Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Timestamps (Score 1) 318

by Kuukai (#35962916) Attached to: Apple Updating iOS To Address Privacy Concerns
To reiterate: Yes this is more work, but apparently it takes more work to make a cache not be a log. If you indiscriminately recorded all information, that would be a gross breach of privacy, regardless of how inconvenient it would be for the programmers to do something else. This is an example of the same kind of thing. The information can be used to track a user. This has already happened. Apple is expected to avoid this, if possible. It's possible. Hence outrage. A few extra instructions in this process will not affect performance.

We're both asserting our points. You're doing so with provocative language and an attitude. Therefore I'm the troll.

Comment Re:Timestamps (Score 1) 318

by Kuukai (#35959878) Attached to: Apple Updating iOS To Address Privacy Concerns
Here's one way the timestamp could be helpful: "Hmm. I don't have any of the towers in range cached. I don't have any clue where I am. I better do two things: 1) Assemble a list of towers & hotspots in range, and query for their locations; 2) Look back at the most recent towers & hotspots in my cache, and assume I'm near them for the purposes of beginning map data retrieval." Cell network connections are high latency, and not always high speed. Minimizing the time required before you can start displaying usable information to the user is a feature, not a bug.

You don't need a timestamp for that. You can just number cache batches in the order they were fetched. You know, 1, 2, 3...

Than to sit there saying "Today is Wednesday the 27th of April. Find and purge all entries in the cache that were created before April 20th!", due to the existence of month boundaries, and the simple fact that extra calculation is required every time you do this - making for less efficient software.

It's a bit shift. Nothing is simpler than a single ARM instruction. If you do that you're working with more like 3/4 of a day, but that's good enough for our purposes here.

I'm sorry that you're confined to your home, but not all of us must - or wish to - operate under those constraints.

Stay classy.

Comment Re:Timestamps (Score 1) 318

by Kuukai (#35955584) Attached to: Apple Updating iOS To Address Privacy Concerns
What are you talking about? A lookup is triggered by a cache miss. Each location batch can be labeled by anything, it doesn't need to be the exact time. This information is useless for any part of the process besides dumping the cache because, like you said, users can travel all over the place in a short period of time. This makes the timestamp not a great heuristic of what batch you want, not that batch lookup would even affect performance in any perceivable way.

Comment Re:Timestamps (Score 1) 318

by Kuukai (#35953568) Attached to: Apple Updating iOS To Address Privacy Concerns
Your initial question was why they needed timestamps to at all. That question has been answered.

No it hasn't. If they're only retaining records for a week, then once again why do you still timestamps? Everything in the retention period should be "good" data now.

Comment Re:passwords? (Score 5, Informative) 645

by Kuukai (#35953234) Attached to: 77 Million Accounts Stolen From Playstation Network
- If you wanted to play any of the games online, you had to have a PSN account. Which meant you had to provide a credit card whether you were ever going to buy anything or not.

Wrong. This is not true at all. You can play games without ever providing a credit card. On the other hand, they do require your name, birthdate, and mailing address.

Comment Re:Timestamps (Score 1) 318

by Kuukai (#35953106) Attached to: Apple Updating iOS To Address Privacy Concerns
Ok, just pretending that's true, do you need the exact time a month ago? Can't there be a fade-out or something? Yes this is more work, but apparently it takes more work to make a cache not be a log. If you indiscriminately record all information, that would be a gross breach of privacy, regardless of how inconvenient it would be for the programmers to do something else. This is an example of the same kind of thing. The information can be used to track a user. That's something Apple is expected to avoid, if possible. It's possible. Hence outrage.

Comment Re:Care for facts? (Score 1) 373

by Kuukai (#35942596) Attached to: Steve Jobs: 'We Don't Track Anyone'
Wait, what? I'm not a cell expert but there are lots of red flags here. How does the iPhone get this information to begin with if not from an external database? Why can't a tower send this position information directly? Why do you need this information if it wasn't important enough to be part of modern cellphone protocol? Is it only used for localized services? If so why the hell do you want the file if you disable those? Isn't GPS going to make this worthless in most cases? Why does it need to be timestamped? What exactly does Android do and when?

Comment Re:Vandalized? (Score 5, Informative) 415

by Kuukai (#35221812) Attached to: Attacked By Anonymous, HBGary Pulls Out of RSA

HBGary is not in the business of preventing or withstanding attacks.

From their website title:

HBGary :: Detect. Diagnose. Respond.

Anonymous intruded on their network for several days without being detected, eventually just plain revealing themselves. Here's a totally-real testimonial on their front page from the esteemed research organization "Research Organization":

Greg Hoglund and the team at HBGary provide some of the most innovative products in cyberdefense. Our advantage in staying ahead of the evolving threat is HBGary's predictive knowledge of the entire malware culture and ecosystem. Their capability goes well beyond the usual, reactive response to individual exploits. We consider them one of our best partners.

Also from their front page:

HBGary, Inc., a leading provider of next-generation threat intelligence solutions for Fortune 500 and government organizations, announced Inoculator, a innovative, patent-pending enterprise agentless appliance solution designed to detect, remove, and, with its breakthrough Digital Antibody technology, PREVENT re-infection of known malware.

Anyone who hires them after this incident is an idiot who likes bright lights and noise. Amazon, a book store, was totally secure against Anonymous' attacks. There's no excuse for a security firm not to be.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Given the choice between accomplishing something and just lying around, I'd rather lie around. No contest." -- Eric Clapton

Close