Why are they basing anything on the domain?? The phisher domains are usually garbled crap with no or irrelevant meaning. Would it kill them to do an automated http request and look for words like "paypal" or "bank", then flag it for manual approval?
The next logical step would be that it becomes free, by Google, and while a sound product/service it will undoutably have questionable privacy & data retention policies that tarnish it's images before it leaves Beta in 2018.
The last I heard on this subject from the phpBB guys is that they're doing precisely this sort of code audit to make sure the new version of the software isn't plagued by so many vulnerabilities as the 2.0 line has been... but only time will tell whether it's manageable.
That's a great start, but it needs to be done on all of the massively popular packages.
Trouble with this sort of job is that the real professionals also happen to charge a fortune for their services, and that's something that most open-source projects can't afford. True, but then on the other side of the spectrum you've got some amazing software & os's coming out that're robust and secure, and written by real professionals who aren't charging anything.
It's kind of weird that the hugely popular open-source php apps don't attract the quality attention the niche desktop apps do.
The real problem with PHP and security
on
Essential PHP Security
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The real problem with PHP and security is that it's perceived as insecure. There are countless stories of people losing their forums, blogs, websites etc to hackers, defacers and script kiddies.
This book might address how to code in PHP more securely, but that is not going to address the much more perceivable problem of "THIS SITE HAS BEEN H4X0RZED".
What's needed is for some *real* professionals to sit down and go through all the popular open source packages - phpbb, nuke etc - and identify and remove as many problems as possible.
That would obviously be a huge effort, but it's a necessary step imho.
At the least, a solid, secure framework should be released that the softwares could be based on so there is a rigorous, thorough filtering of all input/output, and the onus is partially removed from the people who mean well but write shitty software.
Maybe it's time the 'mega companies' of the internet stop trying to be 'American companies' and set themselves up somewhere else.
They're US because they are established there but they serve virtually the whole world. In my opinion they should owe allegiance to no particular country because they deal with them all.
I'm sure many countries would give them the freedom to conduct business internationally without trying to intervene or dictate how and where they may do so.
They're not selling weapons, drugs or anything illegal or immoral so why persecute them based on political moods?
China's human rights issues are something that should be addressed, but not by Google, Yahoo, MSN or any other internet corporation.
So what? Why does every anti-MS article need to reflect that? MS didn't think the internet would be a trillion dollar industry. Not many things turn into trillion dollar industries.
How much safer is Firefoxs really, considering there's ~7000 open bugs, thousands of extensions, each a potential entry point, and millions of users with delusions of invulnerability?
How exactly is 0.9% (Firefox) better than 1.6% (IE) anyway? Both mean spyware has been installed. Is it okay to have less spyware now?
I wiped my greasy finger prints off with the cotton shirt I was wearing.
If the new one is the 'true' video ipod then what is the existing one? Obviously 'untrue' shouldn't be taken literally, maybe 'rushed' or 'half-arsed' would have been a better choice of words.
My complaint is that if you walk into a shop right now and drop $400 on an ipod, in a couple of months it'll have been superceded.
If you walk into a shop and buy a PS2, PSP, XBOX or any other 'pricey toy', you will get years from it.
Assuming I go buy the new video ipod when it comes out in April, in July there'll be a better one able to play more popular formats, and maybe with longer battery life. By comparison the April one would suck ass.
Apple *should* just stop stringing consumers along and make a good, solid, updateable, upgradeable ipod instead of relying on 'ipod' being enough to make people buy 2 or more a year.
If I want the newer features, which in the case of video I think (correct me if I'm wrong) are mostly a software difference rather than hardware, an 'updateable' ipod would allow me to have that feature.
If I want to watch videos while travelling, which I do, I can't with my (currently 4 months old) ipod. If it was made by a company that wasn't retarded, adding that functionality would be as simple as clicking 'update firmware'.
For the price they charge I don't think it's any less of an investment than an xbox / xbox 360 / ps2 whatever console. You want to get a few years out of it, and you don't want to have "a piece of crap" 3 months later. If a new PlayStation or xBox came out every 3 months with newer features that the older ones could not have, people would hit the roof.
I bought an ipod nano in October. Within minutes it was scratched. Within a couple of months, it was superceded by the 'untrue' video ipod.
Now the 'untrue' video ipod is being superceded by the 'true' one, and in the space of 6 months I will have an ipod that is 2 generations old.
