David Boies has not intention of upholding his oath as an officer of the court to uphold the Constitution of the United States, otherwise, he would never support the blanket suppression of Free Speech of the Press. Granted Sony has a right to protect their intellectual property and press should have an obligation not to publish trade secrets that have no public value other than to cause harm to Sony, but that's an ethical decision, not a legal one.
But I do wonder, have they considered hiring Tom Cruise for this? Of course, if this technology does take off, you can rest assure that after the events in Ferguson, Missouri, that chest cameras will be the least of the criminal's worries....
Scientists in a trailer in rural Illinois have just discovered that the world is indeed flat. Thus bringing an end to the several hundred year old scientific debate.
Otherwise I think they got themselves all confuzzled. Cable modems and the such are unlimited. I guess alongside that award winning customer support recently documented and here and here, folks might want to seriously consider their Cox business.
I have to seriously hope that the phone is more than just encryption and access control. What types of intrusion detection does the phone have? What types of behavioral analysis to determine unknown exploit vectors does the phone have? Does the phone have decentralized communication methods? One idea I have pondered but seriously don't have the time to get engaged in is to try an SVOIP concept using peer to peer wifi connections, a mesh network of sorts. If the communications are decentralized and segregated from infrastructure, then you can bypass many of the eavesdropping techniques. If you have some form of behavioral analysis, then you can start to identify techniques to exploit the phone at the operational level. Encryption goes a long way to help, and software based access control at the OS level (assuming it's secure and not hackable) is also a good start. But maleware is getting far more customized and attacks on the platform are getting much tougher to detect on a pattern based methodology.
I had that problem once when I lost my wallet. To get a new drivers license, I needed proof of identity through something with a signature. Needless to say, I didn't have it. So we settled we ended up settling on a gas receipt that was signed.... Nothing more official than that.
I'm just waiting for the word that they've infiltrated porn networks (a concept I'd consider completely feasible for "dirt"). Given the Government's long held, and completely zero tolerated rule on surfing porn at work, I sense that this revelation would be... messy.
I'm not really sure who to criticize here, the guy put out the research project on the reasons why we shouldn't mine the moon (Needless to say, we're probably a long way away from that). Or the guy who decided to write on how stupid it was to criticize the idea. Let's see, first we needs an economically viable method to land and return from the Moon. Next, we need that method to be capable of carrying significant weight. Then we would need the mining apparatuses necessary to work in those environments. And if memory serves, miners don't just mine anywhere, so there would needs to be substantial geological surveying to be done.
But I have to agree, it would be a waste to use all that energy on advertisements.
Gotta admit, I cringed when I heard the words, "J.J. Abrams" and "Star Trek" used in the same sentence. And so far,... yep... not impressed. Pretty curious to see Grant Imahara's spin on his character. That sounds pretty interesting.
Re:Guess who he's going to support more now??
on
Ballmer To Retire
·
· Score: 1
Elaborate. There has never been a difference. If the NSA overhears you talking about buying a brick of weed, they send that to the DEA, who does some parallel construction to find another reason to pull you over. Why wouldn't they cooperate? Do you have any reason to think that they didn't in the past?
Perhaps a better question is, if the FBI obtains a warrant to "wiretap" would that give them justification to do a narrow search on the pool of data already collected. Probably true that the collected data couldn't be used to initiate an investigation, but if the investigation is initiated through other means, what does that mean?
That's not exactly true. You might get a single scan or two, but large services who have farms can easily have a firewall that interconnects an array of different IP's. When a syn is left hanging an IPS can easily craft a rule to block further connections from that address. So you'll get a few replies, but you'll miss the rest. Likewise, there are services out there (ISC?) that track such activities and site block abusive IP's based on netflows. If someone employed this scanner, they'll likely hit the radar. But a good question is what happens when a few hundred thousand people hit this, or folks who come off of major proxy servers that are normally whitelisted... Oh yes, much interestingness can develop from this tool...
You have reached the end of the Internet...
But in all honestly, I wonder how long it will take for an iptable rule to come out and auto drop packets seen from the scanner? Since there is some TCP manipulation involved, I sense that it won't be to hard.
I'm not questioning the rightness or wrongness of the program. That's still very much up for debate, both through official channels and the general public, and no doubt and in no small part on Slashdot. That was the whole intent of why Snowden did what he did. But what I am mentioning is that the reason the program was classified as Top Secret is because releasing the information (which Snowden did) would cause exceptional harm to the US.... $160B in damage in my book is definitely exceptional.
The harm caused by exposing these programs isn't a result of their exposure -- the programs are harmful in their own right, whether or not they are exposed.
Ok, that logic is ridiculous. If that was applied then every classified military technology would be unjustified.
