So if Mozilla can remotely jam new extensions in to my browser without so much as a dialog, that means malicious actors with even fewer scruples will be able to do it in about a week. Short of firewalling all of mozilla.org, how do I turn this shit off? (I wonder if this has anything to do with the weird XSS blocking dialog NoScript threw three times earlier today. It was blocking an XSS attempt between two domains, neither of which was open in any browser tab at the time.)
Look around in about:config
Searching for 'http' and '.enabled'... is usually a good starting place.
Personally I modified most of the URLs to point to a local web server just out of curiosity so I can get a better idea what Mozilla is up to but they can just as easily be sabotaged... http://0.0.0.0/...
As for the XSS browsers have retarded heuristic filters which in my view are dangerous and should be disabled. The filters are naÃve it is basically impossible because the browser lacks necessary context to make a reasoned informed decision.
They work mostly by looking for "reflections" which can easily triggered false positives by random coincidences. They are also easily bypassed by attackers. They don't do jack against stored XSS which is what fucks most people over when using insecure sites and there is a long history of vulnerabilities in XSS filters being used as an actual attack vector.
Telecommunications is a means of transmission without changing the information. "ISPs supply simply routes packets.". Packets are information on top of a means of communications. How is "routing" not a capability of generating, acquiring, storing, transforming, processing, or making information available on a means of transmission?
You left out the preceding keyword "offering" in the definition of an information service... A piece of wire nor an L3 router is physically capable of "offering" to do anything. The only thing doing the offering is the peer at the edge of the network... the "information service" the destination address in the IP header.
... welcome to politics and law? Jesus are you 12? Why do you think the judiciary is separate from the legislature? Funny enough, Scalia even remarked about how in EVERY case half of the lawyers are trying to convince the judges to break the law. "Anyway Counsel often encourage judges to do the wrong thing. In fact in every case there's one of the two counsels urging the court to do the wrong thing." - Antonin Scalia.
The simple fact people behave a certain way does not serve to justify the behavior. I don't care if everyone on earth does it or everyone on earth thinks it's ok. Makes no difference at all to me.
If you want NN to be protected then you need to have Congress to make the law clear that the FCC cannot change the interrpretation based on the chairman.
My preference is to see NN exist independent of Title II. Nevertheless the lawyers are simply wrong. They don't understand the technology.
So, let me get this straight. ISPs do not "generate, acquire, store, transform, retrieve, utilize or make available information via telecommunications" in your mind?
CORRECT. They merely provide a "string" (telecommunications) that transmits and receives information to and from information services outside the ISPs administrative domain.
Maybe you can explain to me how the internet works without any information and is as dumb as a copper line.
Because you don't understand the difference between an eyeball network and a content network.
The Internet network itself...the portion that ISPs supply simply routes packets. It literally is a dumb wire with no intelligence baked into it at all.
All of the intelligence all of the information and data are at the edges of the network far beyond the administrative domain of the ISP.
Now, maybe you can explain to me how you can have an information service when the definition of information service relies on a telecommunications service which you assert does not exist in the case of the ISP?
The point is the existing law is flawed because it forces telecommunications service providers and information service providers to be a distinct thing which clearly they are not with modern internet and ISPs.
This is like opening a store that sells tires and toasters and bitching about laws pertaining to tires because they don't accommodate toasters.
*If* an ISP provides contents like a web hosting service or their own web content, video media libraries, directories... that portion of the ISP is a communication service.
The portion of the ISP that provides network access is a telecommunication service.
It isn't any more difficult than that. There is no ambiguity about these things inherent in the technology.
An ISP can provide more than one thing at once. They can even sell tires and toasters if they want. This changes NOTHING about the character of individual activities they are engaged in.
Both can be right and wrong at the same time because both are operating under the flawed distinction in the law that the FCC goes back and forth on. Namely, telecommunications service must be distinct from information service when an ISP is clearly both.
Clearly false. The wire leading to outside the administrative domain of the ISP is just as dumb as the wire leading outside the administrative domain of a Telco. There is no intelligence baked into that wire of any kind. All of the intelligence is in information services on the other end of the wire far outside the prevue of the ISP/teleco.
I understand what you are saying but you are being obtuse about it. Can the FCC ignore the law and the courts to give you what you want? No. Change the law because it is flawed. The FCC dancing back and forth does no one any favors.
No you don't. You clearly don't understand the basic reality of how the technology works and apparently neither do the lawyers.
You do realize that is the entire basis of the judiciary and this entire debacle?
There is a difference between making a good faith effort to resolve ambiguities and conflicts vs. deliberately bending language to selfishly have your way.
The supreme court disagrees with you. 545 U.S. 967 (2005).
