Thats when you purchase a fireproof safe, and store tapes on site. But any ways, any IT person knows you just don't leave tapes laying around. They always go in a safe place that can be locked, and a car is not a safe place because it can be easily broken into. He learned his lesson. Just to bad no one told him before hand which would have safe a lot of time.
We do, its usually for Firefox bugs, because that is Linux to the rest of the world. But then comes the trolls that point out that it was fixed in a matter of hours and not weeks or months.
Yeah, but I'm pretty sure that people will jump ship from planes that allow cell phone use. That means losses in profits, which is bad for business. Seeing that I'm probably in the majority, in that I don't want to be in close proximity with 150 to 200 people all yapping on cellphones, even if I'm on mine too. Plus, business travelers are where the money is at, and most business people on planes take the time to update spreadsheets, finish a report, write an email, or take a nap because that is the only time they can. Do you think they want to work in a space filled with people talking. They want a quiet as possible place to work, and not all business can afford to send their travelers first class. Trains here on the east coast have a quiet car for people going home after working in the city. That car is where all phones and music players need to be off and there are to be no talking. Those cars are usually swamped with people going home at the end of the day. I see would think there would be the same demand for quiet on airplanes.
Who cares if they interfere with flight controls. I'm sick of being in a public place and having everyone yapping on their cell phones. Take that and put it in an enclosed area, makes for a very long ride with someone sitting next to you that wont shut up. Especially if you are trying to get some shut eye. That is why they are allowing data, and SMS stuff only, so that you don't have to talk to communicate with people outside the plane.
Businesses still has the ability to purchase XP on basically all machines available. We are talking about consumer machines here, the home and home office area. Not the small business or large business area where your client probably purchased from.
Think of it this way. Here in NJ where I live I can get HDTV service with all the channels that I would need to be able to watch my show for about $100. Now, if I cancel my service I will save about $1000 dollars a year. These are very rounded number people. Take out a 300 dollars for the AppleTV and I have about $700 worth of iTunes TV content that I can purchase. Then the next year I will have $1000 of iTunes purchases that I can make. This is more than enough money to purchase the TV shows that I want to watch and also keep them for ever. That is what will drive people to the AppleTV over time, the ability to pick and choose the shows they want to watch and only pay for those shows. And also take them on their computer where ever they go and their iPods. To some, its really just simply purchasing only what they want to watch.
They replied, and basically stated they would accept, but wouldn't hack third party sites since its illegal.
Dear Mr. McNamara and Mr. Snyder,
We read the blog published yesterday by yourself together with the subsequent comment by Joel Snyder and would like to make the following comments while also addressing the issues raised.
The point of publishing the results of the 3200-strong survey was to address the lack of awareness among organizations of the critical dangers of such web application vulnerabilities as Cross Site Scripting, SQL Injection and Cross Site Request Forgery. We are merely pointing out a trend corroborated by other published studies concluding that web security is a problem. It surprises us that Mr. Snyder is among those who do not take the present situation seriously by, indeed, making a mockery of the results through claims that these are incorrect.
This further proves our point that web application security is one of the least understood and often misconceived aspects of online security today.
Several experts in the field (for example, Jeremiah Grossman) have been stating these facts and dangers for a few years now. So we are not the only ones when it comes to web application security concerns.
I do concede sounding apocalyptic with my comment and, for this I apologize. The fact remains, however, that 70% out of the commercial and non-commercial entities that we scanned were seriously vulnerable to hacking during the time we scanned them. Others (for example, http://ha.ckers.org/blog/20070213/70-of-websites-u nder-immediate-risk-of...) believe that these figures are much greater.
We are available to put Mr. Snyder's doubts of the validity of our results at rest by submitting all the reports to a trusted third party with proven web security experience and knowledge. Given appropriate authorization and permission from the owners of the websites we scanned during January 2006 -7, Mr. Snyder would be able to see any of the full reports of our scans - these highlight where and when the vulnerabilities were found. Of course, we cannot vouch that these vulnerabilities have not been fixed but are willing to do this for the sake of professional correctness. And, after all, we stand behind our data.
We are willing to accept the challenge. However we feel that the subject of the challenge should be the Network World website, rather then - as Mr. Snyder suggested - an innocent third party website. After all, making a wager with someone else's website would be unfair, and furthermore illegal.
So we will accept the wager and perform a security audit on the Network World site and attempt to breach any vulnerabilities found. This should be a fair substitute, since we are assuming that considering Mr. Snyder's comments, Network World is confident that its website is secure and any data it holds is unbreachable.
Should Network World accept, we will start the audit immediately and point out any vulnerabilities found to the public. If we do manage to breach the Network World website, we would expect Network World to make a public statement, - published on the home page and first page of the next Network World issue - that its website was actually vulnerable and that Acunetix were able to hack it.
We do expect a response within the next 24 hours that the company authorizes us to immediately perform the security audit and that the company takes full legal responsibility and holds us harmless for any resulting outages and damages.
Our team thanks you for this opportunity and looks forward to the challenge!
