But it could also have more interesting applications for consumers, in devices such as wrist watches, toys and sports equipment.
SWEET! I can sync my wrist watch with my computer now? I've always thought that networking a watch to connect w/ my computer and transferring the time over was soooo much more efficient than using those little dials.
Now imagine the new hacking vulnerabilities! Millions of corporate workers late; all of whome blame hackers for altering their alarm clocks!
I understand that you can double click on the "mov" file once you download it and unzip it and it will open calculator. it is of note, however, that if you right click the icon, OS X will tell you ahead of time that the recommended application is teminal based on the contents -- that's because the application chosen to run a file is based purely on the contents of the file, not the extension. Renaming "myVirus.app" as "index.html" is social engineering (note that if the file were an actual application, you would still get a warning in 10.4. You didn't with this because it was a shell script wich is technically not an application... whether that's a secure idea or not).
The supposed ability of this file to automatically open and execute upon download was what caught my attention. I work at a computer store and tried the feasability demo on an eMac, iMac G5, PowerMac G5, 12" and 17" PowerBook, and a 14" iBook running 10.3.5, 10.3.8, or 10.4.3-10.4.5 - none of these computers have any security software installed and none of them were "vulnerable" to this. They all downloaded a zip file that did not automatically unzip. The file then had to be unzipped and double clicked - no surprising news there.
This must have been an internet survey... The numbers don't add up correctly. Why is it that 33.3% of all people surf the internet for fun 34% of all Males surf the internet for fun 26% of all Femalse surf the internet for fun 52% of the population is females.
If it was an average sampling, you would have (0.52 * 0.26) + (0.48 * 34) = 29.84% I bet the survey was taken online, where statistically more men are online to begin with. (Gotta admit that's a bit ironic)
You do have an interesting point. The Company XYZ would not be liable for a security guard. However, if the parents of the defacers offered to protect your home, then it would be extortion; although they did not directly cause the vandalism it was their responsibility to protect you anyway.
Microsoft is withholding a correction to their product wich it flawed without it. They have a responsibility to repair defects in a program that you have already bought - especially if they already own the patch. You already own a claim to the software patch. An astute observer might note that their putting a market price on the patch and keeping it from you could also be construed as Larceny
The problem with these debates is... well.. security holes are patched by smart people and cretaed by the dumb ones. If you are a dumb adminstrator you might preface your $PATH with . and yes you would need to be shot.. but then again we're comparing you with most windows users, who also need to be shot.
While we're on the topic of linux "security flaws" try this one next time you see a college freshman logged into his terminal
cd ~ touch "-rf *" logout
When the user logs on and sees this annoying file they should type rm "-rf *" but since they're a college freshman taking "Intro to basketweaving in Unix" they'll type rm -rf * (forgetting the quotes) and you'll laugh... and subsequently be damned to hell.
And as an FYI, in his book, The Art of Deception Kevin Mitnic condems the use of software hacks. He says that software is usually the strongest link in the system - it's the users who are foolish. He is considered such a great hacker/cracker, yet from his book he seemed much less technically literate than I had imagined. I wouldn't consider his mere opinion that open source software is more vunerable very persuasive. We are, however, admitting security flaws and simply sweeping them under the rug when we say "no intelligent user would do X." These are the users who may be administering our system - and the users who Mitnick preys on. If we want our computers more secure we need to start educating our communities and telling them to not open up e-mails from strangers saying "I love you"
The emulation used in the XBox360 is actually processor level emulation. The microprocessor in the processor for the XBox360 can handle multiple ISA's. This is where the original meaning of Dual Core and Emulation came from... not having multiple processors on one chip or software hacks. Good hardware level "emulation" runs at 100% full speed and, yes, all three cores should be used in XBox 1 emulation simply because Halo, like all gamees runs multi-threaded.
What is the number one complaint about Halo 2? The way the movies are dynamically generated and increase detail as the movie progresses, adding refined polygons and textures. This makes people look like blobs for the first few seconds of the game. The XBox 360's tripple core PPC 970 processor and revlutionary GPU means that the 360 will "catch up" with the movie much faster if not instantly and I won't cry as much when halo 2 reaches a cut scene.