Slashdot Mirror
David Boies has not intention of upholding his oath as an officer of the court to uphold the Constitution of the United States, otherwise, he would never support the blanket suppression of Free Speech of the Press. Granted Sony has a right to protect their intellectual property and press should have an obligation not to publish trade secrets that have no public value other than to cause harm to Sony, but that's an ethical decision, not a legal one.
But I do wonder, have they considered hiring Tom Cruise for this? Of course, if this technology does take off, you can rest assure that after the events in Ferguson, Missouri, that chest cameras will be the least of the criminal's worries....
Scientists in a trailer in rural Illinois have just discovered that the world is indeed flat. Thus bringing an end to the several hundred year old scientific debate.
Otherwise I think they got themselves all confuzzled. Cable modems and the such are unlimited. I guess alongside that award winning customer support recently documented and here and here, folks might want to seriously consider their Cox business.
I have to seriously hope that the phone is more than just encryption and access control. What types of intrusion detection does the phone have? What types of behavioral analysis to determine unknown exploit vectors does the phone have? Does the phone have decentralized communication methods? One idea I have pondered but seriously don't have the time to get engaged in is to try an SVOIP concept using peer to peer wifi connections, a mesh network of sorts. If the communications are decentralized and segregated from infrastructure, then you can bypass many of the eavesdropping techniques. If you have some form of behavioral analysis, then you can start to identify techniques to exploit the phone at the operational level. Encryption goes a long way to help, and software based access control at the OS level (assuming it's secure and not hackable) is also a good start. But maleware is getting far more customized and attacks on the platform are getting much tougher to detect on a pattern based methodology.
that shutting down Napster totally killed the mp3.
I had that problem once when I lost my wallet. To get a new drivers license, I needed proof of identity through something with a signature. Needless to say, I didn't have it. So we settled we ended up settling on a gas receipt that was signed. ... Nothing more official than that.
All your warheads are belonging to us.
I'm just waiting for the word that they've infiltrated porn networks (a concept I'd consider completely feasible for "dirt"). Given the Government's long held, and completely zero tolerated rule on surfing porn at work, I sense that this revelation would be ... messy.
Yahoo holds email for a great number of people. That is a great deal of data just lying around. Yahoo holds a fair bit of significance today.
I was so hoping for a new domain name. On the other hand, I do find it fascinating that they were able to write a 41 page paper to say "No." Touche!
But I have to agree, it would be a waste to use all that energy on advertisements.
It is important if the top-ranking policeman has sway on public policy.
Gotta admit, I cringed when I heard the words, "J.J. Abrams" and "Star Trek" used in the same sentence. And so far, ... yep... not impressed. Pretty curious to see Grant Imahara's spin on his character. That sounds pretty interesting.
+1 funny! :)
Good point.
Would the recent cutting of price in the Surface be tied to the decision at all?
Ramadan ended almost two weeks ago.
Now maybe the job market will improve! :)
Elaborate. There has never been a difference. If the NSA overhears you talking about buying a brick of weed, they send that to the DEA, who does some parallel construction to find another reason to pull you over. Why wouldn't they cooperate? Do you have any reason to think that they didn't in the past?
Perhaps a better question is, if the FBI obtains a warrant to "wiretap" would that give them justification to do a narrow search on the pool of data already collected. Probably true that the collected data couldn't be used to initiate an investigation, but if the investigation is initiated through other means, what does that mean?
That's not exactly true. You might get a single scan or two, but large services who have farms can easily have a firewall that interconnects an array of different IP's. When a syn is left hanging an IPS can easily craft a rule to block further connections from that address. So you'll get a few replies, but you'll miss the rest. Likewise, there are services out there (ISC?) that track such activities and site block abusive IP's based on netflows. If someone employed this scanner, they'll likely hit the radar. But a good question is what happens when a few hundred thousand people hit this, or folks who come off of major proxy servers that are normally whitelisted... Oh yes, much interestingness can develop from this tool...
Law enforcement using intercepted communications in the pursuit of catching the criminal. Certainly that has never happened before.
You have reached the end of the Internet... But in all honestly, I wonder how long it will take for an iptable rule to come out and auto drop packets seen from the scanner? Since there is some TCP manipulation involved, I sense that it won't be to hard.
I'm not questioning the rightness or wrongness of the program. That's still very much up for debate, both through official channels and the general public, and no doubt and in no small part on Slashdot. That was the whole intent of why Snowden did what he did. But what I am mentioning is that the reason the program was classified as Top Secret is because releasing the information (which Snowden did) would cause exceptional harm to the US. ... $160B in damage in my book is definitely exceptional.
The harm caused by exposing these programs isn't a result of their exposure -- the programs are harmful in their own right, whether or not they are exposed.
Ok, that logic is ridiculous. If that was applied then every classified military technology would be unjustified.