I'd like to see a bluetooth keyer, allowing an operator to wirelessly send morse code over their cell phone.
I think it would look a bit odd though, if you saw several people at a dance club on a saturday night with their "smart coctails" and a morse code key on the table;^)
My takeaway is that if a process knows another thread is calculating an SSL key, it can get an advantage in figuring out the SSL key.
It won't "get" the actual key, but with sufficient "bits" of info, the calculation can be rendered fairly trivial.
I'm not familiar with these types of security reports, but let me say that to me, it sounds much like saying that with a careful analysis of the LEDs on the front of my IMSAI 8080 my private data may be revealed.
There seems to be so many other things that feed into this vulnerability (like, a minimal number of processes running, knowing the code is being executed, that the thread and the "cracker" software run on different "logical" CPUs at the same time, etc...) that this is a very, very, small issue - damn near purely theoretical.
If the author can say, "Run this code on your server, calculate an SSL key, and this piece of code will reveal your SSL key" then we have a real vulnerability. As I read it, the author is saying "Run this code, calculate an SSL key, and you may be able to infer a percentage of the bits that comprise your SSL key".
I will repeat, I only skimmed the paper, and I'm not familiar with these types of reports, but that is what I walked away with - if I am wrong, I invite the correction.
To do this you would need what is called "Structured Wiring" - in short, you would need each phone extension in your house to have a dedicated "twisted pair" come down to a central location, where each extension would be directly wired to a port on your PBX.
Your wiring right now is *probably* like a long snake that runs through the house, with about 10 pairs of wires (it seems, maybe more or less) running continuously around the house. That wiring will not work for you.
The ports to tie each phone line into your PBX will run you about $100/port, so for four phones and one line coming in, that would be $500 plus the cost of the computer and running the wires to each of your four rooms.
If you have an Ethernet network in each of the four rooms, you could get VoIP phones, or VoIP adapters for your extensions and avoid the cost of the structured wiring.
Yes, I consider it vaproware, but this doesn't bother me at all. It fits the definition of vaporware. Sometime, after its release, then it won't fit that definition any more, but for now it does.
No, it doesn't. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporware/ It has not been announced with a certain release date that has been missed - IIRC, they have not announced a date certain that has been passed... If they had, you'd be right - but I think thye have not...
According to their roadmap http://www.opensolaris.org/roadmap/index.html they plan to have a buildable release 2QCY05 (2nd quarter Calendar Year 2005) - which gives them until June 30th to do so. Any calls that OpenSolaris is Vaporware before then are premature...
Well, he states in the book that the idea for this book came about at a series of meetings/dinner parties with a number of the principal characters in the history of computers a few years ago - he doesn't pretend/pass hims self off as directly involved in any of it - as the reviewer clearly points out is the one flaw of the book (narrative/first person "voice").
"Computing...only became possible with the invention of the mouse"?
I can't seem to find the mouse port on the 3090/600 in my basement - wanna come over here and help me find it?
There was an intire industry before those IBM engineers sat down in Boca Raton, FL and cribbed massive bits of the Intel reference design for the 8088 system and developed the ISA bus...
SUn is a hardware company "Sun Microsystems, Inc." - their hardware requires an O/S, so they make their own.
They have BILLIONS in the bank, and they make BILLIONS on hardware/software support contracts - they don't need revenue from their O/S to keep the company afloat...
There are business models other than the one Microsoft follows - Sun bought Star Division and (essentially) gives away the office automation suite for free (it is installed with the Solaris O/S now), Java is (essentially) free, and now Solaris is (essentially) free - I think thye know what they are doing...
No live CD - it doesn't make sense to offer one... Solaris is a Business OS, not a neat way to re-purpose older PCs with outdated version of Windows - invest in a Harddrive - 80+ gig HDs are less than $50 after rebate at many big box retailers (CompUSA, BestBuy, etc.).
If you want to see how your hardware will work, you could download the first CD image and run that - no fear of clobbering your present OS install, but you will see if your video card is supported, etc.