No amount of magical finessing of language will get me to buy into the clearly ridiculous assertion L2 transceivers (Cable modems) and L3 forwarding of datagrams (ISP) constitute an "information service".
What's makes this farce even more absurd is concurrently asserting picking up a phone and calling someone is using a telecommunications service when sending an L3 datagram to that same person conveying the very same information is not a telecommunications service.
The DSPs in the CO must be exerting quite a force on the fabric of reality for this bullshit to make any logical sense.
It's a claim on it's face is simply not true as clear as saying the sky is green with orange polka-dots. I don't care if everyone in the world thinks that I'm wrong it doesn't change a damn thing.
"Information services" only work on top of "telecommunications" as their own definition of information service admits.
"The Act defines âoeinformation serviceâ as âoethe offering of a capability for generating, acquiring, storing, transforming, processing, retrieving, utilizing, or making available information via telecommunications â¦.â "
So if L2/L3 devices are not "telecommunications" how can there be an information service on top of it? Yea there can't be..because the arguments are clearly all bullshit.
You know what else?
The FCC maintains two separate mutually exclusive definitions of what broadband means. One definition says it's 200kbps the other says 25mbits. Both definitions are used concurrently in different contexts in order to get what they want under various statutes.
Whether your NSA claiming collection only counts when you look at what you stole or whether your FCC pondering the difference between a cable modem and a telephone to suite your agenda... I am not impressed.
Is an ISP a telecommunications service provider or an information service provider?
No, the question is whether ISPs are telecommunications service providers or communication service providers.
Information service providers are the shit on the other end of the series of tubes like Wikipedia and Twitter. ISPs providing Internet access are clearly NOT information service providers.
The only gray area here is information service providers that offer what one could argue are communications services. This could be a OTT Voice service or even VPN and Email service providers.
Using Title II, a near-100 year old law to govern the Internet, was the wrong solution to this problem.
Not even Wheeler et al wanted Title II classification. Title II was only invoked as a technical workaround when their original open Internet initiative went down in flames in the courts.
Any of 700 exemptions carved out for ISPs can be uncarved just as easily at any time by corrupt technocrats at the FCC which is why I don't support attempting to undue what has just been done.
Right now my view best possible solution is pushing for a clean legislative solution for NN and only NN. This of course carries a significant risk of being rendered inert by the industry or even repurposed as a weapon against small local operators.
The only alternative is when power changes hands in a few years or less Title II will be immediately reinstated... this will certainly occur as there is now a huge vacuum and NN has become a mainstream political issue. When this happens it's anyone's guess what exemptions would be instated by the new masters in an organization with little political accountability having blatantly succumbed to regulatory capture.
Haven't most of the worst security disasters we've heard of in the past few years come from companies or government departments losing control of their own in-house systems and data? So, what do you think is more risky... apparently incompetent IT management / staff who don't know how to keep things patched (e.g. Equifax, previous government SNAFUs), or the risk of turning over sensitive information to someone else, who one presumes has more expertise in keeping stuff secure.
I think it's impossible to even bother contemplating what the benefit or harm is without knowing details.
Simply moving servers to VM's in someone else's data center changes nothing. You still have the same people and things accessing the systems same as before. You have the exact same management overhead. If anything you've increased security threats because now there is a chance of external VM compromise and more access over Internet links vs what would have previously been more localized.
If on the other hand you outsource common services like book-keeping, HR, groupware...etc and someone else is running and maintaining that service for you then indeed some management and security responsibility can be offloaded.
For all the potential risks of cloud services, I haven't heard of too many major breaches of Amazon, Google, Intel, or Microsoft services, even though those have got to be very significant targets. Most "breaches" I've heard of involving AWS, for instance, are due to misconfiguration, not necessarily the fault of the platform.
Nobody has ever broken into our equipment closet either.
If you read the article, you see a lot of compelling reasons for at least modernizing and consolidating many of those very expensive and often obsolete systems. Naturally, each federal agency has their own completely unique-as-a-snowflake system, and often pays many times what a more modern commercial system should typically cost. This is apparently an effort to get some runaway costs under control, and if it can be done safely, that's a big win. Whether this should be done with commercial cloud services rather than trying to consolidate internally is certainly a valid point of debate.
There really isn't much to the article. It talks about email and moving "data". There are no useful details other than aggregate costs.
My perspective is software costs money to develop and manage while hardware is an insignificant footnote that should be ignored regardless of where it is located or who is babysitting it.
