Comment Re: So no used ebay phones any more (Score 4, Insightful) 556
Remember, the phone has an IMEI number, also. And THAT can be traced.
The IMEI has the same magical immutability as the MAC of an ethernet adapter.
Remember, the phone has an IMEI number, also. And THAT can be traced.
The IMEI has the same magical immutability as the MAC of an ethernet adapter.
an account with sudo access You need root access to run the chroot command and to modify the mount table. NOTE: Do not run any of the commands listed in this document as root â" the commands themselves will run sudo to get root access when needed.
There should be some harsh physical punishment for the idiots that put sudo calls in Makefiles. And for sudo-heads in general. Why would you need root just to build some fucking binary, should it be a hello-world or your browser/os of the day? Even for building a kernel for the machine it's built on, you need root only for the final step, where you install the kernel/modules/ramdisk.
That piece of shit (sudo) should be banned once for all. If you feel like fucking up your systems and ignoring all the good security practices, go install your own setuid garbage; it's easy.
There are also some apps like the one for my blood pressure monitor that i refuse to install because it wants access to my call log
Try downloading the apk, unpack it with apktool, strip those permissions from AndroidManifest.xml, pack it back and then install it via adb.
In fact, the baksmali 'assembly' format is very readable and easy to understand; you can study and modify the java part of an app almost as if you had the source code.
How so? Android is free software.
No, it's not.
I'm yet to see an affordable android device that doesn't require proprietary drivers for video, gps, etc.
Even after "rooting" your device with some dubious "tools" downloaded from warez-like sites or by scouring fulldisclosure and writing your own exploit, most of the time you won't be able to install a modified system; for all intents and purposes it's a pure proprietary device.
Or "tivoized", if you like the term better.
Then there are the idiots that are ideologically prejudiced against CS, Scheme, functional programming, etc and will go out of their way to sabotage it because they find it 'confusing' or because it 'makes debugging harder'.
The only thing you could do is to transform the tail-recursive algorithm into an iterative one by hand, and nicely document it into a big comment & warnings above it. That's almost like writing in assembly.
Interestingly, just reading the preferred environments of winning competition coders, few list a command line editor.
I think this retro movement is a knee-jerk to "user-friendly" or "simplicity", as if that means "not expert".
You're projecting your own snobbery. Not everybody is obsessing about following trends and movements, emulating the elite and continuously assessing his own level of expertise. Some people just think that machines were invented to do the repetitive, mind-numbing tasks instead of them and absolutely hate having to repeat selecting, filling forms, moving windows and clicking menus instead of just issuing some fucking one-line command. Even the most stupid and inconsistent
P.S. hat are all these tedious actions? Spend all my time thinking, architecting, then writing... mostly once.
You're a freaking genius -- you conceive everything in your head, and then it just works: no debugging, no refactoring, no revision control is ever needed. More curiously, the interfaces and external libraries you're using are just as perfect and immutable as your code.
Try moving vim guys to emac, and vice versa.
It's much easier than you think. Once you broke out of repetitive mechanical editing and learnt to use a programmable editor, should it be ed, teco, edt, ex/vi or emacs, it's easy to switch to a new paradigm, even if you happen to detest it. It's just a matter of taste and muscle memory from that point on.
On the contrary, going back to some obtuse "user-friendly" interface, where you can't combine actions other than by tediously repeating them, is simply torture; it feels like slaving for the machine that was supposed to be serving you.
You mention flickering fluorescent bulbs, but there's another fairly common cause of some of these symptoms you should check out if you ever come across a case like this; high-pitched whines from malfunctioning electronic devices.
The kind of cellphone chargers used by Nokia (like ac-3) were the worst of all -- I could hear them through closed doors, and it happened to me to wake with nightmares after some cellphone finished charging and the adapter started its whining.
All switching-mode power supply designs generate some kind of annoying whine, but even "fast" USB chargers (which are pretty bad in their own way) are unable to match that high-pitch sizzle/whine alternation.
Fortunately, Nokia's dead now and with it their unique charger designs.
You could even save that data to a file instead of sending it to the printer; if you then cat that_file >
Most method of bit banging on parallel port relies on being able to use hardware IRQ interrupts (which USB can't do). That's because they are really abusing how a parallel port works, and not just using it as a one way data stream.
It's not only that. Those adapters won't update the data pins with new data unless the BUSY line is pulled high then low, with some time constraints, as specified by the Centronics protocol. That means that you can't use it to drive relays, leds, etc just by writing data to a port, as you could with a classic parallel port on 0x378.
or a version of PL2303 that Prolific decided to remove support for your OS).
Use linux. It supports without problem whatever cheap pl2303 knockoff you put into it. It's also easy to hack the driver to leave the dtr/rts lines alone (instead of pulling them high on reset), so you could use them independently via ioctls.
Not for the parallel port. Those usb-parallel adapters are actually emulating a USB printer -- they're absolutely worthless if you want to use them to bitbang microcontrollers and other such things.
In fact, they're absolutely worthless overall -- when did you last see a printer that doesn't support USB?
O God.
As if the xml/xul/xpcom repetitive cargo cult nighmare wasn't bad enough.
Just as the code started to mature a little bit, and despite its ugliness and brittleness, people started to make (a little bit) sense of it, they plan to tear everything down and put into place another mumbo-jumbo of Web 3.0 idiocy (rewritten in Rust, no less!)
Just like the xorg/wayland bunch of idiots.
And to add insult to injury, they will make everything closed-garden: no more addons not reviewed by mozilla.inc, even if they're signed and you explicitly trust the developer's certificate!
According to the article, it's a bug in PAM.
Then the article (which I wouldn't bother to read) is misleading.
The bug is inside openssh proper. This is how they fixed it:
http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.bin/ssh/auth2-chall.c.diff?r1=1.42&r2=1.43&f=h
Basically, OpenSSH was accepting a list of 'keyboard interactive devices' where the same device apeared thousands of times, completely bypassing the MaxAuthTries setting from sshd_config (default 6).
This is well explained in kingcope's original report.
It's very much a bug, and the code in auth2-call.c looks silly enough (just like the fix, btw) that there's a high probability of other such gross bugs in there.
And as OpenBSD developer Marc Espie says in his message,
Not surprisingly, as the patch clearly shows, the problem is right smack in the middle of USE_PAM code.
That doesn't seem to be the case.
In fact, my will guess is that the default pam_faildelay is what stays in the way of this bug's being exploitable on Linux.
Because my mother-in-law was also fuming against it just a day or two ago.
Moreover, any time I access gmail via ipv6 (I have dual-stack) my messages are marked as spam and I receive terrible warnings about someone else trying to break into my e-mail, and that despite using the same system and browser and the IPv6 whois records pointing to the very same ISP and town as the IPv4 ones. (The funny thing is that they don't tell me that, but that someone is trying to log into my email using "Linux" (as if that wasn't the case everytime).
It seems that despite their pretensions of achieving consciousness and singularity with their AI and stuff, their day-to-day operations are based on 'trusty' cargo-cult more typical of some neighbourhood network run by highschool dropouts.
You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken
