I think Cisco wants to increase their own profits (which are a bit larger, by a factor of 1000 or so) by scaring as many people as possible. Despicable.
Bullshit. Spoken like a true incompetent. Code vulnerabilities are caused by coders. They can be reduced and potentially eliminated by a) using better coders and b) spending more effort. In todays world where coders are often as cheap and incompetent so they just get the job still done (and management bonuses are not threatened), most code is vulnerable, but that is not fate.
The metric is pretty worthless. It can identify extremely bad code, but that it is. It will however con people into thinking it is much better than that and as such do a disservice to software security. Yet another worthless metric that delivers a mostly meaningless number.
The only way at this time to get a good assessment of code-quality is still having an experienced and capable expert look at it manually. Unless we get strong AI at some time (highly doubtful) that will very likely remain the only way.
First, I have never heard of this "famed" person and I have been in computer security research for quite a while. Second, what they describe is basically worthless: They can identify really, really, really bad code, but if it is better than that their metric is unusable.
Sounds like a con to get attention and funding to me, nothing more, and they do harm by promoting yet another useless metric.
That would be good. Because I am not sure I can be Windows-free until 2020, and the Enterprise Edition of Win10 would be the only one I would even consider for replacing my Win7 Pro. Disabling telemetry completely must be possible. Refusing updates must be possible. Getting rid of Cortana permanently must be possible. $7/Month would not be an issue though.
Tor is now shit, because the good people were chased away.
Complete bollocks. Name some of these "good people" who have left. The project founders and all the major technical contributors are still there, as well as many new ones.
Indeed. Methinks that there is a PsyOps campaign running to make people go to less secure alternatives. If you cannot break it, try to make everybody believe it is broken instead.
And in addition, the TOR project explains all the ways you can de-anonymize yourself by mistake while using TOR. One of this things is trusting an exit-node.
Actually, there is no evidence Tor is backdoored at all. The known attacks have all been explained nicely by verifiable vulnerabilities in other places and by entirely plausible user error. Seriously, stop spreading FUD.
It seems to be pretty much a big standard now, hence it will not be going away any time soon. And I do have the occasional statistical problem that would benefit from something like R. (I had an R tutorial a long time ago, so I have some idea about what it can do.)
More general, but just as valid. It is a good guiding principle.
However they currently try to game this. Obviously, they _are_ very much in fear of the citizens, why else all that spying and militarization of the police. Then they try propaganda to make the citizens believe there is nothing to fear. And on some, it seems to work.
You are certainly right about that. The nice thing about C is that the really incompetent will not get their code to run at all and weed themselves out that way. In contrast, a bad Java coder (for example) will usually get things to work, but very badly so.
Well, C is "best" in the sense that it does not stand in your way. If you know what you are doing, that is very nice. It does not help you much either, and for the semi-competent and incompetent masses of "programmers", that is a real problem.
Personally, I went back to C as main language a while ago after trying a number of alternatives. The only change is that I use Python as glue-code these days and withe the core-workers as C-implemented Python classes.
Looks like I have to have a go at R some time these days though.
Otherwise you have a full-blown Police State and that is far, far worse than almost any amount of unsolved crime. In a free state, the police must be severely limited in what it can do and must be kept at a level of power that allows them to reliably keep society functioning, but never above.
We will see. Things do no look so bad for Linux gaming with Vulcan. All it needs is for some major engines to support Vulcan instead or alongside off DirectX. I will probably have to keep a Win7 or Win10 VM around for Office though (customers demand it), or confine it in Wine.
Slashdot Mirror
I think Cisco wants to increase their own profits (which are a bit larger, by a factor of 1000 or so) by scaring as many people as possible. Despicable.
Big egos and small skills usually go hand-in-hand....
I guess you have never heard of hardware verification. Puts you on same level like all the other morons claiming "everything is vulnerable".