"Cloud" providers are offering either a specific service like groupware or they are providing low level crap like execution environments and data tiers. (e.g. SaaS vs. PaaS) They are not going to rewrite old code for you and nobody needs "cloud" as an excuse to go ahead and replace custom software stacks with commercial counterparts where that is even feasible. Cost savings ideas including consolidation of effort and economies of scale exist independent of moving hardware to "someone else's servers".
The homeless population in San Fran is a massive problem. I've had my car's window smashed three times over the course of four years for trivial crap i've
Have you ever wondered why? Perhaps all drugged out animals in America are attracted to the golden gate bridge? They just...ah... naturally tend to congregate there?
left in my car. Seriously, they really think that my FM transmitter and 75 cents are worth something? And this is in Portrero FFS.
Feel the same way about v1agra spam... seriously how does anyone make money off this shit?
You consistently see these animals constantly shooting up, leaving needles everywhere, pissing in the street, and hassling you for money. They're a blight and the city's permissive attitude towards them only encourages more to show up.
It's time we stop wasting money on these animals when they OD with Naloxone. If they want to drug themselves to the point of death, let them. It's time we let Darwin do his work.
Zap them, beat them, lock them up and forcibly detox them from whatever drug they love, I don't care. It's high time vagrancy is treated the same way the homeless treat our communities, with reckless abandonment.
Have you done anything to build consensus to make government change it's insane policies? Anything at all to address underlying causes? BTW what's average home in San Fran running these days? A cool mil?
In the real world literally beating down symptoms has a proven track record of accomplishing nothing. Almost as worthless as bitching on Slashdot about your "problems".
I think you actually may have inadvertently hit on the core problem when you used the words "I don't care".
List of problems I have personally encountered with systemd.
Upgrade never completing due to infinite loop bugs in systemd log maintenance.
Inability to read out log files without using slow as shit systemd commands.
Every time I run top there is ALWAYS systemd shit at the top of the list doing god knows what consuming resources for god knows why. The logging overhead of background noise from Internet SSH probes uses more CPU time than any other process in the entire system. It's almost as if systemd was designed to be a DOS attack helper service.
Kernel message ring buffer full of nothing but systemd related log bullshit.. because that's really what I wanted to see.
Here are a list of benefits I have personally encountered with systemd:
Intentionally left blank. I have no idea.. honestly I just don't know what systemd does that is at all helpful to me.
You don't do it to "win" a game. You do it to prevent the destruction that will result. You keep doing it, just like you keep tossing the moles out of the garden.
You do it to lose a game you are losing even faster.
Nobody should have ever said doing the right thing was going to be easy. If they did, shame on them. Name them and I'll call them out.
The right thing according to your all knowing, all seeing self.
Indeed, extremists are documented liars and frauds, whose desire to push a narrative isn't burdened by a concern to be truthful, or even appear truthful.
Congress and the president are documented liars and frauds, whose desire to push a narrative isn't burdened by a concern to be truthful, or even appear truthful. Is there a point here?
Hmm, sounds like self inflicted injuries. One thing happened, the professional paranoid got a hold of it, exaggerated the hell out of it and then all of them felt they were under attack. That constant psychological stress, affected their brains sufficiently to affect the senses they are attached to. Don't think of it as a one off but in affect a sustained psychological attack upon their own people, generating a continuous state of high stress, fear, paranoia, all feeding into delusions that created real physical harm.
Hmm, sounds like Aliens.
Think of it grinding on, hour after hour, day after day, for months, the threat of someone attacking you and destroying you mind, the message reinforced again and again and again, have you been attacked, have you heard anything, have you felt anything, every thing a possible threat, fully exposed to the enemy. They drove their own people crazy and generated real physical harm as a result.
Think of exposure to alien mind rays grinding on, hour after hour, day after day, for months attacking you and destroying your mind.
This is the ultimate purpose behind placing ISPs under Title II in order to place them under CALEA requirements which could easily be interpreted to require exactly the same kind of 'back doors' on devices.
And of course any such interpretation would be factually incorrect.
CALEA was applied to ISPs in 2005. Title II classification would not arrive for another decade.
CALEA applies to telecommunications service providers only. It does not apply to software and hardware vendors. It does not compel service providers to hand over keys they don't have or restrict the activities of users. It does not mandate the installation of back doors into anything except the infrastructure of telecommunications service providers.
The propaganda has worked so well we have people violently protesting to have their own privacy taken away.
At least get your facts straight before posting provably false information. There are plenty of valid reasons to disapprove of CALEA and criticize U.S. government for it.
If anyone doubts this, and uses Android, go see your voice and audio activity. It's pretty eye-opening when you hear your own voice from several years ago. It includes times that you clearly meant to trigger "OK Google" and times that it mistakenly picked up random conversations.
I have a cell phone.
It runs Android.
