Its perhaps misleading to say that NAT is security, but it undoubtedly provides security.

I can think of no technical reason that someone with access to dump the RAM would not get those registers; the RAM used in the CPU is much less volatile than normal DRAM (its called "static RAM" for a reason).

For example, lets say you manage to catch a VMWare vMotion. You have A) the RAM, B) the current CPU instructions, C) the CPU registers. Ditto with Fault Tolerance.

Lets say you ice the RAM and dump it. If you have access to do that, you could in theory do the same for the CPU; and since CPU memory decays like 1000x slower than DRAM, it would almost certainly be less corrupted than the RAM.

There WAS no 100% increase. The article misinterprets the graph, and the report that it references contradicts its analysis. IE rose from some ~130 vulns to some 140 vulns; thats not 100%, its like 5%.

Like Mugato, I feel like Im taking crazy pills here. Almost noone bothered to fact check the original report, but everyone has an opinion on it. Keep doing what you do, slashdot.

IE had fewer vulnerabilities last year than Chrome, or Firefox. This year it has more. Thats not a slam dunk, or an indication that IE is a dogs breakfast.

Ie has been substantially rewritten since the IE6 days, and is a sort-of-decent browser these days. These days its firefox thats the dogs breakfast; the only saving grace it has is its low userbase and its strong extension support that can plug some of the glaring holes (like its crappy 1-process architecture, its lack of sandboxing for anything, etc).

Have you considered reading the article before criticizing someone else's analysis of it?

Apparently not.

Firefox was "more vulnerable" in 2013, and actually for several years post IE9, I believe it was generally considered LESS secure than MSIE due to its lack of common protections (like reduced privlege, sandboxing, etc).

The real surprise here is that people on a tech site continue to use awful metrics for judging things ("works for me", "everyone else hates it, must be bad").

Neither can IE. It has a ~5-10% increase.

The summary is absolute garbage; it implies that the number of vulnerabilities is doubled (it isnt), that IE security is worse (but public exploits are reduced from last year, and mean time to patch is vastly reduced), and that its always been worse (last year, Chrome and Firefox had more exploits than IE).

Unsurprisingly, everyone here took the bait.

Encrypted RAM would be utterly worthless. The encryption key would have to be in RAM or in the CPU registers, so a RAM dump would get the data either way.

Not really.

SSD performance boosts are 95% due to the massively reduced seek times, which are on the order of 1000x faster than traditional platter latency. The throughput is higher too, but only on the order of 2x-3x.

Meanwhile, AES encryption is generally accelerated by AES-Ni so that a typical supporting processor can hit ~2000MB/s, which is easily 5x faster than your average SSD can output.

Linux is case sensitive, Windows is not, and you're using a third-party NTFS driver that may or may not contain bugs that allows it to write nonsense to disk.

Its not about being insensitive to them, any more than people are insensitive to the weather. At some point you realize that its a part of reality and its not going away. Nothing anyone can do short of a police state is going to stop people from being horrid on the internet for kicks.

Why do women assume that the comments they get need to be taken seriously? Why is one concern more valid than the other?

I dont view women that way either, but when someone posts a blog post saying that "Many men believe women have no worth in the games industry beyond appearance...", its pretty clear that thats meant to be aimed broadly at men. How am I supposed to respond to that?

If there is a problem with specific people, take it up with them. The complaint here seems to be "people on the internet are jerks". Congratulations on the detective work, let me know if you come up with a solution for it. Till then, please dont level accusations so broadly.

Have you seen the average chat where girls ARENT present? People being obnoxious jerks is par for course-- to include rape threats on you, your mom, and your sister, requests that you Die In A Fire, threats to kill you in various ways, threats to DDOS you, etc.

If you're getting upset by that and thinking its about you or your gender-- its not, and you have the blinders on if you think its about sexism.

The first paragraph is written in a way that sounds like its disqus or reddit comments to that effect. And while its crude and mean, this is the internet, and if you learn nothing else from it its that you really need to not take it personally. People are jackasses on the internet, it has nothing to do with the world being sexist and everything to do with the general level of scumminess of your average anonymous troll.

Addendum-- its also worth noting that those tests from phoronix are done on linux using ntfs-3g, which (IIRC) is a third-party userland driver competing with native kernel-mode drivers, so its not even a fair comparison. Do a benchmark of NTFS on the latest NT OS, compare to ZFS or EXT4, and I think you'll see that its a wash.