True CPU Emulation is *very* CPU intensive, and to simulate a complex CPU like the UltraSPARC on something like an x86 CPU is a huge undertaking, and would yield dismal results - IMHO.
To emulate one CPU on another, would take something like 8 - 15 instructions (wild estimate) to recreate the emulated instruction.
For example, to simulate a simple instruction on a dissimilar processor might look like this:
Original Instruction: Load a value into a register
Emulated Instructions: Load OpCode (CPU won't just load the next instruction for you) Jump to emulated OpCode subroutine (based on loaded OpCode - offset into table) Load value from memory location into emulated register Return from OpCode subroutine
Now that is a simple example, complex UltraSPARC instructions could take hundreds of instructions.
My oldest son (8 years old) saw the commercial for H2G2 - The Move, and has seen the teaser trailers in the theaters with his PG-rated movies, so my question is - "Is this a Kid-friendly movie?"
I'll probably take him since I can't recall any real over-the-top scenes in the book, and since the film has a PG rating, I feel comfortable, but I'm curious if it was "designed" as a family picture, or if it happened to wind up with a PG rating...
Funny aside - I let my son watch "Space Balls" last year (when he was 7), since the DVD said it was rated "PG" - I forgot to consider that when "Space Balls" was released, there was no PG-13 rating, so since it wasn't an "R" movie, it was "PG". My son handled it well, but now he thinks "Asshole" is actually someone's last name;^) Sample of dialog
A Ford LTD wagon from, say, the mid-seventies is *way* bigger than a taurus "full size" wagon.
Oh, and Chrysler/Dodge (not sure which) makes the Magnum - it is really a performance wagon.
Also, I agree - increasing the CAFE standars would create a "dumb bell" shaped curve in the *new* car market - lots of high milage cars and lots of low mileage cars/SUVs.
When the Expedition came out, dealers had to take a Escort along with the Expedition, to ensure the CAFE standards were going to be met. Some dealers gave the Escorts away with the Expedition, just to get rid of it!
SUVs are tracked by CAFE standards, *big* SUVs are not (based on weight/size, IIRC).
Newspapers/Magazines charge subscription fees to "qualify" the readers - advertisers see a population that will pay to have this targeted publication delivered to them...
Having a paid subscription indicates that you are not only interested in the topic, but have a residence (to send the publication ot), and some discretionary money to pay for the subscription.
It also gives the advertisers a known subscriber base (that is the basis of their advertising rate)...
Advertising pays for the publication, subscriptions help the advertisers know how many readers the publication has.
I see only *two* reviews, and one is a "five star" review that simply adds to the marketing material presented by Amazon.
The author is very clear about this not being a review, but an expansion on the marketing info, but ot give yourself five stars...
And the other author read the book in under 2 hours, and wished there were more technical info - and gave the book 4 out of 5 stars.
Not really a resounding review in either case, and I question his four-star rating - I suspect it was based on his hope that similar books are published...
My issues (also noted in the review) dispute a few of the claims in the authors pitch:
"allow the reader to build an Apple I replica from scratch" - the author dicsusses the concepts of the chips used in Vince's Replica I, but provides minimal information on circuit design.
"Vince Briel's Replica I will be pointed out" - without the Replica I kit, the reader would be unable build an Apple I clone based on the information in the book.
Relying on the Replica I kit is fine, but the usefulness of the book is limited to the life of Mr. Briel's kit.
Glad to hear the Apple I is working for you (I heard from Vince that it was working, but confirmation is always good).
The book seemed to indicate to me that you built up your Replica in the fall, based on the surrounding comments about VCF (2.0?) where you meet Vince and arranged for a kit - that is why I put the "(seemed)" in my review.
I too, have built up my Replica I, save one resistor (I lost it, had to get a replacement at Radio Shack - 5 for $.99), and hope to power it up later this week. Construction took about 3-4 hours, and was very straightforward. I haven't powered it up yet, as I want to double-check my soldering before applying power. (I soldered all the parts in one sitting)
4 Mediocre; it may have some redeeming qualities, but they're overshadowed by the flaws, or is simply mis-aimed. A book might rank a "4" but still be worthwhile for particular readers.
