As history has shown that does not work in a dictatorship.

History has shown that Socialism does not work period. It does not matter the type of government.

Of course those people are not going to officially talk because we still go after Nazis for qar crimes.

Yes, this is a problem. If we want to learn what happened, then we need to hand out immunity against further prosecutions for people who talk.

Seen what North Korea looks like at night?

In North Korea, less than 25% of the population has any access to electric power. I doubt if there will be a whole lot of DVD watching..... maybe in schools, or when the rich guy down the street has a party and invites the whole street block to his/her showing of the DVD.

Except there's no definitive way to detect if a provider implements BCP38 or not. We'll just all claim that we do implement BCP38, and it will be up to the upstream to prove otherwise, and contact us about the issue with evidence and proof, so we can fix that case, and then they no longer have a source of data to prove that BCP38 isn't implemented.

Or just revisit the requirements, to make sure you aren't imposing some requirements that are not strictly necessary for the job.

Never publish your real evidence that could compromise the investigation, just the circumstantial bits to get the public interested.

If it was just circumstantial bits, then they can't come to a conclusion, of course. The presumption is they have more info

True. What we should really do is require Bars have interlock devices.

Require all bars and restaurants with a license to sell alcoholic beverages to have patrons check all vehicle operating keys and control all exits to their facilities and check and record BAC of all patrons before they may leave.

In the event that any person who visited the bar is found to have committed public drunkenness, DUI, or disorderly conduct while drunk outside the premises, then the bar will be fined a minimum of $1000 DUI per incident and be liable for 75% of any damages and additional fees, for allowing the person to leave with a BAC above the legal limit.

Thunderbolt is more like USB to the user - it's a thing you use to connect untrusted devices to your system.

No. USB is not safe either. Don't plug untrusted devices into your system's I/O ports, period.

USB, Firewire, eSATA, SAS, and Thunderbolt do not have a security model.

Thunderbolt just happens to have more capabilities since there is direct access to the PCI bus, and this is also where the greater performance comes in.

With greater capabilities and access comes greater possibilities of abuse from untrusted components. Including the possibility of malicious option ROMs and malicious access to other hardware devices attached to the bus.

Nope. Just because Mr Stewart isn't around doesn't mean new updates/reshuffles won't be coming out every year.

First of all.... he's probably already written the plan for next 2 to 3 year's worth of versions of the books

Second of all.... his editor can continue to make minor updates to the book ad infintium.

There is no good business reason for you to have my social security number on your computer to write out my paycheck.

99% of the information in the personnel file is stuff not used but once or twice a year that nobody has any legitimate business looking at.

Yes. Lets air-gap the email system. That would work well.

No, foo. It's called basic common sense -- keeping confidential medical records, SSNs, and personnel files in paper format only, and not allowing them to be scanned or placed in a system connected to the general business intranet, or "the cloud".

Which means the embedded device suddenly needs writable storage and routines for uploading said cert

Which is already needed to record configuration details such as hostname and IP address.

I don't need a certificate on my printer any more than I need auto-locking doors everywhere in my house.

Not using SSL for remote administration b/c you think SSL is weak is more like having an open doorway with no door installed, because you are concerned that intruders can just kick in the door.

Learn a little bit, you should notice most people do have locking doors outside their house, and they even have many privacy doors inside their house, many people have a deadbolt on their bedroom door as well, and these are useful home security mitigations when it comes to discouraging potential intruders and helping to protect homeowners.

You have to be horribly ignorant to trust that none of the CAs in your browser's or OS' key store have been compromised, or handed out to someone.

The primary purpose of SSL is to contend with passive sniffers. This is a much higher bar for the attacker. There are many potential attackers to whom gaining access to a compromised CA key or compromising DNSSEC is not even a possible option.

These are embedded devices.

You install the patch or firmware update from your appliance vendor to address the insecure transport security vulnerability (Failure to utilize secure protocols such as SSH or HTTPS over Telnet/HTTP for administrative connections; transmission of usernames and passwords in cleartext withotu encryption).

And Comcast has to be careful how it fights them or it can lad itself in trouble in ALL of it's other markets.

There is one simple way Comcast can fight them.... deliver a better service with better support at lower cost to the consumer, and do it in a way that makes the customers happier and more excited about their service than Tucows.

It does mean Comcast has to probably offer the 1 Gigabit or better service at a lower price than what Tucows is rolling out.

If Comcast uses any other method to fight them, then Comcast deserves to be more tightly regulated.

Of course if Comcast actually gets competitive and causes Tucows to fail fair and square, then once there is no effective competition once again, Comcast could raise their prices or take other new actions as a result of becoming a monopoly ---- in that case, I would expect the regulators to tighten their reigns heavily and create a cap on Comcasts' revenue and requirements similar to the Telco regulations requiring the phone companies to build-out and service all customers (no cherrypicking high-revenue customers; no excluding the "Top or Bottom 2% of users" who have been deemed unprofitable customers).

What is more, these cabbies should have their licenses threatened. A cab license is not a right.

Yes.... being a taxi gives you no right to obstruct usage of the roadways.

They should dispatch police to detain the offenders, and tow trucks to seize all the vehicles involved and impound them for at least 15 days.

Furthermore, their taxi license and their driver's license should be suspended until they pay costs of towing, storage, and a $1000 fine.