I think it's time Apple slow down, I'm not going to spend $1200 a year collecting ipods, and I can't imagine "the masses" will either.
If however they released one robust, sturdy, feature-rich ipod that could be firmware-updated, I would happily purchase it, because it would have a lifespan that justified it.
As it is, the next 'portable media thingy' I buy will be a PSP.
What's more evil - belitting a site (bmw.de is not the first) because of tactics Google doesn't like, or randomly confirming that a selection of pages matches what the GoogleBots see, and quietly contacting/delisting/penalising sites with obvious spam?
Of course, only one of those methods will be newsworthy.
Don't worry if your employer can track your whereabouts. Soon Google will release GoogleTracker, which will be a beta service you can route your calls through.
Of course, by using GoogleTracker you agree to allow non-humans to listen to your calls, for the purpose of identifying relevant ads.
Privacy advocates are satisfied that Google will not track your movement. They are satisfied that Google already knows everything about you. Google spokesmen have reinforced this, saying, "Monitoring your calls would be like triple-wiping. There's only a slim chance we'll get more dirt from you."
There will be a Larry model released later, but it's expected to remain in beta for the first 15 years, and unusuable for the first 15 weeks due to overwhelming underestimates of how many people would use something by Google.
Like the Linus model, it will be free to use. However it will log everything you do for non-evil purposes.
Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla QA (Asa Dotzler)is a longer running joke than the memory leaks.
Heh .. I can see the need for minders. Imagine it *combined* with a gun-control-thing :D
It's only clunky backpack & goggles till Sony drops a billion into making it a wristwatch and Oakleys.
If it's not happening to you personally it's not a Firefox bug? I've heard that justification before.
Isn't Gecko the fastest rendering engine around? Why don't they just compress & cache the actual html, and then re-render it?
A typical page is 30kb - 100kb of plain text. Once it's compressed it's probably under 10kb.
It might take a fraction of a second longer to re-display the page, but with all the extra memory you'd have available who cares/notices.
Why don't they do that or am I missing something obvious?
I'm not sure if anyone else is doing it, but an Australian uni group is working on an augmented gaming thing that looks significantly cooler.
Why settle for a gun in your lounge when you can have a game incorporated into your surroundings?
Why are they basing anything on the domain?? The phisher domains are usually garbled crap with no or irrelevant meaning. Would it kill them to do an automated http request and look for words like "paypal" or "bank", then flag it for manual approval?
The next logical step would be that it becomes free, by Google, and while a sound product/service it will undoutably have questionable privacy & data retention policies that tarnish it's images before it leaves Beta in 2018.
Duh.
The last I heard on this subject from the phpBB guys is that they're doing precisely this sort of code audit to make sure the new version of the software isn't plagued by so many vulnerabilities as the 2.0 line has been... but only time will tell whether it's manageable.
That's a great start, but it needs to be done on all of the massively popular packages.
Trouble with this sort of job is that the real professionals also happen to charge a fortune for their services, and that's something that most open-source projects can't afford.
True, but then on the other side of the spectrum you've got some amazing software & os's coming out that're robust and secure, and written by real professionals who aren't charging anything.
It's kind of weird that the hugely popular open-source php apps don't attract the quality attention the niche desktop apps do.
The real problem with PHP and security is that it's perceived as insecure. There are countless stories of people losing their forums, blogs, websites etc to hackers, defacers and script kiddies.
This book might address how to code in PHP more securely, but that is not going to address the much more perceivable problem of "THIS SITE HAS BEEN H4X0RZED".
What's needed is for some *real* professionals to sit down and go through all the popular open source packages - phpbb, nuke etc - and identify and remove as many problems as possible.
That would obviously be a huge effort, but it's a necessary step imho.
At the least, a solid, secure framework should be released that the softwares could be based on so there is a rigorous, thorough filtering of all input/output, and the onus is partially removed from the people who mean well but write shitty software.
Maybe it's time the 'mega companies' of the internet stop trying to be 'American companies' and set themselves up somewhere else.
They're US because they are established there but they serve virtually the whole world. In my opinion they should owe allegiance to no particular country because they deal with them all.
I'm sure many countries would give them the freedom to conduct business internationally without trying to intervene or dictate how and where they may do so.
They're not selling weapons, drugs or anything illegal or immoral so why persecute them based on political moods?
China's human rights issues are something that should be addressed, but not by Google, Yahoo, MSN or any other internet corporation.
So what? Why does every anti-MS article need to reflect that? MS didn't think the internet would be a trillion dollar industry. Not many things turn into trillion dollar industries.
