"And I still wonder what that Stratfor company is and does, for whom, and why they are considered evil by some."

You have an absurdly low standard of evidence for giving credence to allegations of evil.

"Oh, they're probably evil"
"Says who?"
"I dunno, they didn't identify themselves"
"So what did they do that is so evil?"
"I dunno, they didn't say"

That's moronic.

Stratfor isn't the kind of intelligence that involves eavesdropping and wiretaps. There's also "open source" intelligence, which is pretty much just anything that is published or broadcast in or about a country of interest. I think Stratfor deals with that, and also likely has direct contacts and sources who can provide information, like any journalistic operation.

Stratfor is an information company. They provide information. Remember the huge, violent protests in Bangkok a while back? If hard drive companies, or companies reliant on hard drives, wanted to know the possible repercussions of those protests, they would probably turn to a company like Stratfor, Jane's, or the Economist, for analysis by experts. "Would the current government fall? Would the military take over again? How likely is it that our factories and supply lines would be effected?"

That's all Stratfor does. They provide information and analysis. What their clients *do* with that information is the clients' responsibility.

Anonymous is basically trying to silence an information source.

It's not really a "think tank" in the sense of AEI or Heritage, which exist mostly to push a political agenda. It's more like Jane's (http://www.janes.com/products/janes/index.aspx) or the Economist magazine's "Economist Intelligence Unit".

You know the companies that do market studies of storage makers, or mobile operating systems? Gartner and whatnot?

Stratfor, Jane's, etc, serve a similar purpose in the area of countries and regions, instead of product areas. Companies don't want to spend a bunch of money to hire staffers whose job is keeping track of what's going on in countries around the world. Apple doesn't want to have someone working to keep track of what may happen in Brazil or Turkey or Thailand when there is a change of government, or civil unrest. So they turn to companies that specialize in that sort of research and analysis.

"Although some of the clients appearing most often seem to be financial institutions so possibly this is mainly analysis of investment data?"

Probably political information so the financial institutions can estimate the stability of the country, likelihood of disruptions, etc. Maybe stuff like the level of involvement of the military in the economy.

You realize that there are different kinds of security, don't you?

Being able to analyze the security situation of executives working in Colombia and advise on how to keep them safe from abduction doesn't mean you claim you are the NSA.

That Anonymous seems to have confused this issue is a big indicator that the hack was done by an ignorant script kiddie, not a competitor.

"It just lacks the ability to defend itself, that's the job of it's mother."

Ah. So a woman is just an incubator. I assume you would sacrifice the mother to possibly save the fetus, if complications occur?

"If Stratfor is evil enough to have an angry mob want to punish all the members on that list"

This is like the English morons who threatened a pediatrician because they didn't know the difference between "pediatrician" and "pedophile".

"I understand that Stratfor are probably 'evil' from some of their recent actions" How do you figure? They're mostly an open-source (i.e. public source) intelligence analysis shop, who produce reports about geopolitical issues for customers. Stuff like "what are the odds of Jordan's government being toppled like other Middle Eastern states have been?" It's pretty much like hacking the Economist. Or Jane's. They're not a defense contractor, they're not like some kind of intelligence version of Blackwater. The "Anonymous" people in this case are just idiots.

I think it's interesting in that Google's role is being taken over by their Chinese competitor. It's not just a phone vendor making Bing the search engine, it sounds like it's going to be marketed as a Baidu phone. Bing isn't selling Bing-branded phones that search Bing.

People couldn't use it if Apple didn't include it. Anyway, you're moving goalposts.

Maybe people should get into retro-overclocking. How fast can you get that NeXTStation to run? Or an SGI Indy?

It's in OS X 10.7, server and non-server.

modok:~ jon$ apropos kerberos
kadmin(8) - Kerberos administration utility
kadmin.local(8) - compatiblity shim for MIT Kerberos kadmin.local
kadmind(8) - server for administrative access to Kerberos database
kdc(8) - Kerberos 5 server
klist(1) - list Kerberos credentials
kpasswd(1) - Kerberos 5 password changing program
kpasswdd(8) - Kerberos 5 password changing server
krb5.conf(5) - configuration file for Kerberos 5
ktutil(8) - manage Kerberos keytabs

Given that Stallman hates children and all they represent, he probably doesn't much care about the last one.

"You look at something like Kerberos. Who uses Kerberos? Hardly anybody"

Um, Apple?