I didn't explain what I was truley getting at properly, my bad. I've replied to someone else with the subject heading of OK. In a nutshell, I don't believe the article for a number of reasons. Althought it is tecnically possible, it is not likely - and who have happened already. Basically the control channel is precious - no quesiton. However SMS messages are only put in as second class traffic, when the channel is not busy. There is a queue, and only if impropely configured, the channel couldn't get so busy from SMS traffic alone where the voice signalling would be impeded so badly where calls could not be placed or accepted.
I don't think I'm wrong. I stated (key word) BESIDES the store/forward/routing, meaning the store/forward/routing was important to consider. I was speaking in terms of bandwidth. Do you really think your local cellular telco doesn't get 165 messages a second? The article just didn't sit well with me.
There are more than one control channels usually, and they are wide(r) channels compared with the other channels. Control channels (the actual RF) is transmitted at a higher dB then the other channels for aiding in receiving the channel clearly on a mobile terminal.
My dad works as an engineer for Telus. He's not a senior engineer, but he gets to go into those really cool cellular offices you see sitting next to the antenna tower. (I've never been in one but he's taken a few snaps-very neat environment) He DOES know what's going on for the most part. Some of the guys that go in there are maintenance guys who replace boards, some do firmware upgrades, some do safety etc.
My dad primarily does stuff with the backhauls most of the time, but at other times he is instructed to do other tasks. There is an actual box (more of a module) that handles the text messaging. It seems the wireless telcos pay for hardware devices when software could probably do the trick! One of the (Windows!) software based readouts on a monitoring station actually provides semi-real time stats of the SMS traffic, it goes thru some kind of an ATM router that I have no idea what it does exactly.
He was saying he notices trends (at each cell site) for text messaging. For instance during the summer, the text messages actually get a heck of a lot more active in the evening then they are in the day. (the sending of text messages from a mobile unit to a mobile unit).
So yes, I don't FULLY understand the article, because I didn't study it with as maybe a fine comb as you may have, my apologies. However I do have insight in the subject-I am not an expert, and because my father is in the business this does not make me an expert although he is. But what I'm getting at is it's not a bandwidth thing (very low speed connections can handle a considerable amount of traffic), it's more of a poor setup. The control channels actually signal the phones that something is going to happen, and the phone/network determine what kind of a connection should be setup/how much bandwidth/circuit switched or packet switched, etc,etc,etc. With the whole setup, my bandwidth figure is low. These towers can pass several Mbits/sec thru the air. The control channels are wider than the other channels and can pass those 32K/sec with ease. Well it just so happens with the system I've been told about is, yes control channel traffic is kept to a minimum (as much as possible), however when there are several events lined up, the system IS intelligent enough not to setup and tear down sessions on demand repetitively. It does accept a queue of traffic and that traffic moves very gracefully across the line. Yes, not all SMS traffic is passed thru the control channel in all systems. These are not 'pie in the sky' setups, these are systems you and I use everyday.
I think for that article to be completely valid a number of things would have to be setup (or maybe I should say 'setup incorrectly' at the wireless telco providers end of things) for that attack to actually take place and work.
Why don't you write a script to pump 165 text messages a second into the network and see what happens? By the way, use another mobile phone to monitor while your running the script to see what happens (yes I'm sure your script isn't controlling a bot net or anything, because you're not a mean guy or gal). I can tell you what will ACTUALLY happen ---- NOTHING.
If a provider would actually not pay attention to this vulnerability (if you call it that) they would have been off-line a while ago. This article is basically saying that if your wireless telco is stupid, there network shouldn't be working right now.
Think about it - usually text messages are a max of 200 characters a message X 165 / sec = 33,000 characters a second. 33,000 DIVIDED by 1024 (1k) = 32K/sec of bandwidth. The average telephone call consumes about 19.2K/sec maximum (after compression, so yes a voice circuit can use a heck of a lot less, I believe they say the average duplexing and use of a bi-directional voice link bandwidth efficiency is about 60% as a rule of thunmb --- the consumption of bandwidth generally, meaning at least 40 percent of a call is wasted circuit switched bandwidth on average). So let's say the bandwidth of 165 200 character text messages a second is like the bandwidth of a maximum of 2 to 4 simultanous telephone calls. If you think 2 to 4 simultaneous telephone calls will take down a cellular network, the thing would have stopped working a long time ago.