Signed,
Nick Galea, CEO and Kevin J Vella, VP Sales and Operations
What? This is no open source DRM that anyone can just start to use. Any DRM needs a license to be payed for so Apple just went out and created their own so they didn't have to pay someone else. The only reason why Apple doesn't license it out is probably due to the same reason, why license something you don't want to begin with. Hope that this comes to light and that the EU makes iTunes become DRM free. How do you know that Apple didn't do this on purpose. What else comes with licensing is also making sure that the players that can read Apples format work with iTunes. MS already has trouble with all the players out there that just can't seem to work with their software even though they are licensed to do so. That might be another reason, the same reason why Apple doesn't allow cloning of the Macs, to keep quality high when it comes to iTunes and the plays that work with it. As soon as other players have the ability to work with the Apple DRM, problems with syncing devices are going to happen all because the player makers can't seem to get it right.
Yeah, its Apache on Linux and IIS on Windows, but what about Apache on Windows. What are the system calls there. If they are about the same from Linux to Windows for Apache, then all this proves is that MS wrote a crappy Web server. But if there are more calls to be made with Apache on Windows, then I would say that Windows makes its programs do more system calls and possibly makes all programs more likely to be cracked into. But its not fair to put one program against another on different OSs, then say the OS is the problem.
Or better yet, drag and drop the Applications folder to the right side of the dock, then right click on it and you will get a drop down menu like display of all the apps in the applications folder. That is what I do.
Well, when you browser empties the cache, it doesn't mean the data is deleted to the point it can't be recovered. It just means the computer thinks the space is free for use. So your viewed hotmail, yahoo emails can be recovered long after you viewed them.
Zap: "So, a neutral plot to assasinate a weird looking alien with scissors... But rock crushes scissors! But wait... Paper covers Rock! Kif?"
Kif: "mugghh"
Zap: "We have a conundrum. Search them for paper... And, bring me a rock."
Slashdot Mirror
If I remember correctly, there is Secretary's day. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary's_Day
Thats when you purchase a fireproof safe, and store tapes on site. But any ways, any IT person knows you just don't leave tapes laying around. They always go in a safe place that can be locked, and a car is not a safe place because it can be easily broken into. He learned his lesson. Just to bad no one told him before hand which would have safe a lot of time.
We do, its usually for Firefox bugs, because that is Linux to the rest of the world. But then comes the trolls that point out that it was fixed in a matter of hours and not weeks or months.
Can it run Linux?
Yeah, but I'm pretty sure that people will jump ship from planes that allow cell phone use. That means losses in profits, which is bad for business. Seeing that I'm probably in the majority, in that I don't want to be in close proximity with 150 to 200 people all yapping on cellphones, even if I'm on mine too. Plus, business travelers are where the money is at, and most business people on planes take the time to update spreadsheets, finish a report, write an email, or take a nap because that is the only time they can. Do you think they want to work in a space filled with people talking. They want a quiet as possible place to work, and not all business can afford to send their travelers first class. Trains here on the east coast have a quiet car for people going home after working in the city. That car is where all phones and music players need to be off and there are to be no talking. Those cars are usually swamped with people going home at the end of the day. I see would think there would be the same demand for quiet on airplanes.
Who cares if they interfere with flight controls. I'm sick of being in a public place and having everyone yapping on their cell phones. Take that and put it in an enclosed area, makes for a very long ride with someone sitting next to you that wont shut up. Especially if you are trying to get some shut eye. That is why they are allowing data, and SMS stuff only, so that you don't have to talk to communicate with people outside the plane.
Businesses still has the ability to purchase XP on basically all machines available. We are talking about consumer machines here, the home and home office area. Not the small business or large business area where your client probably purchased from.
Think of it this way. Here in NJ where I live I can get HDTV service with all the channels that I would need to be able to watch my show for about $100. Now, if I cancel my service I will save about $1000 dollars a year. These are very rounded number people. Take out a 300 dollars for the AppleTV and I have about $700 worth of iTunes TV content that I can purchase. Then the next year I will have $1000 of iTunes purchases that I can make. This is more than enough money to purchase the TV shows that I want to watch and also keep them for ever. That is what will drive people to the AppleTV over time, the ability to pick and choose the shows they want to watch and only pay for those shows. And also take them on their computer where ever they go and their iPods. To some, its really just simply purchasing only what they want to watch.
Because they have the French.
Yeah, when you have a good 300+ gigs of data that needs to be backed up daily, me sitting there burning DVDs are not the way its going to get done.
Retards do too, why do you think they all try to eat paint chips.
Now, ask yourself, did you eat the paint chips?
V
It was LAMP, now its LAVA. Much cooler name.
They replied, and basically stated they would accept, but wouldn't hack third party sites since its illegal.
u nder-immediate-risk-of...) believe that these figures are much greater.
Dear Mr. McNamara and Mr. Snyder, We read the blog published yesterday by yourself together with the subsequent comment by Joel Snyder and would like to make the following comments while also addressing the issues raised.
