The key user-facing feature in Freenet 0.7 is the ability to operate Freenet in a "darknet" mode, where your Freenet node will only talk to other Freenet users that you trust. This makes it much more difficult for an adversary to discover that you are using Freenet, let alone what you are doing with it.
The government is never going to allow a method of communication it can't eavesdrop upon. Either your allegedly "secure" communication will be clandestinely monitored, or the technology itself will be outlawed, on the grounds that it enables terrorists and pedophiles to evade the law.
If you had, you'd know that this paper did not say that "hackers can analyze Windows Updates and figure out how to attack systems that aren't patched yet thereby". What it did say was that it is possible to write software that can analyze the update for you and churn out an exploit for the security issue identified thereby...in a matter of seconds.
The PDF outlines three methods of alleviating the problem of staggered patch distribution:
1) Patch Obfuscation: basically an attempt to hide exactly what the patch fixes by padding out the patch with a lot of lines of nonsense. While this might prove effective, it would only be effective until an improved algorithm for discerning the true reason for the patch is found, and in the meantime, it would create its own set of problems, particularly if the level of obfuscation required balloons the size of the patch to an unmanageable degree.
2) Patch Encryption: basically distributing the patch in an encrypted format, waiting until it is reasonable to assume that everyone has the patch, and then transmitting a decryption key to decrypt and apply the patch more or less "simultaneously". Problems: this only pushes the problem back one level; meaning the same method of exploitation is just as possible, while this also creates an unacceptable time lag for patches to be applied, which hackers who write exploits the old-fashioned way can exploit to their considerable benefit.
3) Fast Patch Distribution: basically leveraging technologies like P2P to insure that patches are rolled out...well...fast. Problems again include off-line hoists, as well as hosts who have the misfortune of being on ISPs that take a dim view of P2P.
In summary, none of the methods outlined have much of a chance to combat this new threat.
This isn't high school, it's college. The people there are paying good money to be there (well, at least their parents are...). If a student wants to cheat himself of the maximum benefit of a very costly education bu dicking around on the Web during lectures, that should be his lookout. As long as they're not bothering other students, I don't see how this is an issue.
Wouldn't it be easier to place the electrodes on the peripheral nerves that would normally have controlled the missing limb? Surely, that would be preferable to opening the skull...
Man, M$ is running scared on this one...I never though I'd see they day they'd go to intentionally design an OS that works better on a less powerful computer.
Now, will this OS be generally available? It would be nice to be able to breathe some extra life into some of the slower systems I have here at work.
You can bet that, despite this hard data, the RIAA and MPAA will continue to spread this FUD as much as possible...anything to salvage their fatally broken business models.
Because the plasma channels were too short, the electrical discharge was only able to travel a few meters before dissipating. The team believes that, by increasing the laser pulses by a factor of 10, they would be able to create longer plasma channels, in order to trigger air-to-ground electrical discharges.
Just be sure you surround the laser with some sort of Faraday cage...we'd hate to see your experiment succeed...only to lose your expensive high-power laser to a lightning strike... ^_^
The community heaved a collective *brzech* of relief today as K'Breel, Speaker for the most Illustrious Council of Elders, reassured the citizens that the latest encroachment by the evil blue planet had borne no fruit for the disgusting inhabitants thereof.
"Gentle Citizens, do not be alarmed! While it is true that the devices of terror sent by the horrific inhabitants of the sinister blue planet have managed to capture high-resolution images of our fortress satellites, their pathetic, oxygen-poisoned nerve clusters have not the wit to comprehend what they have seen! The poor primitive fools still believe they are gazing at natural moons with their hideous, liquid-filled sight organs! Rejoice, noble citizenry! Our plans continue unthreatened!"
K'Breel then unexpectedly led the crowd of citizens in an impromptu rendition of one of the more recent patriotic hymms: "My planet - accurate or erroneous. ".
"IT people set up traditional IT networks with the idea of making them secure to operate and defend," Elder said. "The traditional security approach is to put up barriers, like firewalls--it's a defense thing--but everyone in an operations network is also part of the (attack) force. We're trying to move away from clandestine operations. We're looking for real physics--a bigger bang resulting in collateral damage."
But there is an intriguing suggestion that the gas giant, which is some 14 times the size of our Jupiter, could be even younger.
And this celestial body is still in the process of formation. It's possible that it will pick up enough extra mass to push it over the approximately 75 Jupiter-masses threshold and initiate fusion, becoming a star in its own right. We may be witnessing the birth of a binary star system.
But the future's not all doom and gloom just because of Google's progress in bringing unplugged versions of cloud apps to users. Microsoft would be smart to be extremely observant about the end user experience, user feedback and usage patterns of Google Doc users, and then plow that knowledge back into Windows Live and other Microsoft Mesh efforts.
So...all Microsoft has to do to avoid defeat is listen to their customers?
Why should he return donations? If people want to pay him for his TIME, there's nothing wrong with that.
Actually, there is. He's profiting off their IP. If he keeps the money, Creative has a clear avenue to pursue action against him. If he gives it back, or gives it to Creative, their options for litigation get much diminished.
