I replied to another post, it has been known for years that it is easy to break that.
Surely that only applies if the data in the hidden volume was changed? What if you just put everything you wanted to be secure in the hidden container and never added more?
tools to exploit vulnerabilitys should only beavailable to licensed researchers. Stop handing over tools to the criminals and stupid teens. That is IMO
Fair enough, but it's not particularly achievable is it? How would you go about stopping people getting hold of the software or, heaven forbid, from writing their own?
There must be an asshole gene that natural selection has yet to make dormant.
It must be closely related to the 'have lots of money and power' gene.
That's a really bad analogy.
It is. It's more like the wet napkin has retained an imprint of the credit card and you have left the napkin behind on the bar. Someone then takes the napkin, hands it to you and says "you want to be careful with these wet napkins, look". You call the police because someone you don't know has your credit card details.
These muppets will end up having us licensed. There is no justification for scanning the internet for vulnerabilities on systems you have no authorization. It is not their job. They are NOT the internet police!
By the same token doesn't that call into question the legality of honey-pots to assess current attack trends? Surely that's entrapment? One day (I'm ever hopeful) people will realise that words on a piece of paper do not make things either right or wrong. Moral judgements trump laws every day all over the world, yet the persecution continues - I wonder why (well, I don't wonder; I know why, and so do you).
Software production is assumed to be a line function, but it is run like a staff function. -- Paul Licker