Bullshit. Spoken like a true incompetent. Code vulnerabilities are caused by coders. They can be reduced and potentially eliminated by a) using better coders and b) spending more effort. In todays world where coders are often as cheap and incompetent so they just get the job still done (and management bonuses are not threatened), most code is vulnerable, but that is not fate.
Does not sound like a security expert to me. More like somebody that want so con people out of their money.
The metric is pretty worthless. It can identify extremely bad code, but that it is. It will however con people into thinking it is much better than that and as such do a disservice to software security. Yet another worthless metric that delivers a mostly meaningless number.
The only way at this time to get a good assessment of code-quality is still having an experienced and capable expert look at it manually. Unless we get strong AI at some time (highly doubtful) that will very likely remain the only way.
First, I have never heard of this "famed" person and I have been in computer security research for quite a while. Second, what they describe is basically worthless: They can identify really, really, really bad code, but if it is better than that their metric is unusable.
Sounds like a con to get attention and funding to me, nothing more, and they do harm by promoting yet another useless metric.
Incidentally, that is how it is done all over Europe. Works well.
Alt least you cannot say MS is not innovative. What they came up here is massively against the customer's interest, but still.
And that is the problem. The Enterprise Edition is now the only one even worth considering.
That would be good. Because I am not sure I can be Windows-free until 2020, and the Enterprise Edition of Win10 would be the only one I would even consider for replacing my Win7 Pro. Disabling telemetry completely must be possible. Refusing updates must be possible. Getting rid of Cortana permanently must be possible. $7/Month would not be an issue though.
Thanks. Yes, I noticed that too. Probably somebody hired some spin-doctors that are bad-mouthing TOR now, with no actual evidence.
Tor is now shit, because the good people were chased away.
Complete bollocks. Name some of these "good people" who have left. The project founders and all the major technical contributors are still there, as well as many new ones.
Indeed. Methinks that there is a PsyOps campaign running to make people go to less secure alternatives. If you cannot break it, try to make everybody believe it is broken instead.
And in addition, the TOR project explains all the ways you can de-anonymize yourself by mistake while using TOR. One of this things is trusting an exit-node.
Actually, there is no evidence Tor is backdoored at all. The known attacks have all been explained nicely by verifiable vulnerabilities in other places and by entirely plausible user error. Seriously, stop spreading FUD.
You underestimate how bad the worst "programmers" are these days.
I do. You just do not realize how bad some "programmers" are these days.
It seems to be pretty much a big standard now, hence it will not be going away any time soon. And I do have the occasional statistical problem that would benefit from something like R. (I had an R tutorial a long time ago, so I have some idea about what it can do.)
More general, but just as valid. It is a good guiding principle.
However they currently try to game this. Obviously, they _are_ very much in fear of the citizens, why else all that spying and militarization of the police. Then they try propaganda to make the citizens believe there is nothing to fear. And on some, it seems to work.
The system did recognize the side of the trailer, it just though it was a traffic-sign higher up. Hence there is data to work with.
You are certainly right about that. The nice thing about C is that the really incompetent will not get their code to run at all and weed themselves out that way. In contrast, a bad Java coder (for example) will usually get things to work, but very badly so.
Well, C is "best" in the sense that it does not stand in your way. If you know what you are doing, that is very nice.
It does not help you much either, and for the semi-competent and incompetent masses of "programmers", that is a real problem.
Personally, I went back to C as main language a while ago after trying a number of alternatives. The only change is that I use Python as glue-code these days and withe the core-workers as C-implemented Python classes.
Looks like I have to have a go at R some time these days though.
Otherwise you have a full-blown Police State and that is far, far worse than almost any amount of unsolved crime. In a free state, the police must be severely limited in what it can do and must be kept at a level of power that allows them to reliably keep society functioning, but never above.
Ask Cortana. She probably knows all the best brands and how to apply them.
We will see. Things do no look so bad for Linux gaming with Vulcan. All it needs is for some major engines to support Vulcan instead or alongside off DirectX. I will probably have to keep a Win7 or Win10 VM around for Office though (customers demand it), or confine it in Wine.