That seemed fair to me, anything lower would have been an emotional review, not an honest review.
Years from now, this bok will have some merit - more so if the Replica 1 kit is still available. The info in the book is insufficient to build an Apple 1 replica without the kit, IMHO.
I tried to send them to the publisher, but the email bounced.
I went to Applefritter.com, but didn't want to register to send you my notes. (Your email address was not in any of the places I looked, but that is not to say it wasn't there)
I google'd the technical reviewer of the book, since many of my notes were about items that seemed related to the technical content of the book.
I also sent my notes to booktech@oreilly.com (from memory), since Syngress Press is a partner of ORA - I wasn't sure of the relationship between the publishing houses (I learned of the book on the ORA website over a month ago).
Slashdot Mirror
RFID can't "displace" or become "the next internet" anymore than barcodes can. RFID tags have no computation ability, no networking capabilities...
;^)
RFID tags, at the lowest level emit a pre-programmed number when activated by RF energy (the resonate, if you will).
There is a Dummies Guide on RFID - I expect it to be a big seller among the tin foil hat crowd
I'd like to see a bluetooth keyer, allowing an operator to wirelessly send morse code over their cell phone.
;^)
I think it would look a bit odd though, if you saw several people at a dance club on a saturday night with their "smart coctails" and a morse code key on the table
The paper is here http://www.daemonology.net/papers/htt.pdf and I've skimmed it.
My takeaway is that if a process knows another thread is calculating an SSL key, it can get an advantage in figuring out the SSL key.
It won't "get" the actual key, but with sufficient "bits" of info, the calculation can be rendered fairly trivial.
I'm not familiar with these types of security reports, but let me say that to me, it sounds much like saying that with a careful analysis of the LEDs on the front of my IMSAI 8080 my private data may be revealed.
There seems to be so many other things that feed into this vulnerability (like, a minimal number of processes running, knowing the code is being executed, that the thread and the "cracker" software run on different "logical" CPUs at the same time, etc...) that this is a very, very, small issue - damn near purely theoretical.
If the author can say, "Run this code on your server, calculate an SSL key, and this piece of code will reveal your SSL key" then we have a real vulnerability. As I read it, the author is saying "Run this code, calculate an SSL key, and you may be able to infer a percentage of the bits that comprise your SSL key".
I will repeat, I only skimmed the paper, and I'm not familiar with these types of reports, but that is what I walked away with - if I am wrong, I invite the correction.
Disclosure timeline
Why wasn't Intel notified over the past SEVEN MONTHS ?
Why pre-announce a vulnerability?
This sounds like an attempt to build himself up at the cost of others who use these processors - assuming this is a real vulnerability.
My laptop has an HT processor, and I am absolutely unconcerned about this vulnerability, since he said it only relates to servers
Let me pre-announce a few more entries for his "disclosure timeline":
To do this you would need what is called "Structured Wiring" - in short, you would need each phone extension in your house to have a dedicated "twisted pair" come down to a central location, where each extension would be directly wired to a port on your PBX.
Your wiring right now is *probably* like a long snake that runs through the house, with about 10 pairs of wires (it seems, maybe more or less) running continuously around the house. That wiring will not work for you.
The ports to tie each phone line into your PBX will run you about $100/port, so for four phones and one line coming in, that would be $500 plus the cost of the computer and running the wires to each of your four rooms.
If you have an Ethernet network in each of the four rooms, you could get VoIP phones, or VoIP adapters for your extensions and avoid the cost of the structured wiring.
No, it doesn't. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporware/ It has not been announced with a certain release date that has been missed - IIRC, they have not announced a date certain that has been passed... If they had, you'd be right - but I think thye have not...
According to their roadmap http://www.opensolaris.org/roadmap/index.html they plan to have a buildable release 2QCY05 (2nd quarter Calendar Year 2005) - which gives them until June 30th to do so. Any calls that OpenSolaris is Vaporware before then are premature...
