And now I believe the black hat hackers should more or less just go scorched earth.
If there's no system left, there's no evidence. Just burn it on your way out.
i feel the same way but for a different reason: if there are no insecure systems left standing, only secure systems will be able to stand. in effect, security by destruction of the insecure. a sharp learning curve but companies will start making secure products that way.
pff... try taking your meds. when parts of the internet go down, people notice. remember syria when the NSA actually did brick routers there? yeah, that made headlines. after finding out what the US gov has been up to, people have become much more interested in the cause of outages. if the military gets caught doing something like that on the american public, there will be pitchforks and torches making an appearance.
a cyber armageddon is super easy to avoid, all you have to do is not connect every damn machine to a network and for the ones that must be, secure them. it's quite obvious that we have the capability to find and exploit weaknesses, so why not use our knowledge and secure those few things that must be connected. we could also be prudent and require (by law) a certain level of software security for dangerous things connected to the internet (if stupid people insist on having them connected). finally, it sure wouldn't hurt if we started teaching things like how to mathematically prove a buffer wont overflow.
And here is the underlying problem with a good chunk of FCC regulation. Basically, you can do anything you want until they decide it is against an arbitrary regulation. Then they can not only stop you from doing it, but fine you for having done it.
i call bullshit.
Think of the "decency" statues for broadcast TV. Sometimes you can swear (playing Saving Private Ryan) sometimes you can't (some random award show) Sometimes you can show nudity (NYPD Blue) sometimes you can't (Superbowl?) The FCC will let you know you violated the unspecified rules via a fine well after the fact.
guess what, they have very detailed rules on decency and guess what, it actually makes sense. what is required to be censored is based on context! what context? well, the rating of the show, time it's broadcast and if it's a public broadcast or not and some other things that are well documented. fun fact, if you don't know if what you are going to show will violate the rules, you can ask them!
This is the regulatory regime being imposed on the business practices of ISPs.
the rules they have put forth are exceptionally simple. all they have to do is not limit the speed of the connection based on the connection endpoint. seriously, that's it! they can restrict your speed out the wazoo based on any criteria except the endpoint. want to slow down HTTP traffic? you can do that! however, you can't make it faster for XYZ because XYZ gave you money.
I don't like the big ISPs screwing around with the internet just as most anyone else, but this type of regulation is bonkers.
i'll take "bonkers" regulation over blatant abuse any day. then again, maybe you just haven't read all 300 pages, so you dont really know facts.
ignoring the law is not a good business strategy because you go to jail or at least court. they should have done what other companies do and buy some people in the government and have the laws changed in their favor.
let's be clear here, the people these corporations work are not looking to thwart cyber attacks, they are looking to thwart cyber attacks against themselves. the rest of us will still be considered their cannon fodder.
how to address technically competent people who make nonsensical decisions.
for people who are completely hardened and unwilling to even consider the possibility that they are wrong, there is nothing you can do besides fork the code and go on. however, people may not be hardened like you think so in the case of UI choices, a usability study could be performed. it will require significant effort but it may change some minds. the question you must then contend with is if it's easier to fork or is it worth the effort to run a study. the windows 10 preview was effectively a study on how usable their UI was.
A friend of mine built a "device" for an event, which was basically a directed microwave cyclotron. He shot it at a staged PC across the room and it crashed.
come on, you tell me google is trying to destroy everything good about the world and now you say they aren't? what am i supposed to do with this google outrage now?! editors, this type of sloppiness is OUTRAGEOUS! nevermind... problem solved itself.
it's ironic because there is a disproportionate amount of intelligent and successful CEOs with mental illnesses (besides socio/psychopathy) that they have managed to get under control.
Until you have been made unemployed you really can not understand how brutally our system is geared towards assessing a human being's total value solely on their economic utility.
this is something i know quite well. If anyone needs a C++ programmer, i'm available for hire.
it seems to me that making treatment free (it's expensive!) and encouraging people to get help rather than shaming them for feeling badly would be a better way to go.
society doesn't want spend money to help the mentally ill which ironically bites them in the ass because about 1/3 of the homeless have a form of (untreated) mental illnesses which is why they are homeless. it costs more to have social programs for the homeless than it does to actually help them or even give them homes! i'm sure it would cost much less if we had free treatment to prevent them from becoming homeless in the first place.
if people attack anything that is known to be vulnerable then we actually might get some decent software security! putting our heads in the ground isn't going to solve the fundamental issue that we have wildly insecure systems.
These police are complete fucking idiots if they think this was the motive. It's quite obvious the objective wasn't theft, it was just to cause damage.
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity/greed.
I would be more impressed with a paper by people who could actually make the software these guys theorize about, rather than sophomoricaly discussing it.
umm... who exactly "could actually make the software these guys theorize about"? the whole world is dying to know an frankly i would love to chat with the person that makes mankind obsolete.
Slashdot Mirror
And now I believe the black hat hackers should more or less just go scorched earth.
If there's no system left, there's no evidence. Just burn it on your way out.
i feel the same way but for a different reason: if there are no insecure systems left standing, only secure systems will be able to stand. in effect, security by destruction of the insecure. a sharp learning curve but companies will start making secure products that way.
pff... try taking your meds. when parts of the internet go down, people notice. remember syria when the NSA actually did brick routers there? yeah, that made headlines. after finding out what the US gov has been up to, people have become much more interested in the cause of outages. if the military gets caught doing something like that on the american public, there will be pitchforks and torches making an appearance.
a cyber armageddon is super easy to avoid, all you have to do is not connect every damn machine to a network and for the ones that must be, secure them. it's quite obvious that we have the capability to find and exploit weaknesses, so why not use our knowledge and secure those few things that must be connected. we could also be prudent and require (by law) a certain level of software security for dangerous things connected to the internet (if stupid people insist on having them connected). finally, it sure wouldn't hurt if we started teaching things like how to mathematically prove a buffer wont overflow.