It does not run Google Play or call home to Google. I don't have a Google account.
On the other hand, if Google is honest about this being the data that they collect, then bravo for being so open and transparent. They also offer the ability to delete. Do Amazon or Apple provide such access to the audio data they have collected from you?
To me this sounds more like having your home robbed and the thief leaving detailed note enumerating everything they stole.
In my view the problem I care about is the theft itself not the transparency of those doing the stealing.
You already own one of these you carry everywhere â" your cellphone. A microphone (and camera!) you take everywhere, and is connected everywhere, including in your home.
In other words if there was already one vehicle rampaging thru my neighborhood spraying my home with bullets...
A second vehicle doing the same thing wouldn't be a big deal...right? After all there are some rooms with only a few bullet holes and I can certainly afford to loose more blood.
Who would be stupid enough to do something like this?
Trump can't even keep his mouth shut long enough to save himself from criminal liability or resist to the urge to give Russian government the location of U.S. nuclear submarines.
Any spy who reports directly to trump is a dead man walking.
With net neutrality they aren't allowed to discriminate per government mandate.
No, they are forced by the government to convey things they don't want to. You've got it exactly, perfectly backwards. You want private people and the organizations they build to be forced by the government to give a platform to people with whom they disagree. You want the government to control your own editorial decisions, instead of you doing that according to your own standards.
A more accurate analogy is organizing a protest in which every time you were to utter something into a megaphone the manufacturer didn't agree with nothing but silence would came out the other end.
Or the only post office serving your area burning letters addressed to you because they don't like you.
The FCC has no control over "information services" which originate content. ISPs are being paid to forward packets in the same way megaphones forward sound or sorting machines forward letters nothing more.
Allowing unchecked capitalism because some abstract philosophical notions of "freedom" divorced from objective reality does not magically lead to outcomes that maximize freedom.
I think I'll reserve my right to contact companies and let them know they are doing business with hatred, and let them decide whether or not they want to work with CloudFlare. First Amendment is a double-edged sword, so I hope very much we do not lose the social pressures that keep hate speech in the far corners vs. potentially showing up in a dangerous way in some auto-personalized result for a lot of users.
Normalizing hate is always, always how genocide starts.
No it always starts with nitwits silencing others out of fear. Genocides are not perpetrated by free societies.
Freedom does not exist merely for its own sake to afford people the space to be left alone. Freedom at its core limits the power (e.g. corruption) of the state in order to protect it from ITSELF. Without freedom history is crystal clear about happens next.. what always happens when power over others is consolidated.
Whether it's government or some kind of mob rule social structure where Industry is forced to cede to demands or die the outcome is the same. Recall that anti-war advocates, politicians and members of the media received death threats for their (belatedly correct) positions in the lead-up to Iraq war. It is impossible to have it both ways... to seek structures which limit freedom of expression of others yet expect those structures to be wielded only in furtherance of YOUR personal beliefs and values. It's a Fanta Fanta fantasy.
Oh fuck. Why didn't you just say you ticked the wrong box during the setup. Either that or you were running the pre-channel setup. Firefox does NOT DO THIS BY DEFAULT.
Oh fuck. You obviously have no idea what your talking about. It does this by default and CONTINUES to do so even after ALL privacy related settings are DISABLED.
There are no privacy installation options. It just starts installing itself automatically when the installer is run. Even when ALL privacy related options are disabled available to mortals the behavior continues.
Specifically disabling "Allow Firefox to send technical and interaction data to Mozilla", "Allow Firefox to install and run studies" and "Allow Firefox to send crash reports to Mozilla" does NOT STOP TELEMETRY.
In fact the UI infers as much "We strive to provide you with choices and collect only what we need to provide and improve Firefox for everyone. We always ask permission before receiving personal information."
Which translates to we will continue to collect data from you regardless of your privacy settings and there is nothing you can do about it. It's the same BS/w Windows 10 where there is no OFF setting that disables malware baked into Windows.
Please do yourself a favor and stop talking about shit you clearly have no clue about.
Then take yourself out of the discussion and disappear.
Right back at ya. You not only don't care about privacy you are ignorant to the behavior of Firefox.
Slashdot Mirror
So if Mozilla can remotely jam new extensions in to my browser without so much as a dialog, that means malicious actors with even fewer scruples will be able to do it in about a week. Short of firewalling all of mozilla.org, how do I turn this shit off?
(I wonder if this has anything to do with the weird XSS blocking dialog NoScript threw three times earlier today. It was blocking an XSS attempt between two domains, neither of which was open in any browser tab at the time.)
Look around in about:config
Searching for 'http' and '.enabled' ... is usually a good starting place.
