Again, IANAL.

Still, how can you have a high burden of proof? In an adverserial system, the only things you can prove need two opposing parties to present their case. As such, an ex-parte request does not contain proof at all (how can it?)

Instead, it contains claims backed by sworn testimony. The judge examines these claims in the light most favorable to the non-present party, but otherwise within the context of the claims presented by the moving party.

In other words, you cannot second guess the judge's decision without looking at what MS actually wrote in its TRO request. If (as likely happened) MS wrote that no-ip do not remove the offending domains, and that these domains are used on a daily basis to cause huge harm, then a reasonable judge (who, I might remind you, is not technically savvy, and may not realize the implications of granting this order are disrupting no-ip's business) might conclude that granting this Temporary Restraining Order is reasonable.

So, once again, I think MS were acting like douches. I have no idea whether the judge acted reasonably, and cannot know without looking at MS's petition.

Shachar

IANAL. All of this is from following legal procedures.

Not showing up is a big no-no. A judge can, usually, assume that the party not showing up has nothing to say in the matter, and just accept the petition as is. This is, however, not what happened here. From the first link:

Emphasis mine.

An Ex-Parte petition is filed without the other side being given a chance to answer. This is outrageous act by Microsoft. You ask for an ex-part hearing when there is danger that the other side, if given prior warning of your requested subpoena, will destroy evidence. Since Microsoft is claiming that no-ip are unknowingly hosting malware, this simply wrong.

Before you go to blame the judge, however, please bear in mind that he can only rule based on the petitions before him. Presumably, a two-party hearing will be held soon, and then things can, and should, go differently. Also, the judge should have ordered Microsoft to place some money in escrow, which no-ip will automatically get in case the temporary restraining order is found to be unjustified.

What I'm saying is that we don't have enough information so far to conclude that the judge did anything wrong, but the first link, written by Microsoft, clearly shows MS to be douche bags in this case.

Shachar

At most, this will delete one directory above the one you're in. If you're in e.g. /home/shachar, this will delete /home, but not /usr or /etc.

Shachar

The -- end of options option is a GNU getopt extension. It is, if memory serves me correctly, not part of any standard. This means that program that were not compiled with glibc, or programs that do not use getopt/getopt_long, may or may not honor it.

Even by simply looking at the man page, it is easy to spot programs that don't use getopt. Any program that accept multi-letter options with one minus sign is, obviously, not using getopt (e.g. gcc, find).

Then there is git. Git uses -- to mean "no revisions after this point. Any remaining argument must be a file name". This is almost, but not quite, what -- means for getopt. I don't even know what underlying parsing engine they are using (could be getopt with the "no options after first argument" option set).

The "./*" feature is a more global workaround, if it is applicable.

Shachar

On my system (Debian GNU/Linux Jessie with Bash version 4.3.11), ls -lad *.* does not return either "." or "..". This is unlike ".*", which return both.

I have not found the precise rules of how * is expanded, but it seems pretty universal that if the pattern doesn't begin with a dot, files beginning with a dot are not matched.

Other systems (and, more to the point, shells) might behave differently, of course.

Shachar

While I agree with a lot of what you said, it is not completely true.

Jerusalem now has an (above ground, so not technically a subway) train throughout the city. It did take longer than planned, (and I believe was over budget too), but did, finally, happen. It definitely took more than one mayoral tenure to complete.

Yes, the Tel Aviv subway is now a running joke, and has been for about two decades. Then again, so was the Tel Aviv central bus station (took 40 years to complete and is under utilized, but complete it, eventually, did).

Just because something is a running joke doesn't mean it will not, eventually, happen. See "Duke Nukem Forever".

Shachar

Your drivel shows a remarkably consistent level of insightfulness. As anyone who has ever done ISO-9000 knows, consistency is a vital first step. Only once that is achieved, can one also aim for quality. Congratulations! You are half way there!

It's not all good news, I'm afraid. While I can sort of see which (or is that "whose"?) ass you pulled most of your incorrect assumptions from, I am dumbfounded in trying to figure out where you got the assumption that my current wife is a trophy wife.