Well, he states in the book that the idea for this book came about at a series of meetings/dinner parties with a number of the principal characters in the history of computers a few years ago - he doesn't pretend/pass hims self off as directly involved in any of it - as the reviewer clearly points out is the one flaw of the book (narrative/first person "voice").
"Computing...only became possible with the invention of the mouse"?
I can't seem to find the mouse port on the 3090/600 in my basement - wanna come over here and help me find it?
There was an intire industry before those IBM engineers sat down in Boca Raton, FL and cribbed massive bits of the Intel reference design for the 8088 system and developed the ISA bus...
SO, you refused to be teased into reading the book, well good for you!
But, if you read the book, you could make an INFORMED decision, instead of a SNAP decision.
It was minds like yours that put Galelio under house arrest for stating that the Earth revolved around the Sun...
I'm not sure if the pope actually used your terminology ("What the Fuck?"), but the conclusion seems the same - deny, don't consider...
Pre-PC means before the 4004 microprocessor, not before the IBM PC...
Personal Computer was a generic term, a description for a class of systems, not a specific implementation (like the IBM 5150 Personal Computer)
It seems like a good read - an interesting perspective on the early California roots of the PC business...
So you've missed Solaris 7, 8, 9 and now that 10 is out, you've decided that it is no good? Based on what - your exp. with Solaris 2.6?
Solaris 10 is a great, stable, O/S, and a true evolution from Solaris from the 2.5.1/2.6-era.
Why do you feel that Solaris is inferiour to Linux? What is your yardstick for comparison? I trust you aren't taking this review at face value...
SUn is a hardware company "Sun Microsystems, Inc." - their hardware requires an O/S, so they make their own.
They have BILLIONS in the bank, and they make BILLIONS on hardware/software support contracts - they don't need revenue from their O/S to keep the company afloat...
There are business models other than the one Microsoft follows - Sun bought Star Division and (essentially) gives away the office automation suite for free (it is installed with the Solaris O/S now), Java is (essentially) free, and now Solaris is (essentially) free - I think thye know what they are doing...
If you install the Companion CD on your Solaris 10 box you have a system that is very similar to Linux w/r/t the number of tools installed...
As for portability, are you talking source code or binary level portability?
(Lots of Linux applications/tools will compile and install on a Solaris box without incident)
No live CD - it doesn't make sense to offer one... Solaris is a Business OS, not a neat way to re-purpose older PCs with outdated version of Windows - invest in a Harddrive - 80+ gig HDs are less than $50 after rebate at many big box retailers (CompUSA, BestBuy, etc.).
If you want to see how your hardware will work, you could download the first CD image and run that - no fear of clobbering your present OS install, but you will see if your video card is supported, etc.
True CPU Emulation is *very* CPU intensive, and to simulate a complex CPU like the UltraSPARC on something like an x86 CPU is a huge undertaking, and would yield dismal results - IMHO.
To emulate one CPU on another, would take something like 8 - 15 instructions (wild estimate) to recreate the emulated instruction.
For example, to simulate a simple instruction on a dissimilar processor might look like this:
Original Instruction: Load a value into a register
Emulated Instructions:
Load OpCode (CPU won't just load the next instruction for you)
Jump to emulated OpCode subroutine (based on loaded OpCode - offset into table)
Load value from memory location into emulated register
Return from OpCode subroutine
Now that is a simple example, complex UltraSPARC instructions could take hundreds of instructions.
Now, how fast is the AMD64 CPU of yours?
My oldest son (8 years old) saw the commercial for H2G2 - The Move, and has seen the teaser trailers in the theaters with his PG-rated movies, so my question is - "Is this a Kid-friendly movie?"
;^) Sample of dialog
I'll probably take him since I can't recall any real over-the-top scenes in the book, and since the film has a PG rating, I feel comfortable, but I'm curious if it was "designed" as a family picture, or if it happened to wind up with a PG rating...
