To be fair, I guess they got one right
The sad part is that I have worked for people who take these announcements as Gospel. "Gartner says..."
Whatever.
You and your sysadmin are fools. Ever hear of PATCHING??? Sure Windows has it's problems, but most of them are people who don't pay attention to the fact that you must patch EVERY month. (You do know that Microsoft releases patches every month, right?)
If you did that, your "bug" would never had surfaced.
If only people stop running Windows servers the same way they run thier switches and routers. the Internet might be a better place.
I was a beta tester for SWG. I was one of the many that pre-ordered, and took the day off to start playing on Day 1. After only 2 months of playing, it was very apparent that the game wasn't going to have enough content added to justify the monthly fee. While the expansion will dramatically improve the game, the parent post is right, too little, too late. In beta, they actually announced that this was planned 6 months after the release. I might have stuck around if they would have kept that deadline.
I agree with you. We're going to have to spend months testing compatibility with the software our company uses. Even with the "promise" of better security management will allow us to install something that breaks critical software.
Then there are the home users who will hear "SP2 breaks 'Product X'" from the mass media and will be afraid to install it. We already have a hard enough time getting them to install normal patches that are supposed to be "safe". Image how eager people will be to isntall it when they hear it might break their favorite software!
Isn't the fear of exponentially speading nano-bots being the fact that we only need a few to get out?? How is limiting them to a 'minumum number' going to help that? Don't these guys watch movies??:)
Good thing the article was posted after the event.
Re:Holy fuck.... this is stupid all around
on
Safe and Insecure?
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
Exactly!
In a word, privacy. By making my Internet connection available to any and all who happen upon it, I have no way to be certain what kinds of songs, movies and pictures will be downloaded by other people using my IP address. And more important, my ISP has no way to be certain if it's me.
Actually, from the ISP's point of view, they know completely that it's you! It's your connection that's hosting the pr0n and sending thousands of emails a day.
This is like owning a gun that you keep on your front porch. When someone grabs it, shoots someone, then puts it back, guess who the police are going to bring in first? I'd like to hear that excuse.
With the original security holes in basic wireless, our company waited until we could roll out Cisco's LEAP. As a company that is a Microsoft and Cisco shop, LEAP integrated wonderfully with Active Directory and had a client available for every device we use.
So with already seamless use, not to mention NOT requiring certificates on our access-points, why would a company want to use PEAP over LEAP? I can see companies getting burned buy starting out with PEAP to only later to move to LEAP.
Slashdot Mirror
These guys are like a washed out Hollywood star. They only seem to say and do things to get media attention.
Some exmaples:
Death to IDS! All hail IPS!
Well, duh...
Arrhh, there be Pirates here
To be fair, I guess they got one right The sad part is that I have worked for people who take these announcements as Gospel. "Gartner says..."
Whatever.
Its just a shame that this project appears to be abandoned.
You and your sysadmin are fools. Ever hear of PATCHING??? Sure Windows has it's problems, but most of them are people who don't pay attention to the fact that you must patch EVERY month. (You do know that Microsoft releases patches every month, right?)
If you did that, your "bug" would never had surfaced.
If only people stop running Windows servers the same way they run thier switches and routers. the Internet might be a better place.
-B
---
I had a sig once... Then I didn't.
I was a beta tester for SWG. I was one of the many that pre-ordered, and took the day off to start playing on Day 1. After only 2 months of playing, it was very apparent that the game wasn't going to have enough content added to justify the monthly fee. While the expansion will dramatically improve the game, the parent post is right, too little, too late. In beta, they actually announced that this was planned 6 months after the release. I might have stuck around if they would have kept that deadline.
I'm not talking about running. Try uninstalling VS6 then reinstalling.
I'm running the public early release of SP2 and Visual Studio 6 won't install. There will be more applications that break besides viruses and trojans.
I agree with you. We're going to have to spend months testing compatibility with the software our company uses. Even with the "promise" of better security management will allow us to install something that breaks critical software.
Then there are the home users who will hear "SP2 breaks 'Product X'" from the mass media and will be afraid to install it. We already have a hard enough time getting them to install normal patches that are supposed to be "safe". Image how eager people will be to isntall it when they hear it might break their favorite software!
Isn't the fear of exponentially speading nano-bots being the fact that we only need a few to get out?? How is limiting them to a 'minumum number' going to help that? Don't these guys watch movies?? :)
Good thing the article was posted after the event.
Exactly!
In a word, privacy. By making my Internet connection available to any and all who happen upon it, I have no way to be certain what kinds of songs, movies and pictures will be downloaded by other people using my IP address. And more important, my ISP has no way to be certain if it's me.
Actually, from the ISP's point of view, they know completely that it's you! It's your connection that's hosting the pr0n and sending thousands of emails a day.
This is like owning a gun that you keep on your front porch. When someone grabs it, shoots someone, then puts it back, guess who the police are going to bring in first? I'd like to hear that excuse.
-B
I have to totally agree. Three years really shifts the meaning of "impressive" and "ground-breaking".
In my opinion, too little, too late for Halo.
-B
With the original security holes in basic wireless, our company waited until we could roll out Cisco's LEAP. As a company that is a Microsoft and Cisco shop, LEAP integrated wonderfully with Active Directory and had a client available for every device we use.
So with already seamless use, not to mention NOT requiring certificates on our access-points, why would a company want to use PEAP over LEAP? I can see companies getting burned buy starting out with PEAP to only later to move to LEAP.