This assumption is completely incorrect, but, as I said, that is no different than the rest of your comment. What is worse, and reflects really badly on your potential as a truly effective troll, is that there is nothing to suggest it.

Your comment started so well, casting doubt on my ability to be happy (at least I think that's what you said. The missing word is actually important there), my ability as a father, fear of mortality and of being insignificant. Those are universal fears, and you can't really go wrong by pushing those buttons. And then you had to put that "trophy wife" in there.

Not only is this unlikely to be true, reducing the likely hurt I'm likely to feel from your troll, but it also hurts your logic. If my wife is a trophy wife, then the age difference between her and my kid isn't so big.

Please take this comment as the constructive criticism it is meant to be. Trolling, like any other art form, requires practice to get right. Judging from your comments on other threads, I'm sure you're well on your way to perfection. Keep at it. You'll get it in the end!

Oh, and thanks for the sig comment. I've been meaning to do something about it for quite some time, but was not sure what. I just removed it altogether for the time being.

Shachar

As one such stupid person, I can tell you. Oh, how I wish I had the smarts to to go ahead and make a child with my !@#%!@#$ crazy first wife, instead of divorcing her, spending time looking for a right one that will be, well, right, and only then having a child.

I'm sure me, my first wife, and my hypothetical children would have been so much happier for having a younger dad. Obviously, a younger dad is preferrable to growing up in a happy family.

Shachar

I found http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

I don't see anything there substantially different than the one shown. Can you elaborate, please?

Shachar

Why not provide an actual link?

Shachar

I used to work for a company called "Gteko". Don't bother looking them up - they were acquired several years ago. They sold bundled software (OEM) to a handful of companies, all of them huge. One of those was AOL. This is over a decade ago.

The incident in question took place after I left, so I don't know the specifics. The bottom line is, they screwed up a server deployment that affected the AOL front page for all AOL customers. After that was finally fixed, the company's CEO, expecting pretty much to be shown the door, walked into a meeting with several AOL high execs.

The meeting started with the following sentence:
"Let's see how we can make sure this never happens again"

Even when it's something less "close" to you than an employee, it is sometimes worth it to not terminate someone who made a mistake, even a serious one.

My current employer, Akamai, has a motto effectively saying: It's okay to screw up, so long as that screwup results in a procedure that will prevent anyone from making the same mistake again.

Shachar

Posted it as a question there already.

Here's the thing, however. From reading the article, it seems that DH was not, itself, broken. Here's the problem, however: DH is used for forward reference security. It is used to ensure that an adversary that captured the encrypted communication cannot be decrypted later, even if the RSA key is later compromised

Which means that whether DH has already been broken is a moot question. The real question is whether it is likely to be broken in the near future (where what "near" means depends on what you're actually encrypting).

Here is what Schneier usually has to say about that: Attacks always get better over time.

Of course, the main problem with replacing DH is that we don't really have anything better on hand.

Shachar

RSA does not rely on discrete log. It rather relies on discrete root.

Dlog is the base, however, to almost any other public key algorithm out there which isn't elliptic curve. This includes Diffie Hellman, El-Gamal, DSA, Schnor and I'm sure others as well.

My reading of the article is that those are not yet borken, per se (spelling mistake left in intentionally). Since Diffie Hellman is primarily used for forward reference security, however (i.e. - figuring out a session key that will not be compromised even if the private key later is), the question is not whether it is safe today. The question is whether it will remain safe for the foreseeable future.

If attacks on dlog are beginning to become practical, the answer is "less and less".

Shachar

I really really skimmed the article, but I think it all boils to this one algorithm. If Diffie Hellman is at risk, then all of our "perfect forward security" reliance of SSL is gone.

Shachar

Had I not been able to postpone the migration for as long as I have, I would probably have agreed with you. I tried at least two of the versions you mentioned, and reached conclusions substantially similar to yours. None the less, modern KDE 4 is okay (after some getting used to).

Shachar