Bravo... I always love it when a cynic is actually backed by... the facts. I'm curious, actually, about 2 points... 1. Does this law affect software created in washington (i.e. Microsoft) or law that is on computers in washington? Computer law is always fuzzy in the jurrisdiction that it applies to (i.e. internet gambling) 2. I haven't tried windows hacking in quite some time, but is it still impossible to delete certain executable files on windows? When I used windows, if you deleted IE, MSMessenger or WMP, they would respawn themselves - which violates this new law and would subject Microsoft to a $100,000 fine for each copy sold/manufactured in their jurrisdiction - however jurrisdiction was solved.
As far as Microsoft being the enforcer goes - this is even more asinine than my old high school requiring proficiency in their products to graduate... It is completely inacceptable for a software company to try to "enforce" software laws... especially one who has a past plagued with such questionable ethics.
REAAALY? Tiger is out? Apple.com/macosx says that it's not released until 6PM This REALLY kills my store because we close at 4:30 on fridays and the manager isn't willing to stay late for it (because we're the campus bookstore and the computer department is just a small piece) It makes me want to cry -_-
Sadly... these guys have been selling... At my store we brought in a few just because w could and were afraid we wouldn't sell even 3 of them... what do you know... steve jobs could crap and sell it for $30 -_-
Graaaaaa why are both these people so friggen stupid?!? PearPC is lucky they're not slapped with legal suit after suit under the DMCA for ading in the breaking of the EULA and all that cal. Sorry, but if I remember my computer law class, you can't sue somebody for screwing you over in your comitting a crime. All these people aggrivate me, and it reminds me of when the makers of Kazaa sued the makers of Kazaa light -_-
Why is it that every day I read slashdot I lose more and more faith in humanity?
Didn't you learn when you were taking AP tests that when you analyze a document, you're supposed to look at the source's bias and the evidence they present?
These people have a vendeta against Linux. Sun makes a competing product. Microsoft's Halloween papers (specifically 1 & 2) say that they see Linux as a threat and must force it out of the market. Unlike HP and IBM (companies this article directtly attacks) Dell does not want Linux to prosper. The list goes on.
The next question we should ask ourselves is "What proof - or even evidence - do they present?" Well folks, they were nice enough to give us their word.
Get real folks.
I wonder if Microsoft helped apple accidentally? According to Gamespy The XBox Next is using the PPC processor. Rumors have placed it at the PPC970 chip (e.g. the G5) at 3.0Ghz w/ a dual core.
Yup ^_^ It doesn't just violate the GPL in any way by stealing the prevoius way of loading OS X on an x86 machine, but the EULA for OS X specifically states that OS X can only be installed on a computer manufactured by Apple or with the Apple logo on it. Using PearPC is thus illegal and, it could be reasoned, creating software exclusively for illegal activities is also illegal
P.S. Ironically, I couldn't find the EULA online at apple's website, if anyone has a credible link, I would appreciate the post
I feel quite honored to have the same computer as the father of linux himself.... although I kinda gave up the linux thing on my G5...
Knowing him (not that I do) he will probably want to run a 64bit SMP variant, being that... well.. he has multiple 64 bit processors. As of last summer, when I tried playing with putting linux on my box, the only viable option was tgall's PPC64 project
Unfortunately, as of last summer, the cds were buggy and it took me quite a lot of work to get it working.
Not being the creator of linux, I wanted to keep OS X, so I decided to keep multiple partitions: one for OS X, one for gentoo and it's requirements (swap, etc), and one that would be a common partition that would be mounted as/home in linux and/users in OS X. This turned out to be HELL. In OS X 1.3 (highly reccomended for a G5) the files like passwd and shadow are almost a buffer for what's really used by the system. You have to load it to net info. This is all fine and dandy - there are some guides out there, but every time my system crashed (MUCH more than a mac ever should, but that was cause of buggy software more than anything else) net info would go to default and I'd have to redo some of my work to get my system back in order.
All in all, it took a month and I never got it working to my satisfaction.
Perhapse this kind of toying with OSs isn't his thing? I think it'd be pretty obvious that if he had to make a decision he'd choose OS X.