Personally I modified most of the URLs to point to a local web server just out of curiosity so I can get a better idea what Mozilla is up to but they can just as easily be sabotaged... http://0.0.0.0/...
As for the XSS browsers have retarded heuristic filters which in my view are dangerous and should be disabled. The filters are naÃve it is basically impossible because the browser lacks necessary context to make a reasoned informed decision.
They work mostly by looking for "reflections" which can easily triggered false positives by random coincidences. They are also easily bypassed by attackers. They don't do jack against stored XSS which is what fucks most people over when using insecure sites and there is a long history of vulnerabilities in XSS filters being used as an actual attack vector.
Telecommunications is a means of transmission without changing the information. "ISPs supply simply routes packets.". Packets are information on top of a means of communications. How is "routing" not a capability of generating, acquiring, storing, transforming, processing, or making information available on a means of transmission?
You left out the preceding keyword "offering" in the definition of an information service... A piece of wire nor an L3 router is physically capable of "offering" to do anything. The only thing doing the offering is the peer at the edge of the network... the "information service" the destination address in the IP header.
... welcome to politics and law? Jesus are you 12? Why do you think the judiciary is separate from the legislature? Funny enough, Scalia even remarked about how in EVERY case half of the lawyers are trying to convince the judges to break the law. "Anyway Counsel often encourage judges to do the wrong thing. In fact in every case there's one of the two counsels urging the court to do the wrong thing." - Antonin Scalia.
The simple fact people behave a certain way does not serve to justify the behavior. I don't care if everyone on earth does it or everyone on earth thinks it's ok. Makes no difference at all to me.
If you want NN to be protected then you need to have Congress to make the law clear that the FCC cannot change the interrpretation based on the chairman.
My preference is to see NN exist independent of Title II. Nevertheless the lawyers are simply wrong. They don't understand the technology.
So, let me get this straight. ISPs do not "generate, acquire, store, transform, retrieve, utilize or make available information via telecommunications" in your mind?
CORRECT. They merely provide a "string" (telecommunications) that transmits and receives information to and from information services outside the ISPs administrative domain.
Maybe you can explain to me how the internet works without any information and is as dumb as a copper line.
Because you don't understand the difference between an eyeball network and a content network.
The Internet network itself...the portion that ISPs supply simply routes packets. It literally is a dumb wire with no intelligence baked into it at all.
All of the intelligence all of the information and data are at the edges of the network far beyond the administrative domain of the ISP.
Now, maybe you can explain to me how you can have an information service when the definition of information service relies on a telecommunications service which you assert does not exist in the case of the ISP?
The point is the existing law is flawed because it forces telecommunications service providers and information service providers to be a distinct thing which clearly they are not with modern internet and ISPs.
This is like opening a store that sells tires and toasters and bitching about laws pertaining to tires because they don't accommodate toasters.
*If* an ISP provides contents like a web hosting service or their own web content, video media libraries, directories... that portion of the ISP is a communication service.
The portion of the ISP that provides network access is a telecommunication service.
It isn't any more difficult than that. There is no ambiguity about these things inherent in the technology.
An ISP can provide more than one thing at once. They can even sell tires and toasters if they want. This changes NOTHING about the character of individual activities they are engaged in.
Both can be right and wrong at the same time because both are operating under the flawed distinction in the law that the FCC goes back and forth on. Namely, telecommunications service must be distinct from information service when an ISP is clearly both.
Clearly false. The wire leading to outside the administrative domain of the ISP is just as dumb as the wire leading outside the administrative domain of a Telco. There is no intelligence baked into that wire of any kind. All of the intelligence is in information services on the other end of the wire far outside the prevue of the ISP/teleco.
I understand what you are saying but you are being obtuse about it. Can the FCC ignore the law and the courts to give you what you want? No. Change the law because it is flawed. The FCC dancing back and forth does no one any favors.
No you don't. You clearly don't understand the basic reality of how the technology works and apparently neither do the lawyers.
You do realize that is the entire basis of the judiciary and this entire debacle?
There is a difference between making a good faith effort to resolve ambiguities and conflicts vs. deliberately bending language to selfishly have your way.
The supreme court disagrees with you. 545 U.S. 967 (2005).
No amount of magical finessing of language will get me to buy into the clearly ridiculous assertion L2 transceivers (Cable modems) and L3 forwarding of datagrams (ISP) constitute an "information service".
What's makes this farce even more absurd is concurrently asserting picking up a phone and calling someone is using a telecommunications service when sending an L3 datagram to that same person conveying the very same information is not a telecommunications service.
The DSPs in the CO must be exerting quite a force on the fabric of reality for this bullshit to make any logical sense.
