencies of various countries as their customers. I'm fairly certain most will also have sold their product to regimes that were considered "okay" at the time but fell from grace later on.
Losing subs because of a slight malfunction costs too much. It may in theory be a perfect solution, but the chances of the sub getting lost versus the costs of building one, currently make it an unprofitable risk. Even with the significant chance of snapping the umbilical, that is still cheaper than risk losing unmanned crafts. There are frequent stories of research vessels losing an unmanned sub, usually costing six figures or more. You don't hear much about commercial vessels losing subs, but the oil and glass-fiber-cable-on-the-ocean-floor companies have plenty of experience with risk calculations and choosing the cheapest solution to get the job done. They default to cable operation, unless they can't avoid untethered. In that case, they usually outsource the job. The military and secret services know a thing or two about this as well, but won't tell you, even if you ask.
This all being said, it's about time people come up with a more reliable way to control and propel unmanned submarines. Using some form of transmitter station lowered to some place close where the sub is, might make getting signals through easier. However, water isn't as uniform a transmission medium as you might think. Currents and temperature differences make layers that can be reflective to radio and sound waves. It would be kind of embarrassing to lose a submarine because you crossed an inversion and your signal wasn't getting through.
Diving breathing issues aren't about gas pressure, but about saturation of blood and tissue with gasses. At higher pressure, your blood and tissue take up way more gasses than they do at surface pressure. Therefor, if you dive deep, you will become equivalent to a soda bottle. If you surface too quick, it's like someone shakes you and then takes the cap of the bottle. All of a sudden, there will be bubbles in your entire body. Those bubbles will kill your (brain) cells, by oxygen deprivation.
At higher pressures, gasses that are normally "inert" to the human body tissue, will form chemical bonds with your tissues, making the gasses poisonous. That is why there are different gas mixtures used for high pressure (deep) dives.
Even if you can overcome this by using liquids to replace the gasses, it appears that your nerve tissue will have electrical/chemical problems transmitting signals at about 750 meters (75 times atmospheric pressure).
I'd welcome the day that I can block google from my Internet experience. Their insistence on wanting your personal data just because you want to use a smart phone with features and services that are provided by several other parties is annoying me highly. Not to the point that I'd step over to Apple, because they essentially do the same, but to the point that I choose not to use smart phones. If an alternative to android would become available, I'd be more than happy to try it out.
sixty thousand clones of George Washington disagree with you on that.
The whole concept of PWNing is that someone comes up with a way to circumvent the security built into that system. Sure, multiple layers like you describe will hopefully catch the intruder at some other point, where they try to do something that triggers an alarm. However, there is nothing you can do against zero-day vulnerabilities, other than multilayer your security and set up proper alerting.
People smart enough to find a zero day in a common and well tested browser, tend to be smart enough to write "payload code" that will not be detected by your virus scanner as well. Most likely, they will disable your local (windows) firewall (the payload would have to be OS specific anyway) and get the information they are after back to themselves some way.
Like others already said, you won't get to hear details on how they got through until after the patch has been rolled out and you can download a fixed version. If you want to learn how to defend yourself against zero-days in general, read what the leak was, do that for as many other zero-day vulnerabilities as you can spend time on and come up with generic defenses that will help against as much of those as possible. Just concentrating on this one won't do you any good.
How did you manage to get _ working in DNS?
Use subdomains for that. Bonus is that you can move stuff around datacenters without having to reassign hostnames.
Unfortunately, customers weren't too thrilled to see their website hosted on "syphilis" or "herpes".
You will strain something if you have a twister mat laid out in mission control, so you can point out how to move data across your platform.
I'd like to see that claim explained please. Is it powered by cold fusion?
Since the USA government has taken control of the servers controlling .com, .net and .org, they can now officially be considered Rogue Servers. The common Internet practice is to route around this and tell the root servers that other servers have taken their place. It would be wise to place those servers outside of USA jurisdiction, to prevent a case of takeover in the future. I'm sure RIPE, IANA and other organizations are more than capable of coming up with a technical solution to deal with this.
Sure, data got in, Stuxnet got in. But no data got out. If you want to protect your IP from "theft" (they still have the data, so any file sharing evangelist won't call it theft) landlocking seems like a perfect layer of security. Trusting just the one layer is not very smart, but as security layers come, in this case, it would be quite effective.
Encrypting each individual track and storing the keys on another landlocked location would make it a lot better, but it would make access to the date quite a bit more cumbersome.
It usually is one interest group getting a strategic alliance with some other interest groups, thereby getting themselves a majority of votes. Now the interest groups that each individually represent a minority opinion can have their minority opinion pushed through because they have the backing up of other groups to do so. In practice, most political decisions made, have less than 40% of actual people supporting the decision and over 50% opposing it.
What practical use is a hand gun, apart from killing or wounding people? Hunting isn't practical with a hand gun (you'd rather have a rifle) and "shooting targets" might be a nice hobby, but it's not very practical. Hand guns are made with the only and specific practical purpose of hurting humans. Hand guns are used in a very large percentage of violent interactions causing hospitalization and death of humans in the USA. There is no way that gun manufacturers aren't aware of those statistics, yet they keep on allowing their products being sold in shops. After all, "guns don't kill people, people do". With this jurisprudence, gun manufacturers are just as guilty. Either that, or someone got wrongly convicted here. I can see the weapons manufacturers wanting to see this case appealed, because this is their income at stake.