Funny aside - I let my son watch "Space Balls" last year (when he was 7), since the DVD said it was rated "PG" - I forgot to consider that when "Space Balls" was released, there was no PG-13 rating, so since it wasn't an "R" movie, it was "PG". My son handled it well, but now he thinks "Asshole" is actually someone's last name
Full Size biggest car they make
A Ford LTD wagon from, say, the mid-seventies is *way* bigger than a taurus "full size" wagon.
Oh, and Chrysler/Dodge (not sure which) makes the Magnum - it is really a performance wagon.
Also, I agree - increasing the CAFE standars would create a "dumb bell" shaped curve in the *new* car market - lots of high milage cars and lots of low mileage cars/SUVs.
When the Expedition came out, dealers had to take a Escort along with the Expedition, to ensure the CAFE standards were going to be met. Some dealers gave the Escorts away with the Expedition, just to get rid of it!
SUVs are tracked by CAFE standards, *big* SUVs are not (based on weight/size, IIRC).
Newspapers/Magazines charge subscription fees to "qualify" the readers - advertisers see a population that will pay to have this targeted publication delivered to them...
Having a paid subscription indicates that you are not only interested in the topic, but have a residence (to send the publication ot), and some discretionary money to pay for the subscription.
It also gives the advertisers a known subscriber base (that is the basis of their advertising rate)...
Advertising pays for the publication, subscriptions help the advertisers know how many readers the publication has.
Does this have anything to do with a 3 Gig HD in a cell phone?
Aren't there better places for this kind of material?
I see only *two* reviews, and one is a "five star" review that simply adds to the marketing material presented by Amazon.
The author is very clear about this not being a review, but an expansion on the marketing info, but ot give yourself five stars...
And the other author read the book in under 2 hours, and wished there were more technical info - and gave the book 4 out of 5 stars.
Not really a resounding review in either case, and I question his four-star rating - I suspect it was based on his hope that similar books are published...
Andy,
My issues (also noted in the review) dispute a few of the claims in the authors pitch:
"allow the reader to build an Apple I replica from scratch" - the author dicsusses the concepts of the chips used in Vince's Replica I, but provides minimal information on circuit design.
"Vince Briel's Replica I will be pointed out" - without the Replica I kit, the reader would be unable build an Apple I clone based on the information in the book.
Relying on the Replica I kit is fine, but the usefulness of the book is limited to the life of Mr. Briel's kit.
Evan,
Glad to hear the Apple I is working for you (I heard from Vince that it was working, but confirmation is always good).
The book seemed to indicate to me that you built up your Replica in the fall, based on the surrounding comments about VCF (2.0?) where you meet Vince and arranged for a kit - that is why I put the "(seemed)" in my review.
I too, have built up my Replica I, save one resistor (I lost it, had to get a replacement at Radio Shack - 5 for $.99), and hope to power it up later this week. Construction took about 3-4 hours, and was very straightforward. I haven't powered it up yet, as I want to double-check my soldering before applying power. (I soldered all the parts in one sitting)
In the slashdot scale (1-10), a four is rated as:
4 Mediocre; it may have some redeeming qualities, but they're overshadowed by the flaws, or is simply mis-aimed. A book might rank a "4" but still be worthwhile for particular readers.
That seemed fair to me, anything lower would have been an emotional review, not an honest review.
Years from now, this bok will have some merit - more so if the Replica 1 kit is still available. The info in the book is insufficient to build an Apple 1 replica without the kit, IMHO.
Tom,
I tried to send them to the publisher, but the email bounced.
I went to Applefritter.com, but didn't want to register to send you my notes. (Your email address was not in any of the places I looked, but that is not to say it wasn't there)
I google'd the technical reviewer of the book, since many of my notes were about items that seemed related to the technical content of the book.
I also sent my notes to booktech@oreilly.com (from memory), since Syngress Press is a partner of ORA - I wasn't sure of the relationship between the publishing houses (I learned of the book on the ORA website over a month ago).
Ken