I'm sure there are at least 165 text messages being sent every second already.
Yes I do know there are store and forwarding to consider/routing etc, however I find this unlikely.
They should have had this a long time ago. This article is almost making it sound like a break-thru that Dell has finallu engineered a way to distribute computers with out an OS on it! What a break-thru!!!!!
Local computer stores have been doing this for years.
Why would this developer own the code he is being paid to construct? Is he developing ground-breaking, innovative software? Or is s/he filling in the blanks in some web/database app?
If it isn't new an innovative, and there are already common practice standard ways of developing the business software for the same product in the end, the company should own the code, not the developer being paid to construct it.
If the code REQUIRED innovation or a 'new way' of doing something, and the developer came up with the innovative way of 'doing it', then the developer should have rights to that 'new way' of doing it. ONLY if there isn't already another common method of producing the same result.
I have a feeling this topic could get really sticky. Who owns what and why.
The first post was right - get a lawyer and don't listen to me or anyone else.
Any Device that has standard 120V AC NEMA plugs and outlets is not meant to be 'tied' into your household electrical system. Having the UPS in the room and plugging only what you NEED into it is better than plugging the whole room into it.
The more load you put on the unit, the less life you will get out of the batteries.
You cannot vacuum clean off a UPS or a modified sine wave inverter.
I wouldn't have any printers plugged into it, or devices with motors or heating elements.
Why did your work throw the unit out? If it's just batteries it needed, I'm surprised they couldn't put it to use somewhere.. Congratulations on the score of some nice hardware!
I am not sure, and I haven't checked the APC page, but does the 3000 Unit require a 230Volt AC input?
Sometimes I like to keep the telemarketers on the phone for a while, then I put them on hold. I also pretend I'm retarded and such. It's great. If they're gonna call, they're gonna call. Might as well have a little fun with the bastards.
Article heading should be changed to 'School has computer problems, what's new?'
Schools are fucking retarded, mainly because they always about some techno-nut teacher as the IT person in charge of making the school computer decisions because that teacher has the rest of the school believing s/he is the resident computer god.
Dropping Windows because they can't get a program installed? Sounds like the program needs to be dropped!
Why is this on SlashDot?
Why doesn't slashdot do an article on me because I had major trouble this past week trying to get freeradius installed?
I am not being sarcastic, maybe a bit of an a-hole
on
Google Hires Vint Cerf
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I have a lot of respect for Vinton. He even appeared on the kick-ass BBS documentary!-very cool of him. He is one of my heros (kinda). My comment/question is not specifically related to Vint himself, but people like him. -- People who made the initial innovation and sprung the thing forward.
I don't know how technically competent he is to-date, however althought he came up with cool shit (tcp/ip) I get this impression (total intuition here) that he's pretty much useless 30 years later. Am I missing something? Am I wrong?
For instance, I know he is a visionary... However, take a great number of reasonably bright people on slashdot for example. I bet you we (individually, for the most part) would come up with the same ideas, and basic concepts that he will while he's working at google.
Don't get me wrong - the guy is good, he obviously is comfortable thinking in his own realm/sphere, but I bet you there are probably tcp/ip topics that blow his f-ing mind -- stuff that he can't even come up with. Or, I could be wrong. What is he doing there? What the heck was he doing at MCI? I'm sure the engineers at MCI probably think, what the F does Vint know about installing an OC48, or a DSLAM, or BGP routing, etc. I just can't see him getting his hands dirty. What are they hoping to accomplish with this guy?
As far as the guy from Microsoft - he sounds pretty darn bright with all the speech technology he was working on. That guy sounds like he is in the know, and has the theory and practical under his belt, and the innovation floating on his brain 24/7.
I'm not bashing Cerf, I just question what the hell good is he there? Someone tell me please. Remember - I like the guy.
I know they are doing it out of the goodness of their hearts, but come on, they can do better than that! Until sept 2nd????? I bet there are thousands who lost their wallets and such, can't find there credit cards.
e-nuff with the Microsoft bullshit articles -/. is turning into a cyber retirement home for grumpy old geeks that have nothing else to do except bash MS.
I'm sure most of us had a virus on our machines for more than 4 days with out noticing it (even with protection).