It's a claim on it's face is simply not true as clear as saying the sky is green with orange polka-dots. I don't care if everyone in the world thinks that I'm wrong it doesn't change a damn thing.
"Information services" only work on top of "telecommunications" as their own definition of information service admits.
"The Act defines âoeinformation serviceâ as âoethe offering of a capability for generating, acquiring, storing, transforming, processing, retrieving, utilizing, or making available information via telecommunications ⦠.â "
So if L2/L3 devices are not "telecommunications" how can there be an information service on top of it? Yea there can't be ..because the arguments are clearly all bullshit.
You know what else?
The FCC maintains two separate mutually exclusive definitions of what broadband means. One definition says it's 200kbps the other says 25mbits. Both definitions are used concurrently in different contexts in order to get what they want under various statutes.
Whether your NSA claiming collection only counts when you look at what you stole or whether your FCC pondering the difference between a cable modem and a telephone to suite your agenda... I am not impressed.
Is an ISP a telecommunications service provider or an information service provider?
No, the question is whether ISPs are telecommunications service providers or communication service providers.
Information service providers are the shit on the other end of the series of tubes like Wikipedia and Twitter. ISPs providing Internet access are clearly NOT information service providers.
The only gray area here is information service providers that offer what one could argue are communications services. This could be a OTT Voice service or even VPN and Email service providers.
Using Title II, a near-100 year old law to govern the Internet, was the wrong solution to this problem.
Not even Wheeler et al wanted Title II classification. Title II was only invoked as a technical workaround when their original open Internet initiative went down in flames in the courts.
Any of 700 exemptions carved out for ISPs can be uncarved just as easily at any time by corrupt technocrats at the FCC which is why I don't support attempting to undue what has just been done.
Right now my view best possible solution is pushing for a clean legislative solution for NN and only NN. This of course carries a significant risk of being rendered inert by the industry or even repurposed as a weapon against small local operators.
The only alternative is when power changes hands in a few years or less Title II will be immediately reinstated ... this will certainly occur as there is now a huge vacuum and NN has become a mainstream political issue. When this happens it's anyone's guess what exemptions would be instated by the new masters in an organization with little political accountability having blatantly succumbed to regulatory capture.
Haven't most of the worst security disasters we've heard of in the past few years come from companies or government departments losing control of their own in-house systems and data? So, what do you think is more risky... apparently incompetent IT management / staff who don't know how to keep things patched (e.g. Equifax, previous government SNAFUs), or the risk of turning over sensitive information to someone else, who one presumes has more expertise in keeping stuff secure.
I think it's impossible to even bother contemplating what the benefit or harm is without knowing details.
Simply moving servers to VM's in someone else's data center changes nothing. You still have the same people and things accessing the systems same as before. You have the exact same management overhead. If anything you've increased security threats because now there is a chance of external VM compromise and more access over Internet links vs what would have previously been more localized.
If on the other hand you outsource common services like book-keeping, HR, groupware...etc and someone else is running and maintaining that service for you then indeed some management and security responsibility can be offloaded.
For all the potential risks of cloud services, I haven't heard of too many major breaches of Amazon, Google, Intel, or Microsoft services, even though those have got to be very significant targets. Most "breaches" I've heard of involving AWS, for instance, are due to misconfiguration, not necessarily the fault of the platform.
Nobody has ever broken into our equipment closet either.
If you read the article, you see a lot of compelling reasons for at least modernizing and consolidating many of those very expensive and often obsolete systems. Naturally, each federal agency has their own completely unique-as-a-snowflake system, and often pays many times what a more modern commercial system should typically cost. This is apparently an effort to get some runaway costs under control, and if it can be done safely, that's a big win. Whether this should be done with commercial cloud services rather than trying to consolidate internally is certainly a valid point of debate.
There really isn't much to the article. It talks about email and moving "data". There are no useful details other than aggregate costs.
My perspective is software costs money to develop and manage while hardware is an insignificant footnote that should be ignored regardless of where it is located or who is babysitting it.
"Cloud" providers are offering either a specific service like groupware or they are providing low level crap like execution environments and data tiers. (e.g. SaaS vs. PaaS) They are not going to rewrite old code for you and nobody needs "cloud" as an excuse to go ahead and replace custom software stacks with commercial counterparts where that is even feasible. Cost savings ideas including consolidation of effort and economies of scale exist independent of moving hardware to "someone else's servers".
He was doing more than probing. Anyone who thinks this bottom feeder was performing a public service is an idiot.
I think he should get a gold medal for each bricked device. He deserves it.
This guy is my hero.