Until very recently, it was very hard to get private data on anyone else than the roughly 500 people you would encounter most of your life. If you'd move to the next town, only a few people would know just a little about you. If you moved a bit further, you'd be a stranger amongst strangers. It's not since we started automating our records that we have had a real serious problem.
Keeping records may sound nice, but what purpose does the record hold? If you don't really absolutely need the information, you may want to reconsider. Modern history has plenty of proof where "innocent data" has been used by people for not-so-innocent purposes. The first true example in my countries history, sorry to Godwin here, is in World War II. The Dutch were very meticulous about registering everyone in local government administration, including their religion. Once the Germans got here, it was a breeze for them to single out every Jew, go to their home and put them on a deportation train to the camps. It hasn't been the only example in history and it won't be the last.
Keeping records and tabs on everyone will not be purely beneficial. Sooner or later, giving up the data might just not be a benefit to you anymore and you regret you gave it up in exchange for something trivial. The more we do it, the bigger the chance that we get hurt. E-mail spam has grown to such a level that it takes an enormous effort just to keep e-mail as a system practical and controllable. The more data you leak, the more targeted spam you'll get. Not just in e-mail, but your phone, you IM, your social networks, everything is spammed to bits.
It's not just spam. How would you like to have to pay more for your health insurance, because your insurance company found on your FaceBook that you practice a sport that they think is risky? How about paying more for your car insurance, because you know how to properly use your car and the black box put there by the company registers your higher curve velocity as "dangerous driving"? How about being fired for results from a medical test taken in a hospital for something unrelated showing you have been smoking something your employer disagrees with? I can keep on giving examples and sooner or later, there will be one where even you will say "Sorry, but that is just too much invasion of my privacy".
Writing tools to configure cable modems is what he got convicted for. He just wrote some tools so you could BOOTP your cable modem with a "valid" MAC and uncapped access speed. The cable companies knew they were putting the security in the dynamically configured end user device. They didn't fix the security flaw after it was publicly known. All the guy did was write an exploit for a publicly known bug, others (end users) were the ones that abused it.
Oh well, at least now there is jurisprudence to put gun manufacturers into jail. After all, they make the tools that others use to commit crimes, which is what this guy is going to do hard time for.
Try running FireFox 10 on a Windows XP 32 bit system. Everything works, until you hit the Gbyte RAM mark. Yes, you can put more than 2G of RAM in your machine, but PAE on XP/32 with FireFox, will stall your entire machine for seconds more than once a minute. Given the fact that XP/32 is still the most used OS on the planet, arguments like "RAM is cheap" simply don't hold up. Making sotware work on systems that are common 5 years from now is very future proof, but you have to make it work on today's systems if you want anyone to use it at all.
Hunter gatherers would have had plenty of use for a wheel, if you were to use your argument. Mankind may have settled down into small villages eventually, but they still went on days/weeks long hunting trips. You wouldn't want to carry a large prey with you on a sled or on your shoulders, if you would have a cart of some sort to transport it on. I'd say your argument doesn't really hold up if you look at it a bit more closely.
I want my visual porn, not an endless link farm of old /. articles.
Badger Badger Badger!
This is a disclaimer for damages occurring due to interruption of service. The service wasn't interrupted at all. This is a break-in due to bad security and in my opinion, not covered in this disclaimer. No, I am not a lawyer, but this disclaimer is rather explicit about what Linode is is not responsible or accountable and data theft due to bad security is not excluded from liability in this piece of text.
African or European?
In Europe, there are regulations, which get adjusted every few years, that mandate car manufacturers to limit the blind spots for their vehicles to "smaller than regulation" areas around the vehicle. Some countries go beyond that and have stricter demands than EU-wide. This means that a manufacturer can't just fabricate any vehicle, put some "regulation size rear view mirrors" on and have it approved for road use. You have to be able to see outside the vehicle, behind the vehicle and to the side to a certain amount of it before it gets approval. Mandating workarounds like a camera instead of mandating the proper design sounds short sighted (pun intended).
Granted, for those situations where you back up in a residential area or parking spot, these don't apply, but people tend to use the screen to replace their mirrors:
Have you tried focusing your eyes on anything 15" away from you and then again 100 foot in front of you 4 times a minute? How long do you think you spend focusing your eyes on average? That's over 10% of the time you are effectively blind, unless you are too young to drive or have eyes that focus faster than the vast majority of drivers. Mirrors don't have this problem, since you're focusing on the object way behind your car, not on the mirror surface. screens are close to your eyes and require a lot of work for the muscles in your eyes to focus.
Camera's, unless full HD and equipped with "retina" monitors offer less detail than a rear view mirror. That means you have to look longer to conclude what you are seeing, or to assess you don't get to see it any clearer and ignore the fact you don't get your data.
In unlit road situations, any light source inside the car will deteriorate your night vision, making it harder for you to see what's happening in front of you. This means you can't use it as a rear view mirror when driving forwards. Regardless, many people leave it on and get horrible night vision, causing accidents. The same applies for personal navigation devices.