Fact is, despite the attitude here at/. MS does know how to run their shit. The same level of geekness and experience that is here at/. exists at Microsoft as well (maybe more so, for the most part).
I remember NOKIA had a solution in '99 for this. We didn't go for it because our office only had 15 people, but it was neat-o.
You walk into the building and your mobile would switch to pbx mode - local extension at your desk mobile style. Low output power too - no brain tumours.
A customer of mine (does NOT use AOL) had a spam sending virus on her computer. I cleaned it up once I was told about it. I was guessing the virus may have been on her machine for up to a week.
I don't know why the heck Symantec doesn't detect this stuff sometimes!!!
AOL put her IP on the blacklist. We have called AOL a few times to take it off the blacklist, they always say they will do it, yet, we still can't get an e-mail to AOL subscribers!!! er!! We don't use AOL and it still sucks!
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't explain what I was truley getting at properly, my bad. I've replied to someone else with the subject heading of OK. In a nutshell, I don't believe the article for a number of reasons. Althought it is tecnically possible, it is not likely - and who have happened already. Basically the control channel is precious - no quesiton. However SMS messages are only put in as second class traffic, when the channel is not busy. There is a queue, and only if impropely configured, the channel couldn't get so busy from SMS traffic alone where the voice signalling would be impeded so badly where calls could not be placed or accepted.
There are more than one control channels usually, and they are wide(r) channels compared with the other channels. Control channels (the actual RF) is transmitted at a higher dB then the other channels for aiding in receiving the channel clearly on a mobile terminal.
My dad works as an engineer for Telus. He's not a senior engineer, but he gets to go into those really cool cellular offices you see sitting next to the antenna tower. (I've never been in one but he's taken a few snaps-very neat environment) He DOES know what's going on for the most part. Some of the guys that go in there are maintenance guys who replace boards, some do firmware upgrades, some do safety etc.
My dad primarily does stuff with the backhauls most of the time, but at other times he is instructed to do other tasks. There is an actual box (more of a module) that handles the text messaging. It seems the wireless telcos pay for hardware devices when software could probably do the trick! One of the (Windows!) software based readouts on a monitoring station actually provides semi-real time stats of the SMS traffic, it goes thru some kind of an ATM router that I have no idea what it does exactly.
He was saying he notices trends (at each cell site) for text messaging. For instance during the summer, the text messages actually get a heck of a lot more active in the evening then they are in the day. (the sending of text messages from a mobile unit to a mobile unit).
So yes, I don't FULLY understand the article, because I didn't study it with as maybe a fine comb as you may have, my apologies. However I do have insight in the subject-I am not an expert, and because my father is in the business this does not make me an expert although he is. But what I'm getting at is it's not a bandwidth thing (very low speed connections can handle a considerable amount of traffic), it's more of a poor setup. The control channels actually signal the phones that something is going to happen, and the phone/network determine what kind of a connection should be setup/how much bandwidth/circuit switched or packet switched, etc,etc,etc. With the whole setup, my bandwidth figure is low. These towers can pass several Mbits/sec thru the air. The control channels are wider than the other channels and can pass those 32K/sec with ease. Well it just so happens with the system I've been told about is, yes control channel traffic is kept to a minimum (as much as possible), however when there are several events lined up, the system IS intelligent enough not to setup and tear down sessions on demand repetitively. It does accept a queue of traffic and that traffic moves very gracefully across the line. Yes, not all SMS traffic is passed thru the control channel in all systems. These are not 'pie in the sky' setups, these are systems you and I use everyday.
I think for that article to be completely valid a number of things would have to be setup (or maybe I should say 'setup incorrectly' at the wireless telco providers end of things) for that attack to actually take place and work.
Why don't you write a script to pump 165 text messages a second into the network and see what happens? By the way, use another mobile phone to monitor while your running the script to see what happens (yes I'm sure your script isn't controlling a bot net or anything, because you're not a mean guy or gal). I can tell you what will ACTUALLY happen ---- NOTHING.
If a provider would actually not pay attention to this vulnerability (if you call it that) they would have been off-line a while ago. This article is basically saying that if your wireless telco is stupid, there network shouldn't be working right now.
Come on, article aside, th
I'm sure there are at least 165 text messages being sent every second already.
Yes I do know there are store and forwarding to consider/routing etc, however I find this unlikely.