The homeless population in San Fran is a massive problem. I've had my car's window smashed three times over the course of four years for trivial crap i've
Have you ever wondered why? Perhaps all drugged out animals in America are attracted to the golden gate bridge? They just...ah... naturally tend to congregate there?
left in my car. Seriously, they really think that my FM transmitter and 75 cents are worth something? And this is in Portrero FFS.
Feel the same way about v1agra spam... seriously how does anyone make money off this shit?
You consistently see these animals constantly shooting up, leaving needles everywhere, pissing in the street, and hassling you for money. They're a blight and the city's permissive attitude towards them only encourages more to show up.
It's time we stop wasting money on these animals when they OD with Naloxone. If they want to drug themselves to the point of death, let them. It's time we let Darwin do his work.
Zap them, beat them, lock them up and forcibly detox them from whatever drug they love, I don't care. It's high time vagrancy is treated the same way the homeless treat our communities, with reckless abandonment.
Have you done anything to build consensus to make government change it's insane policies? Anything at all to address underlying causes? BTW what's average home in San Fran running these days? A cool mil?
In the real world literally beating down symptoms has a proven track record of accomplishing nothing. Almost as worthless as bitching on Slashdot about your "problems".
I think you actually may have inadvertently hit on the core problem when you used the words "I don't care".
Personally I would much rather have mega corporations fighting each other than duopolies colluding.
List of problems I have personally encountered with systemd.
Upgrade never completing due to infinite loop bugs in systemd log maintenance.
Inability to read out log files without using slow as shit systemd commands.
Every time I run top there is ALWAYS systemd shit at the top of the list doing god knows what consuming resources for god knows why. The logging overhead of background noise from Internet SSH probes uses more CPU time than any other process in the entire system. It's almost as if systemd was designed to be a DOS attack helper service.
Kernel message ring buffer full of nothing but systemd related log bullshit.. because that's really what I wanted to see.
Here are a list of benefits I have personally encountered with systemd:
Intentionally left blank. I have no idea.. honestly I just don't know what systemd does that is at all helpful to me.
You are an idiot - http://healthland.time.com/201... and https://www.researchgate.net/p.... In fact simply do the search yourself https://duckduckgo.com/?q=stre.... Stupid is as stupid does and they have been quite stupid.
I would post studies showing Aliens causing the same damage but it's classified and they would find me.
Go back under your rock, you damn ISIS advocates are disgusting!
Never understood appeal of ISIS over OSPF. Personally I would rather RIP than join the ranks of ISIS lusers.
You don't do it to "win" a game. You do it to prevent the destruction that will result. You keep doing it, just like you keep tossing the moles out of the garden.
You do it to lose a game you are losing even faster.
Nobody should have ever said doing the right thing was going to be easy. If they did, shame on them. Name them and I'll call them out.
The right thing according to your all knowing, all seeing self.
Indeed, extremists are documented liars and frauds, whose desire to push a narrative isn't burdened by a concern to be truthful, or even appear truthful.
Congress and the president are documented liars and frauds, whose desire to push a narrative isn't burdened by a concern to be truthful, or even appear truthful. Is there a point here?
Hmm, sounds like self inflicted injuries. One thing happened, the professional paranoid got a hold of it, exaggerated the hell out of it and then all of them felt they were under attack. That constant psychological stress, affected their brains sufficiently to affect the senses they are attached to. Don't think of it as a one off but in affect a sustained psychological attack upon their own people, generating a continuous state of high stress, fear, paranoia, all feeding into delusions that created real physical harm.
Hmm, sounds like Aliens.
Think of it grinding on, hour after hour, day after day, for months, the threat of someone attacking you and destroying you mind, the message reinforced again and again and again, have you been attacked, have you heard anything, have you felt anything, every thing a possible threat, fully exposed to the enemy. They drove their own people crazy and generated real physical harm as a result.
Think of exposure to alien mind rays grinding on, hour after hour, day after day, for months attacking you and destroying your mind.
This is the ultimate purpose behind placing ISPs under Title II in order to place them under CALEA requirements which could easily be interpreted to require exactly the same kind of 'back doors' on devices.
And of course any such interpretation would be factually incorrect.
CALEA was applied to ISPs in 2005. Title II classification would not arrive for another decade.
CALEA applies to telecommunications service providers only. It does not apply to software and hardware vendors. It does not compel service providers to hand over keys they don't have or restrict the activities of users. It does not mandate the installation of back doors into anything except the infrastructure of telecommunications service providers.
The propaganda has worked so well we have people violently protesting to have their own privacy taken away.
At least get your facts straight before posting provably false information. There are plenty of valid reasons to disapprove of CALEA and criticize U.S. government for it.
Nice to see Germany returning to its totalitarian roots.
