There is a large group of consumers that actually do want a lot of those silly things. Just look at some of the Kickstarter projects that are out there, or some of the IoT stuff that people want for example (Internet connected light bulb anyone?), or people who buy new phones as soon as a new model comes out jut because it's the new model with cool new features. Of course, I agree that there is also disconnect between what consumers want and what a company thinks they want as well. It's both.

I guess it depends on your school. I used to teach security aspects (with programming and others such as embedded systems) both at Bachelor and Master levels....

Its' not the engineers that think that. It's their managers and the marketing department: new cool features can be charged for and gives a competitive edge, because that's what your average consumer wants. In contrast, security is seen as a cost. You need dedicated people for security, code review, etc. and all of that costs money. It can delay a product. It can make the product more expensive. This is counter to what the consumer wants: cools stuff as cheap as possible. This is why security sucks.

Incidentally, part of the blame here lies with the consumer. With the pressure to go cheaper and cheaper, corners are cut, manufacturing is moved overseas, coding and engineering are outsourced to copy-paste OEMs, all in the name of making things as cheap as possible. Then, that same consumer complains that jobs are taken away. Not saying this is the only reason (profit being the obvious other one), but it does have an impact. This all in the end means security is seen as not important, so no one cares.

I thought that was self evident and didn't add that...

That should of course be "compare if they overlap (dst - src >= len) and if not do a forward copy, otherwise a backward copy"

You can't compare arbitrary pointers in this case. You would have to cast them to integers (e.g., unsigned long) first and do the comparison there. Basically, the workflow is a) cast source and destination to long integers, b) compare if they overlap (dst - src >= len) and if so do a forward copy, otherwise a backward copy. The reason for not using a backward copy in all cases has to do with a speed penalty (for preserving alignment).

~ $ pwgen -y -s 20

Same here. I see the same things. We design everything with security in mind from the get-go. However, this has meant having to skip customers who just didn't care (and wouldn't cover the costs that come with it). Most businesses wouldn't do that, so this all leads to horribly insecure crap.

http://www.st.com/web/catalog/... Cost: 10 Euro. That gives you an ARM Cortex with plenty of resources, Arduino compatible headers, debugger on board, and the tools are free and you can use http://www.mbed.org/ with it. And yes, the pins are labeled.

http://www.st.com/web/catalog/... Cost: 10 Euro. That gives you an ARM Cortex with plenty of resources, Arduino compatible headers, debugger on board, and the tools are free and you can use http://mbed.org/ with it.

Over here in Europe we have http://www.eurocircuits.com/ You can get prototypes of your board in single digit quantity for very little money ( 100Euro easily). Seven days later, you have your boards in the mail. No issues with double sided boards, or even multilayer. They also take Eagle files directly, so no need to generate Gerber files etc. In addition, their web interface allows you to visually inspect your boards to make sure all the design rules are correct, and this also helps getting to a lower class of complexity of the PCB and lower your cost even further.

It is memory, registers and ports, e.g. BSF STATUS,5 would mean set bit 5 in the STATUS register. The reason why it is called 'File' is for historical reasons from terminology such as the 'register file'. This is apparent in other instructions such as FSR (File Select Register). The 'register file' is an array of the processor registers.

It's PIC assembly. BSF == BIt Set in File, BCF == Bit Clear in File.