Ah well... even if you can't use firefox, it's reeeeaaaaly cool to emerge KDE in 40% the time it takes my P4 ^_^
Slashdot Mirror
SWEET! I can sync my wrist watch with my computer now? I've always thought that networking a watch to connect w/ my computer and transferring the time over was soooo much more efficient than using those little dials.
Now imagine the new hacking vulnerabilities! Millions of corporate workers late; all of whome blame hackers for altering their alarm clocks!
I understand that you can double click on the "mov" file once you download it and unzip it and it will open calculator. it is of note, however, that if you right click the icon, OS X will tell you ahead of time that the recommended application is teminal based on the contents -- that's because the application chosen to run a file is based purely on the contents of the file, not the extension. Renaming "myVirus.app" as "index.html" is social engineering (note that if the file were an actual application, you would still get a warning in 10.4. You didn't with this because it was a shell script wich is technically not an application... whether that's a secure idea or not).
The supposed ability of this file to automatically open and execute upon download was what caught my attention. I work at a computer store and tried the feasability demo on an eMac, iMac G5, PowerMac G5, 12" and 17" PowerBook, and a 14" iBook running 10.3.5, 10.3.8, or 10.4.3-10.4.5 - none of these computers have any security software installed and none of them were "vulnerable" to this. They all downloaded a zip file that did not automatically unzip. The file then had to be unzipped and double clicked - no surprising news there.
This must have been an internet survey... The numbers don't add up correctly.
Why is it that 33.3% of all people surf the internet for fun
34% of all Males surf the internet for fun
26% of all Femalse surf the internet for fun
52% of the population is females.
If it was an average sampling, you would have (0.52 * 0.26) + (0.48 * 34) = 29.84%
I bet the survey was taken online, where statistically more men are online to begin with.
(Gotta admit that's a bit ironic)
You do have an interesting point. The Company XYZ would not be liable for a security guard. However, if the parents of the defacers offered to protect your home, then it would be extortion; although they did not directly cause the vandalism it was their responsibility to protect you anyway.
Microsoft is withholding a correction to their product wich it flawed without it. They have a responsibility to repair defects in a program that you have already bought - especially if they already own the patch. You already own a claim to the software patch. An astute observer might note that their putting a market price on the patch and keeping it from you could also be construed as Larceny
The problem with these debates is... well.. security holes are patched by smart people and cretaed by the dumb ones. If you are a dumb adminstrator you might preface your $PATH with . and yes you would need to be shot.. but then again we're comparing you with most windows users, who also need to be shot.
While we're on the topic of linux "security flaws" try this one next time you see a college freshman logged into his terminal
cd ~
touch "-rf *"
logout
When the user logs on and sees this annoying file they should type
rm "-rf *"
but since they're a college freshman taking "Intro to basketweaving in Unix" they'll type
rm -rf *
(forgetting the quotes) and you'll laugh... and subsequently be damned to hell.
And as an FYI, in his book, The Art of Deception Kevin Mitnic condems the use of software hacks. He says that software is usually the strongest link in the system - it's the users who are foolish. He is considered such a great hacker/cracker, yet from his book he seemed much less technically literate than I had imagined. I wouldn't consider his mere opinion that open source software is more vunerable very persuasive. We are, however, admitting security flaws and simply sweeping them under the rug when we say "no intelligent user would do X." These are the users who may be administering our system - and the users who Mitnick preys on. If we want our computers more secure we need to start educating our communities and telling them to not open up e-mails from strangers saying "I love you"
The emulation used in the XBox360 is actually processor level emulation. The microprocessor in the processor for the XBox360 can handle multiple ISA's. This is where the original meaning of Dual Core and Emulation came from... not having multiple processors on one chip or software hacks. Good hardware level "emulation" runs at 100% full speed and, yes, all three cores should be used in XBox 1 emulation simply because Halo, like all gamees runs multi-threaded.
What is the number one complaint about Halo 2? The way the movies are dynamically generated and increase detail as the movie progresses, adding refined polygons and textures. This makes people look like blobs for the first few seconds of the game.
The XBox 360's tripple core PPC 970 processor and revlutionary GPU means that the 360 will "catch up" with the movie much faster if not instantly and I won't cry as much when halo 2 reaches a cut scene.
Bravo... I always love it when a cynic is actually backed by... the facts.
I'm curious, actually, about 2 points...
