Did a/. user with the name "Fozzy" really just jump on someone for useing "carebear" ?
I think maybe he just has bear envy....
Will just love to see what Smokey has to say.
It is the NTSB that researches things like this, not the FAA per se. They are very methodical and precise with their work. They are slow to publish thier findings, this doesn't mean they are slow to identify the cause, just very carefull that they have come to the correct conclusion.
Check out the NTSB aircraft accident database, this contains detail over every aircraft accident reasearched by them for several decades ( 1962 ) http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp
"The website for Al-Qaeda should be near the bottom of the list for the defense department."
I disagree, the Internet is a great propoganda tool ( on both sides ), it is ideal for sending discrete messages, some degree of anonmity, synchronizing activities in distant places etc.
It is not FUD to say that these capabilities can be exploited to their advantage.
"Shouldn't airplanes (the software controlling them) be able to deal with bad information coming in from their GPS systems, either by shutting down, and letting the pilot take over, or having redundant systems that detect when a sensor is giving incorrect data? Don't pilots have to know how to navigate and control the plane without GPS in the case where it isn't working."
Yes! also reference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAIM , Pilots also do not ever rely on just one instrument or one type of navigation, flying is a process of checking instruments and other observations against each other. At this point in aviation the human is allways in contol of the aircraft dring the landing and takeoff, even when using auto-pilot the aircraft responds to the control inputs by the human pilot ( just like cruise control in your car ) The only area where this differs is on some comercial airliner that has a system for avoiding an imminent collision in which the aircraft will execute a manuver to avoid.
"Yes, we could put up a server in front of each, or a router that has anti-virus built in, however this is not a cost effective method for a number of their locations. "
You need to tie value to a firewall / router / vpn ( or all of the above even) so that you have a solution not just a band-aid. You can find a DVR that isn't windows-based, but it doesn't get you out of the mess you have in design. I assume the cameras are used for security ? so it is not just worms that you need to protect against, you need to protect against some one deliberately attacking and or altering hte contents of these sytems, thieves are great inovators. ( excuse the spelling )
>>It would look an awful lot like the internet we have now.
>Except for, you know, the Tier 1 ISPs, on whose networks practically all our >traffic passes at some point.
>Control them, and you control the net.
Keep the backbone, without huge aggregate networks the internet is not cost effective and not to mention what kind of routing problems and bloated BGP tables we would have, just do VPN to peers you trust, that can be either router-to-router ( GRE IPSEC hacked-together-ssh whatever ) or somehting even browser based , but fragmenting things into many many more smaller peers just makes things unusable.
"What computers cannot teach however, is the NOISE and physical presence of a firefight."
Not that it is the same as combat, ( or anywhere near watching friends die / actually having to KILL someone ) but this is why I like paintball better than FPS games.
Unless it comes up as an issue under SOX or HIPPA we are not worried about it, we can't be all our time is taken up fxing the uncompliant parts of our systems/network.
"...That's your problem though, not mine as a server admin. Besides, a simple SSL server would foil that attack and pop up a warning that the server names don't match the certificate...."
If I am truely in the middle, i can rewrite URL, present other certificates etc, ( spoof the certificate authority too even ), all this software technology exists Load balancers content switches ssl concentrators all have to legitmately do this now.
All that being said, this is currently not the biggest threat, although pulled off successfully could efect many at time.
you could implement choke points, maybe like a portal/doorway where to pass through to the other realm you must have certain client-side data or abilities that come with a download or paid service. You could mask the doorway with large physical boundries such as a vast sea, bottomless canyons, Space ( the vacum kind ) etc.
"This is why Microsoft Windows is not a good choice for embedded systems. System designers should choose an unecumbered system such as Linux or BSD, particularly if any kind of security is required, like for voting or banking."
So are you saying it is possible to list the names of every programmer who worked on Linux ? I wouldn't think so. ( Please correct me if I am wrong ) As far as I can tell if this is a true requirement, someone will have to start from scratch, ( OS and all )
"Yeah, that's pretty shitty, but I wouldn't say it's Microsoft's fault. If they want to do business in China they have to comply with Chinese law. Chinese law's kinda oppressive. News at 11."
Yeah, screw ethics!
forget about your fellow human being, I mean you lucked out on you were born, too bad for them.
reminds me of the "In Order For Evil To Triumph, Good People Do Nothing" quote.
Take a look at http://english.epochtimes.com/news/5-1-7/25560.htm l
It isn't just Microsoft, it is anyone willing to make a buck, Cisco, Network Associates, Trend Micro, Nortel etc.
A quote from the above link
"...This is a black market. It's a black market where state-of-the-art equipment is being sold to the Communist Party. Cisco is no longer assisting the censorship of the Chinese web. They're actually assisting the round up of Chinese dissidents of all manner and stripe. Internet dissidents are the fasting growing group of political prisoners in China."
"...and the NetBSD folks want to port their system to anything bigger than a digital watch..."
Linus has you beat again.
http://www.freeos.com/articles/3800/ (Linux wrist-watch)
"...It happens *often* that some passenger drinks too much / ha..."
Just as a point of FYI...
this is why Pilots are prohibited from allowing anyone under the influence of any drug (excpet under medical care and supervision) from boarding an aircraft.
look here for an example and an excerpt from the FAR (Federal Aviation Regulations)
http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/callback_issues/cb_261.ht m
It isn't just mergers, our private addresses space collied with Qaulcomm's address space! Even though Service providers are not supposed to use RFC1918 addresses, they do. I am not really looking forward to IP6, but there are many times within this last year where I would have loved to have it already.