If anyone doubts this, and uses Android, go see your voice and audio activity. It's pretty eye-opening when you hear your own voice from several years ago. It includes times that you clearly meant to trigger "OK Google" and times that it mistakenly picked up random conversations.
I have a cell phone.
It runs Android.
It does not run Google Play or call home to Google. I don't have a Google account.
On the other hand, if Google is honest about this being the data that they collect, then bravo for being so open and transparent. They also offer the ability to delete. Do Amazon or Apple provide such access to the audio data they have collected from you?
To me this sounds more like having your home robbed and the thief leaving detailed note enumerating everything they stole.
In my view the problem I care about is the theft itself not the transparency of those doing the stealing.
You already own one of these you carry everywhere â" your cellphone. A microphone (and camera!) you take everywhere, and is connected everywhere, including in your home.
In other words if there was already one vehicle rampaging thru my neighborhood spraying my home with bullets...
A second vehicle doing the same thing wouldn't be a big deal...right? After all there are some rooms with only a few bullet holes and I can certainly afford to loose more blood.
Who would be stupid enough to do something like this?
Trump can't even keep his mouth shut long enough to save himself from criminal liability or resist to the urge to give Russian government the location of U.S. nuclear submarines.
Any spy who reports directly to trump is a dead man walking.
With net neutrality they aren't allowed to discriminate per government mandate.
No, they are forced by the government to convey things they don't want to. You've got it exactly, perfectly backwards. You want private people and the organizations they build to be forced by the government to give a platform to people with whom they disagree. You want the government to control your own editorial decisions, instead of you doing that according to your own standards.
A more accurate analogy is organizing a protest in which every time you were to utter something into a megaphone the manufacturer didn't agree with nothing but silence would came out the other end.
Or the only post office serving your area burning letters addressed to you because they don't like you.
The FCC has no control over "information services" which originate content. ISPs are being paid to forward packets in the same way megaphones forward sound or sorting machines forward letters nothing more.
Allowing unchecked capitalism because some abstract philosophical notions of "freedom" divorced from objective reality does not magically lead to outcomes that maximize freedom.
No, courage is what is required to kill all Nazis and Fascists, and not only build but protect a civilization.
A civilization of people who kills those they don't agree with. Can't argue with that. Apparently neither could Joe G., Adolf H or Uncle S.
I think I'll reserve my right to contact companies and let them know they are doing business with hatred, and let them decide whether or not they want to work with CloudFlare. First Amendment is a double-edged sword, so I hope very much we do not lose the social pressures that keep hate speech in the far corners vs. potentially showing up in a dangerous way in some auto-personalized result for a lot of users.
Normalizing hate is always, always how genocide starts.
No it always starts with nitwits silencing others out of fear. Genocides are not perpetrated by free societies.
Freedom does not exist merely for its own sake to afford people the space to be left alone. Freedom at its core limits the power (e.g. corruption) of the state in order to protect it from ITSELF. Without freedom history is crystal clear about happens next.. what always happens when power over others is consolidated.
We are already seeing the fruits of this throughout Europe:
https://theintercept.com/2017/...
Whether it's government or some kind of mob rule social structure where Industry is forced to cede to demands or die the outcome is the same. Recall that anti-war advocates, politicians and members of the media received death threats for their (belatedly correct) positions in the lead-up to Iraq war. It is impossible to have it both ways... to seek structures which limit freedom of expression of others yet expect those structures to be wielded only in furtherance of YOUR personal beliefs and values. It's a Fanta Fanta fantasy.
Oh fuck. Why didn't you just say you ticked the wrong box during the setup. Either that or you were running the pre-channel setup. Firefox does NOT DO THIS BY DEFAULT.
Oh fuck. You obviously have no idea what your talking about. It does this by default and CONTINUES to do so even after ALL privacy related settings are DISABLED.
There are no privacy installation options. It just starts installing itself automatically when the installer is run. Even when ALL privacy related options are disabled available to mortals the behavior continues.
Specifically disabling "Allow Firefox to send technical and interaction data to Mozilla", "Allow Firefox to install and run studies" and "Allow Firefox to send crash reports to Mozilla" does NOT STOP TELEMETRY.
In fact the UI infers as much "We strive to provide you with choices and collect only what we need to provide and improve Firefox for everyone. We always ask permission before receiving personal information."
Which translates to we will continue to collect data from you regardless of your privacy settings and there is nothing you can do about it. It's the same BS /w Windows 10 where there is no OFF setting that disables malware baked into Windows.
Please do yourself a favor and stop talking about shit you clearly have no clue about.
Then take yourself out of the discussion and disappear.
Right back at ya. You not only don't care about privacy you are ignorant to the behavior of Firefox.