1. Does this law affect software created in washington (i.e. Microsoft) or law that is on computers in washington? Computer law is always fuzzy in the jurrisdiction that it applies to (i.e. internet gambling)
2. I haven't tried windows hacking in quite some time, but is it still impossible to delete certain executable files on windows? When I used windows, if you deleted IE, MSMessenger or WMP, they would respawn themselves - which violates this new law and would subject Microsoft to a $100,000 fine for each copy sold/manufactured in their jurrisdiction - however jurrisdiction was solved.
As far as Microsoft being the enforcer goes - this is even more asinine than my old high school requiring proficiency in their products to graduate... It is completely inacceptable for a software company to try to "enforce" software laws... especially one who has a past plagued with such questionable ethics.
REAAALY? Tiger is out?
Apple.com/macosx says that it's not released until 6PM
This REALLY kills my store because we close at 4:30 on fridays and the manager isn't willing to stay late for it (because we're the campus bookstore and the computer department is just a small piece)
It makes me want to cry -_-
sorry man.. $30 is after an "educational" discount =p
Sadly... these guys have been selling... At my store we brought in a few just because w could and were afraid we wouldn't sell even 3 of them... what do you know... steve jobs could crap and sell it for $30 -_-
Graaaaaa why are both these people so friggen stupid?!?
PearPC is lucky they're not slapped with legal suit after suit under the DMCA for ading in the breaking of the EULA and all that cal.
Sorry, but if I remember my computer law class, you can't sue somebody for screwing you over in your comitting a crime.
All these people aggrivate me, and it reminds me of when the makers of Kazaa sued the makers of Kazaa light -_-
Why is it that every day I read slashdot I lose more and more faith in humanity? Didn't you learn when you were taking AP tests that when you analyze a document, you're supposed to look at the source's bias and the evidence they present? These people have a vendeta against Linux. Sun makes a competing product. Microsoft's Halloween papers (specifically 1 & 2) say that they see Linux as a threat and must force it out of the market. Unlike HP and IBM (companies this article directtly attacks) Dell does not want Linux to prosper. The list goes on. The next question we should ask ourselves is "What proof - or even evidence - do they present?" Well folks, they were nice enough to give us their word. Get real folks.
I wonder if Microsoft helped apple accidentally?
According to Gamespy The XBox Next is using the PPC processor. Rumors have placed it at the PPC970 chip (e.g. the G5) at 3.0Ghz w/ a dual core.
Yup ^_^ It doesn't just violate the GPL in any way by stealing the prevoius way of loading OS X on an x86 machine, but the EULA for OS X specifically states that OS X can only be installed on a computer manufactured by Apple or with the Apple logo on it. Using PearPC is thus illegal and, it could be reasoned, creating software exclusively for illegal activities is also illegal P.S. Ironically, I couldn't find the EULA online at apple's website, if anyone has a credible link, I would appreciate the post
I feel quite honored to have the same computer as the father of linux himself.... although I kinda gave up the linux thing on my G5... Knowing him (not that I do) he will probably want to run a 64bit SMP variant, being that... well.. he has multiple 64 bit processors. As of last summer, when I tried playing with putting linux on my box, the only viable option was tgall's PPC64 project Unfortunately, as of last summer, the cds were buggy and it took me quite a lot of work to get it working. Not being the creator of linux, I wanted to keep OS X, so I decided to keep multiple partitions: one for OS X, one for gentoo and it's requirements (swap, etc), and one that would be a common partition that would be mounted as /home in linux and /users in OS X. This turned out to be HELL. In OS X 1.3 (highly reccomended for a G5) the files like passwd and shadow are almost a buffer for what's really used by the system. You have to load it to net info. This is all fine and dandy - there are some guides out there, but every time my system crashed (MUCH more than a mac ever should, but that was cause of buggy software more than anything else) net info would go to default and I'd have to redo some of my work to get my system back in order.
All in all, it took a month and I never got it working to my satisfaction.
Perhapse this kind of toying with OSs isn't his thing? I think it'd be pretty obvious that if he had to make a decision he'd choose OS X.
Ah well... even if you can't use firefox, it's reeeeaaaaly cool to emerge KDE in 40% the time it takes my P4 ^_^