Slashdot Mirror
Did a /. user with the name "Fozzy" really just jump on someone for useing "carebear" ?
I think maybe he just has bear envy....
Will just love to see what Smokey has to say.
It is the NTSB that researches things like this, not the FAA per se. They are very methodical and precise with their work. They are slow to publish thier findings, this doesn't mean they are slow to identify the cause, just very carefull that they have come to the correct conclusion. Check out the NTSB aircraft accident database, this contains detail over every aircraft accident reasearched by them for several decades ( 1962 ) http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp
There are IFR certifed GPS, they are ALL panel mounts.
"Shouldn't airplanes (the software controlling them) be able to deal with bad information coming in from their GPS systems, either by shutting down, and letting the pilot take over, or having redundant systems that detect when a sensor is giving incorrect data? Don't pilots have to know how to navigate and control the plane without GPS in the case where it isn't working."
Yes! also reference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAIM , Pilots also do not ever rely on just one instrument or one type of navigation, flying is a process of checking instruments and other observations against each other. At this point in aviation the human is allways in contol of the aircraft dring the landing and takeoff, even when using auto-pilot the aircraft responds to the control inputs by the human pilot ( just like cruise control in your car ) The only area where this differs is on some comercial airliner that has a system for avoiding an imminent collision in which the aircraft will execute a manuver to avoid.
"Yes, we could put up a server in front of each, or a router that has anti-virus built in, however this is not a cost effective method for a number of their locations. "
You need to tie value to a firewall / router / vpn ( or all of the above even) so that you have a solution not just a band-aid. You can find a DVR that isn't windows-based, but it doesn't get you out of the mess you have in design.
I assume the cameras are used for security ? so it is not just worms that you need to protect against, you need to protect against some one deliberately attacking and or altering hte contents of these sytems, thieves are great inovators. ( excuse the spelling )
>>It would look an awful lot like the internet we have now.
>Except for, you know, the Tier 1 ISPs, on whose networks practically all our >traffic passes at some point.
>Control them, and you control the net.
Keep the backbone, without huge aggregate networks the internet is not cost effective and not to mention what kind of routing problems and bloated BGP tables we would have, just do VPN to peers you trust, that can be either router-to-router ( GRE IPSEC hacked-together-ssh whatever ) or somehting even browser based , but fragmenting things into many many more smaller peers just makes things unusable.
"What computers cannot teach however, is the NOISE and physical presence of a firefight." Not that it is the same as combat, ( or anywhere near watching friends die / actually having to KILL someone ) but this is why I like paintball better than FPS games.
in context I belive they are talking about the first U.S. jet powered aircraft, something like http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/aero/aircraft/lock heed_xp80.htm
Unless it comes up as an issue under SOX or HIPPA we are not worried about it, we can't be all our time is taken up fxing the uncompliant parts of our systems/network.
"...That's your problem though, not mine as a server admin. Besides, a simple SSL server would foil that attack and pop up a warning that the server names don't match the certificate...."
If I am truely in the middle, i can rewrite URL, present other certificates etc, ( spoof the certificate authority too even ), all this software technology exists Load balancers content switches ssl concentrators all have to legitmately do this now.
All that being said, this is currently not the biggest threat, although pulled off successfully could efect many at time.
you could implement choke points, maybe like a portal/doorway where to pass through to the other realm you must have certain client-side data or abilities that come with a download or paid service. You could mask the doorway with large physical boundries such as a vast sea, bottomless canyons, Space ( the vacum kind ) etc.
"This is why Microsoft Windows is not a good choice for embedded systems. System designers should choose an unecumbered system such as Linux or BSD, particularly if any kind of security is required, like for voting or banking." So are you saying it is possible to list the names of every programmer who worked on Linux ? I wouldn't think so. ( Please correct me if I am wrong ) As far as I can tell if this is a true requirement, someone will have to start from scratch, ( OS and all )
yeah you know, i have a *ton* of those spare $50,000.00 TEST routers to throw at the lab.....
or , for instance pod casting the local weather, loacl news, ESPN, public access etc.
"Yeah, that's pretty shitty, but I wouldn't say it's Microsoft's fault. If they want to do business in China they have to comply with Chinese law. Chinese law's kinda oppressive. News at 11." Yeah, screw ethics! forget about your fellow human being, I mean you lucked out on you were born, too bad for them. reminds me of the "In Order For Evil To Triumph, Good People Do Nothing" quote. Take a look at http://english.epochtimes.com/news/5-1-7/25560.htm l
It isn't just Microsoft, it is anyone willing to make a buck, Cisco, Network Associates, Trend Micro, Nortel etc.
A quote from the above link
"...This is a black market. It's a black market where state-of-the-art equipment is being sold to the Communist Party. Cisco is no longer assisting the censorship of the Chinese web. They're actually assisting the round up of Chinese dissidents of all manner and stripe. Internet dissidents are the fasting growing group of political prisoners in China."
"...and the NetBSD folks want to port their system to anything bigger than a digital watch..." Linus has you beat again. http://www.freeos.com/articles/3800/ (Linux wrist-watch)
my aimbot seems to work just fine without a mouse....
"...It happens *often* that some passenger drinks too much / ha..." Just as a point of FYI... this is why Pilots are prohibited from allowing anyone under the influence of any drug (excpet under medical care and supervision) from boarding an aircraft. look here for an example and an excerpt from the FAR (Federal Aviation Regulations) http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/callback_issues/cb_261.ht m
It isn't just mergers, our private addresses space collied with Qaulcomm's address space! Even though Service providers are not supposed to use RFC1918 addresses, they do. I am not really looking forward to IP6, but there are many times within this last year where I would have loved to have it already.