The point of publishing the results of the 3200-strong survey was to address the lack of awareness among organizations of the critical dangers of such web application vulnerabilities as Cross Site Scripting, SQL Injection and Cross Site Request Forgery. We are merely pointing out a trend corroborated by other published studies concluding that web security is a problem. It surprises us that Mr. Snyder is among those who do not take the present situation seriously by, indeed, making a mockery of the results through claims that these are incorrect.
This further proves our point that web application security is one of the least understood and often misconceived aspects of online security today.
Several experts in the field (for example, Jeremiah Grossman) have been stating these facts and dangers for a few years now. So we are not the only ones when it comes to web application security concerns.
I do concede sounding apocalyptic with my comment and, for this I apologize. The fact remains, however, that 70% out of the commercial and non-commercial entities that we scanned were seriously vulnerable to hacking during the time we scanned them. Others (for example, http://ha.ckers.org/blog/20070213/70-of-websites-
We are available to put Mr. Snyder's doubts of the validity of our results at rest by submitting all the reports to a trusted third party with proven web security experience and knowledge. Given appropriate authorization and permission from the owners of the websites we scanned during January 2006 -7, Mr. Snyder would be able to see any of the full reports of our scans - these highlight where and when the vulnerabilities were found. Of course, we cannot vouch that these vulnerabilities have not been fixed but are willing to do this for the sake of professional correctness. And, after all, we stand behind our data.
We are willing to accept the challenge. However we feel that the subject of the challenge should be the Network World website, rather then - as Mr. Snyder suggested - an innocent third party website. After all, making a wager with someone else's website would be unfair, and furthermore illegal.
So we will accept the wager and perform a security audit on the Network World site and attempt to breach any vulnerabilities found. This should be a fair substitute, since we are assuming that considering Mr. Snyder's comments, Network World is confident that its website is secure and any data it holds is unbreachable.
Should Network World accept, we will start the audit immediately and point out any vulnerabilities found to the public. If we do manage to breach the Network World website, we would expect Network World to make a public statement, - published on the home page and first page of the next Network World issue - that its website was actually vulnerable and that Acunetix were able to hack it.
We do expect a response within the next 24 hours that the company authorizes us to immediately perform the security audit and that the company takes full legal responsibility and holds us harmless for any resulting outages and damages.
Our team thanks you for this opportunity and looks forward to the challenge!
Signed,
Nick Galea, CEO and Kevin J Vella, VP Sales and Operations
Acunetix Ltd Direct: +356 2316 8126 Tel: +356 2316 8000 Fax: +356 2316 8001 Web: http://www.acunetix.com/ Web: http://www.acunetix.de/
What? This is no open source DRM that anyone can just start to use. Any DRM needs a license to be payed for so Apple just went out and created their own so they didn't have to pay someone else. The only reason why Apple doesn't license it out is probably due to the same reason, why license something you don't want to begin with. Hope that this comes to light and that the EU makes iTunes become DRM free. How do you know that Apple didn't do this on purpose. What else comes with licensing is also making sure that the players that can read Apples format work with iTunes. MS already has trouble with all the players out there that just can't seem to work with their software even though they are licensed to do so. That might be another reason, the same reason why Apple doesn't allow cloning of the Macs, to keep quality high when it comes to iTunes and the plays that work with it. As soon as other players have the ability to work with the Apple DRM, problems with syncing devices are going to happen all because the player makers can't seem to get it right.
Yeah, its Apache on Linux and IIS on Windows, but what about Apache on Windows. What are the system calls there. If they are about the same from Linux to Windows for Apache, then all this proves is that MS wrote a crappy Web server. But if there are more calls to be made with Apache on Windows, then I would say that Windows makes its programs do more system calls and possibly makes all programs more likely to be cracked into. But its not fair to put one program against another on different OSs, then say the OS is the problem.
Oh, wait, you weren't kidding. I'm sorry, I wasn't laughing at you, but with you, at yourself.
Perry's Perspective
2. I'm fairly sure that if they took all the porn off the Internet, there'd only be 1 website left, and it would be called Bring Back The Porn.
http://www3.youtube.com/watch?v=Ii2xOV6dqGc
Or better yet, drag and drop the Applications folder to the right side of the dock, then right click on it and you will get a drop down menu like display of all the apps in the applications folder. That is what I do.
How many of those people signing up are government agents there to just delete and change everything to what the government wants.
Well, when you browser empties the cache, it doesn't mean the data is deleted to the point it can't be recovered. It just means the computer thinks the space is free for use. So your viewed hotmail, yahoo emails can be recovered long after you viewed them.
Acceptable.
We would have also accepted:
Well, for large sums of 2 it works.
What are you, the addition police.
99,999,999 porn sites and one website that only says, "Bring back the Porn", encase they took all the porn off the net.
Zapf Brannigan quote inserted
Zap: "So, a neutral plot to assasinate a weird looking alien with scissors... But rock crushes scissors! But wait... Paper covers Rock! Kif?"
Kif: "mugghh"
Zap: "We have a conundrum. Search them for paper... And, bring me a rock."
Because that wouldn't be any fun.