Wow, who would have ever have had the idea of providing a free email account with an external domain?? Other than Microsoft last year with Hotmail.
Google is just so wonderful omg.
This sounds very familiar. Was there a giant gorilla too?
How much safer is Firefoxs really, considering there's ~7000 open bugs, thousands of extensions, each a potential entry point, and millions of users with delusions of invulnerability? How exactly is 0.9% (Firefox) better than 1.6% (IE) anyway? Both mean spyware has been installed. Is it okay to have less spyware now?
I wiped my greasy finger prints off with the cotton shirt I was wearing.
If the new one is the 'true' video ipod then what is the existing one? Obviously 'untrue' shouldn't be taken literally, maybe 'rushed' or 'half-arsed' would have been a better choice of words.
My complaint is that if you walk into a shop right now and drop $400 on an ipod, in a couple of months it'll have been superceded.
If you walk into a shop and buy a PS2, PSP, XBOX or any other 'pricey toy', you will get years from it.
Assuming I go buy the new video ipod when it comes out in April, in July there'll be a better one able to play more popular formats, and maybe with longer battery life. By comparison the April one would suck ass.
Apple *should* just stop stringing consumers along and make a good, solid, updateable, upgradeable ipod instead of relying on 'ipod' being enough to make people buy 2 or more a year.
If I want the newer features, which in the case of video I think (correct me if I'm wrong) are mostly a software difference rather than hardware, an 'updateable' ipod would allow me to have that feature.
If I want to watch videos while travelling, which I do, I can't with my (currently 4 months old) ipod. If it was made by a company that wasn't retarded, adding that functionality would be as simple as clicking 'update firmware'.
For the price they charge I don't think it's any less of an investment than an xbox / xbox 360 / ps2 whatever console. You want to get a few years out of it, and you don't want to have "a piece of crap" 3 months later. If a new PlayStation or xBox came out every 3 months with newer features that the older ones could not have, people would hit the roof.
I bought an ipod nano in October. Within minutes it was scratched. Within a couple of months, it was superceded by the 'untrue' video ipod.
Now the 'untrue' video ipod is being superceded by the 'true' one, and in the space of 6 months I will have an ipod that is 2 generations old.
I think it's time Apple slow down, I'm not going to spend $1200 a year collecting ipods, and I can't imagine "the masses" will either.
If however they released one robust, sturdy, feature-rich ipod that could be firmware-updated, I would happily purchase it, because it would have a lifespan that justified it.
As it is, the next 'portable media thingy' I buy will be a PSP.
When will they be hosing them down with tugboats?
For Google, 30+ million a day. For the ad publishers (100's of thousands? who knwos), some fraction of that.
When you consider most ads served are on Google services (search, gmail etc), I would say probably only a 3rd are actually served by publishers.
So 1 in 62 site sis:
- illegal downloads
- cellphone ringtones
- cheesy screensavers
- dumb ass hacker/cracker/whatever wannabe shite
I'd say that's declining rapidly, but not fast enough.
PS. I bet we see some people say Spyware isn't declining, Firefox is growing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!onnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnne
Wasn't the original goal of a Google payment system to help ease the workload for cutting and mailing xx,xxx,xxx ad publishers a check each month?
Do you mean they should cloak themselves?
What's more evil - belitting a site (bmw.de is not the first) because of tactics Google doesn't like, or randomly confirming that a selection of pages matches what the GoogleBots see, and quietly contacting/delisting/penalising sites with obvious spam?
Of course, only one of those methods will be newsworthy.
Don't worry if your employer can track your whereabouts. Soon Google will release GoogleTracker, which will be a beta service you can route your calls through.
Of course, by using GoogleTracker you agree to allow non-humans to listen to your calls, for the purpose of identifying relevant ads.
Privacy advocates are satisfied that Google will not track your movement. They are satisfied that Google already knows everything about you. Google spokesmen have reinforced this, saying, "Monitoring your calls would be like triple-wiping. There's only a slim chance we'll get more dirt from you."
What's so hard to understand about it? It's the heaviest, densest matter available and it powers spaceships duh. Oh yeah, and Nibbler craps it.
There will be a Larry model released later, but it's expected to remain in beta for the first 15 years, and unusuable for the first 15 weeks due to overwhelming underestimates of how many people would use something by Google.
Like the Linus model, it will be free to use. However it will log everything you do for non-evil purposes.