And here is the underlying problem with a good chunk of FCC regulation.
Basically, you can do anything you want until they decide it is against an arbitrary regulation. Then they can not only stop you from doing it, but fine you for having done it.
i call bullshit.
Think of the "decency" statues for broadcast TV. Sometimes you can swear (playing Saving Private Ryan) sometimes you can't (some random award show) Sometimes you can show nudity (NYPD Blue) sometimes you can't (Superbowl?) The FCC will let you know you violated the unspecified rules via a fine
well after the fact.
guess what, they have very detailed rules on decency and guess what, it actually makes sense. what is required to be censored is based on context! what context? well, the rating of the show, time it's broadcast and if it's a public broadcast or not and some other things that are well documented. fun fact, if you don't know if what you are going to show will violate the rules, you can ask them!
This is the regulatory regime being imposed on the business practices of ISPs.
the rules they have put forth are exceptionally simple. all they have to do is not limit the speed of the connection based on the connection endpoint. seriously, that's it! they can restrict your speed out the wazoo based on any criteria except the endpoint. want to slow down HTTP traffic? you can do that! however, you can't make it faster for XYZ because XYZ gave you money.
I don't like the big ISPs screwing around with the internet just as most anyone else, but this type of regulation is bonkers.
i'll take "bonkers" regulation over blatant abuse any day. then again, maybe you just haven't read all 300 pages, so you dont really know facts.
NASA has found 462 separate inter-dependencies, less than two-thirds of which have been resolved so far.
sounds like someone deleted systemd from their software repo. ;)
ignoring the law is not a good business strategy because you go to jail or at least court. they should have done what other companies do and buy some people in the government and have the laws changed in their favor.
on second thought, maybe it's for the best.
let's be clear here, the people these corporations work are not looking to thwart cyber attacks, they are looking to thwart cyber attacks against themselves. the rest of us will still be considered their cannon fodder.
how to address technically competent people who make nonsensical decisions.
for people who are completely hardened and unwilling to even consider the possibility that they are wrong, there is nothing you can do besides fork the code and go on. however, people may not be hardened like you think so in the case of UI choices, a usability study could be performed. it will require significant effort but it may change some minds. the question you must then contend with is if it's easier to fork or is it worth the effort to run a study. the windows 10 preview was effectively a study on how usable their UI was.
you know that DRAM hack-attack that was just made public? how much you wanna bet the US gov had a hand in making that possible?
CIA Tried To Crack Security of Apple Devices when the NSA already did
should've just asked, bros!
A friend of mine built a "device" for an event, which was basically a directed microwave cyclotron. He shot it at a staged PC across the room and it crashed.
a 10 GHz pulsed magnetron will distrupt (unshielded) electronics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Being able to 100% protect the President is something they have to get right the first time, and every time.
tell that to JFK.
come on, you tell me google is trying to destroy everything good about the world and now you say they aren't? what am i supposed to do with this google outrage now?! editors, this type of sloppiness is OUTRAGEOUS! nevermind... problem solved itself.
It's because they have no deemed economic value.
it's ironic because there is a disproportionate amount of intelligent and successful CEOs with mental illnesses (besides socio/psychopathy) that they have managed to get under control.
Until you have been made unemployed you really can not understand how brutally our system is geared towards assessing a human being's total value solely on their economic utility.
this is something i know quite well. If anyone needs a C++ programmer, i'm available for hire.
it seems to me that making treatment free (it's expensive!) and encouraging people to get help rather than shaming them for feeling badly would be a better way to go.
society doesn't want spend money to help the mentally ill which ironically bites them in the ass because about 1/3 of the homeless have a form of (untreated) mental illnesses which is why they are homeless. it costs more to have social programs for the homeless than it does to actually help them or even give them homes! i'm sure it would cost much less if we had free treatment to prevent them from becoming homeless in the first place.
wake up, society!
if people attack anything that is known to be vulnerable then we actually might get some decent software security! putting our heads in the ground isn't going to solve the fundamental issue that we have wildly insecure systems.
once you have reactors, you're stuck with them for the better part of a century and when shit goes wrong, it goes really wrong.
can we start switching over to solar panels and batteries yet? seriously, we are bombarded by free power every single day!
These police are complete fucking idiots if they think this was the motive. It's quite obvious the objective wasn't theft, it was just to cause damage.
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity/greed.
At $190 for the case alone, I can think of at least a hundred reasons not to build a fanless box.
i can think of at least 190 reasons to use ARM over x86. ;)
a nice fanless i7 (haswell) build, with the magic being a heatpipe heatsink case and a 45w i7 chip:
heat pipes, that's cute. i rather stick to ARM chips and save money on both processor and cooling. ;)
pff... call me when you get serious and put an ARMv8 processor in there.
I would be more impressed with a paper by people who could actually make the software these guys theorize about, rather than sophomoricaly discussing it.
umm... who exactly "could actually make the software these guys theorize about"? the whole world is dying to know an frankly i would love to chat with the person that makes mankind obsolete.
As long as they can enable/disable features in your graphics card, you are being controlled by them.
Open source drivers are the only way to be free.
uBlock is great because it's a good ad blocker with minimal overhead. it works on firefox and chrome.
https://github.com/gorhill/uBl...
google glass is no longer being sold, so there is literally no competition between the two.