However, I agree that most of the points were simply various different ways unchecked user input can be exploited, and the banking example was absolutely horrible.
My overall impression was that the author either had no idea what he/she was talking about or was aiming for a much less computer-literate audience than slashdot.
1. cut funding
2. ignore the engineers and launch anyhow
3. blame the engineers when something goes wrong
4. State the problem is not what even high-school dropouts suspect is the problem
5. Ignore the engineers for weeks until it becomes patently obvious to even idiots that the problem engineers warned about and laypersons expected was the problem IS the problem 6. Profit???
And then when Bush Jr. Jr. Jr. decides that he doesn't like [bad country here], he'll just tell the opperators to point the giant microwave systems at [bad country] country for a while.
"Instead, Mu Security's product performs a thorough and methodical analysis along the many lines of inter-dependencies that exist among protocols. Understanding how to create the right type and set of mutations needed to systematically expose potential vulnerabilities in highly interconnected applications and systems - identifying both existing and "day zero" threats - is a key part of Mu Security's breakthrough in determining the security readiness of such a wide range of systems. Marrying such capabilities to a platform approach allows such analysis to be comprehensive, efficient, and repeatable. The net result is that Mu Security's solution has already uncovered multiple day zero vulnerabilities in every system analyzed."
Us Canadians live in America too.
North America contains much more than just the USA, but somehow they are the ones we go around calling americans (I refuse).
The summary said "0.004%, which is not the same as (800,000 / 200,000,000) OR the 0.4% in the actual article. The number in the summary is the ratio, not the percent, and is incorrect and misleading.
Slashdot Mirror
With respect to the RSS issue, I assume that the author of the article was trying to explain in a very poorly-worded way discoveries like these:
n gFeeds.pdf (warning: pdf)p ting-with-sage/
http://www.spidynamics.com/assets/documents/Hacki
http://www.gnucitizen.org/blog/cross-context-scri
etc, etc.
However, I agree that most of the points were simply various different ways unchecked user input can be exploited, and the banking example was absolutely horrible.
My overall impression was that the author either had no idea what he/she was talking about or was aiming for a much less computer-literate audience than slashdot.
I would say RTFA, but you apparently didn't read the summary either.
I preemptively declare RTFT to mean 'Read the Full Title.'
You meant...
proc DetectPoison ()
{
global $NeuralActivity;
return ($NeuralActivity == 0);
}
Right?
Or Beowolf?
Wrong again, it's:
1. cut funding
2. ignore the engineers and launch anyhow
3. blame the engineers when something goes wrong
4. State the problem is not what even high-school dropouts suspect is the problem
5. Ignore the engineers for weeks until it becomes patently obvious to even idiots that the problem engineers warned about and laypersons expected was the problem IS the problem
6. Profit???
Thats a great idea.
And then when Bush Jr. Jr. Jr. decides that he doesn't like [bad country here], he'll just tell the opperators to point the giant microwave systems at [bad country] country for a while.
"Instead, Mu Security's product performs a thorough and methodical analysis along the many lines of inter-dependencies that exist among protocols. Understanding how to create the right type and set of mutations needed to systematically expose potential vulnerabilities in highly interconnected applications and systems - identifying both existing and "day zero" threats - is a key part of Mu Security's breakthrough in determining the security readiness of such a wide range of systems. Marrying such capabilities to a platform approach allows such analysis to be comprehensive, efficient, and repeatable. The net result is that Mu Security's solution has already uncovered multiple day zero vulnerabilities in every system analyzed."
http://www.musecurity.com/
Can someone explain to me the difference between the "Blueprints" and "source code"?
Us Canadians live in America too. North America contains much more than just the USA, but somehow they are the ones we go around calling americans (I refuse).
As I understand it, the company consists of a single person with rights for this single patient.
Possibly worse than a patient farm no?
The summary said "0.004%, which is not the same as (800,000 / 200,000,000) OR the 0.4% in the actual article. The number in the summary is the ratio, not the percent, and is incorrect and misleading.
30% of my emails contain executables, and 0% of them are evil. Granted, I enjoy programming....
I just put my zip files inside another zip file.
I get 6.7m now on google. 1.05m without quotes.