Of course, an interesting option (if he doesn't mind the hassle) would be to keep the money, and let Creative sue him over a profit of $146.00. If initially hammering him for fixing their intentionally broken drivers was Creative shooting themselves in the foot, suing him would be akin to pointing an AK-47 at their foot and holding down the trigger. ^_^
Shoot down the guy that's making your product work. That's a brilliant strategy.
Kawakami probably should have not solicited donations, but that's the only questionable thing he's done here. He should make out a cashier's check for the total amount of donations he's received, mail it to Creative Labs, and refuse any further donations. That should shut them up.
Slashdot Mirror
In the case of TOR, my money's on the first possibility I mentioned.
The government is never going to allow a method of communication it can't eavesdrop upon. Either your allegedly "secure" communication will be clandestinely monitored, or the technology itself will be outlawed, on the grounds that it enables terrorists and pedophiles to evade the law.
***WARNING***
Link in parent is malicious. Do not click.
(Honestly, dude...it's getting old...)
What would happen if every single Windows box in the entire world simultaneously lost all network connectivity?
Something like this, I would imagine... ^_^
Didn't actually RTFA, did you?
If you had, you'd know that this paper did not say that "hackers can analyze Windows Updates and figure out how to attack systems that aren't patched yet thereby". What it did say was that it is possible to write software that can analyze the update for you and churn out an exploit for the security issue identified thereby...in a matter of seconds.
The PDF outlines three methods of alleviating the problem of staggered patch distribution:
1) Patch Obfuscation: basically an attempt to hide exactly what the patch fixes by padding out the patch with a lot of lines of nonsense. While this might prove effective, it would only be effective until an improved algorithm for discerning the true reason for the patch is found, and in the meantime, it would create its own set of problems, particularly if the level of obfuscation required balloons the size of the patch to an unmanageable degree.
2) Patch Encryption: basically distributing the patch in an encrypted format, waiting until it is reasonable to assume that everyone has the patch, and then transmitting a decryption key to decrypt and apply the patch more or less "simultaneously". Problems: this only pushes the problem back one level; meaning the same method of exploitation is just as possible, while this also creates an unacceptable time lag for patches to be applied, which hackers who write exploits the old-fashioned way can exploit to their considerable benefit.
3) Fast Patch Distribution: basically leveraging technologies like P2P to insure that patches are rolled out...well...fast. Problems again include off-line hoists, as well as hosts who have the misfortune of being on ISPs that take a dim view of P2P.
In summary, none of the methods outlined have much of a chance to combat this new threat.
This isn't high school, it's college . The people there are paying good money to be there (well, at least their parents are...). If a student wants to cheat himself of the maximum benefit of a very costly education bu dicking around on the Web during lectures, that should be his lookout. As long as they're not bothering other students, I don't see how this is an issue.
*** WARNING ***
Link in parent is malicious. Do not click.
"I decline the title of Iron Cook
and accept only the lesser title of Zinc Saucier,
which I just made up.
Also, it comes with double prize money."
- Bender
Wouldn't it be easier to place the electrodes on the peripheral nerves that would normally have controlled the missing limb? Surely, that would be preferable to opening the skull...
Man, M$ is running scared on this one...I never though I'd see they day they'd go to intentionally design an OS that works better on a less powerful computer.
Now, will this OS be generally available? It would be nice to be able to breathe some extra life into some of the slower systems I have here at work.
You can bet that, despite this hard data, the RIAA and MPAA will continue to spread this FUD as much as possible...anything to salvage their fatally broken business models.
Just be sure you surround the laser with some sort of Faraday cage...we'd hate to see your experiment succeed...only to lose your expensive high-power laser to a lightning strike... ^_^
An excellent resource documenting the myriad evils of Monsanto can be found here.
K'Breel then unexpectedly led the crowd of citizens in an impromptu rendition of one of the more recent patriotic hymms: "My planet - accurate or erroneous. ".
Fry: Wow, the 3-D's great!
Leela: Mine's not working!
Your Identity Is Worth Less Than $15
(checks bank balance...)
Yeah, that's about right...*sigh*...
What do you know of fire? You prance around like you have laser eyes!
</Oglethorpe>
Yeah...just not seeing that happening...
Why should he return donations? If people want to pay him for his TIME, there's nothing wrong with that.
Actually, there is. He's profiting off their IP. If he keeps the money, Creative has a clear avenue to pursue action against him. If he gives it back, or gives it to Creative, their options for litigation get much diminished.
Of course, an interesting option (if he doesn't mind the hassle) would be to keep the money, and let Creative sue him over a profit of $146.00. If initially hammering him for fixing their intentionally broken drivers was Creative shooting themselves in the foot, suing him would be akin to pointing an AK-47 at their foot and holding down the trigger. ^_^
It's not about rewarding the company. It's about avoiding any appearance of wrongdoing.
From TFA, the grand total of the donations was a whopping $146.00. That's not that much money to give away.
Shoot down the guy that's making your product work. That's a brilliant strategy.
Kawakami probably should have not solicited donations, but that's the only questionable thing he's done here. He should make out a cashier's check for the total amount of donations he's received, mail it to Creative Labs, and refuse any further donations. That should shut them up.
You obviously didn't read the article:
You obviously didn't read my response. Try again.