Yeah - I never thought of that!! DUH! - I was being sarcastic (I should have made a point of that earlier I guess!) My bad!
This story has been out for a minute and you've written a longer reply than the article!
I guess it's kinda like a cell phone getting slashdotted too!
You could send 165 text messages a second OR you could keep calling the phone you want to disrupt!
Local computer stores have been doing this for years.
totally on topic - mercedes benz is having a conference, and a bunch of execs at Land Rover want to put on a show - think about it. Dumb moderator.
If it isn't new an innovative, and there are already common practice standard ways of developing the business software for the same product in the end, the company should own the code, not the developer being paid to construct it.
If the code REQUIRED innovation or a 'new way' of doing something, and the developer came up with the innovative way of 'doing it', then the developer should have rights to that 'new way' of doing it. ONLY if there isn't already another common method of producing the same result.
I have a feeling this topic could get really sticky. Who owns what and why.
The first post was right - get a lawyer and don't listen to me or anyone else.
The more load you put on the unit, the less life you will get out of the batteries.
You cannot vacuum clean off a UPS or a modified sine wave inverter.
I wouldn't have any printers plugged into it, or devices with motors or heating elements.
Why did your work throw the unit out? If it's just batteries it needed, I'm surprised they couldn't put it to use somewhere.. Congratulations on the score of some nice hardware!
I am not sure, and I haven't checked the APC page, but does the 3000 Unit require a 230Volt AC input?
Why is this on slashdot?
It's be done, oh, wait a minute....
Sometimes I like to keep the telemarketers on the phone for a while, then I put them on hold. I also pretend I'm retarded and such. It's great. If they're gonna call, they're gonna call. Might as well have a little fun with the bastards.
Article heading should be changed to 'School has computer problems, what's new?'
Schools are fucking retarded, mainly because they always about some techno-nut teacher as the IT person in charge of making the school computer decisions because that teacher has the rest of the school believing s/he is the resident computer god.
Dropping Windows because they can't get a program installed? Sounds like the program needs to be dropped!
Why is this on SlashDot?
Why doesn't slashdot do an article on me because I had major trouble this past week trying to get freeradius installed?
I don't know how technically competent he is to-date, however althought he came up with cool shit (tcp/ip) I get this impression (total intuition here) that he's pretty much useless 30 years later. Am I missing something? Am I wrong?
For instance, I know he is a visionary... However, take a great number of reasonably bright people on slashdot for example. I bet you we (individually, for the most part) would come up with the same ideas, and basic concepts that he will while he's working at google.
Don't get me wrong - the guy is good, he obviously is comfortable thinking in his own realm/sphere, but I bet you there are probably tcp/ip topics that blow his f-ing mind -- stuff that he can't even come up with. Or, I could be wrong. What is he doing there? What the heck was he doing at MCI? I'm sure the engineers at MCI probably think, what the F does Vint know about installing an OC48, or a DSLAM, or BGP routing, etc. I just can't see him getting his hands dirty. What are they hoping to accomplish with this guy?
As far as the guy from Microsoft - he sounds pretty darn bright with all the speech technology he was working on. That guy sounds like he is in the know, and has the theory and practical under his belt, and the innovation floating on his brain 24/7.
I'm not bashing Cerf, I just question what the hell good is he there? Someone tell me please. Remember - I like the guy.
1) computer
2) condoms
The terminals will just get shot at or stolen.
I know they are doing it out of the goodness of their hearts, but come on, they can do better than that! Until sept 2nd????? I bet there are thousands who lost their wallets and such, can't find there credit cards.
We knew this a long time ago.
I'm sure most of us had a virus on our machines for more than 4 days with out noticing it (even with protection).
Fact is, despite the attitude here at /. MS does know how to run their shit. The same level of geekness and experience that is here at /. exists at Microsoft as well (maybe more so, for the most part).
i wasn't aware that option existed - thank you.
You walk into the building and your mobile would switch to pbx mode - local extension at your desk mobile style. Low output power too - no brain tumours.
I don't know why the heck Symantec doesn't detect this stuff sometimes!!!
AOL put her IP on the blacklist. We have called AOL a few times to take it off the blacklist, they always say they will do it, yet, we still can't get an e-mail to AOL subscribers!!! er!! We don't use AOL and it still sucks!