If you ask the drive to read out the whole flash.
The maybe the firmware would have to go to the platter to get the real image.

Or the malware could regenerate the un-attacked version.

For instance: If it's a patch that loads into an otherwise cleared-to-known-vallue region it can detect that region while reporting flash content and report the cleared value, instead. Add a couple other tiny regions where it saved (or alread knew) the previous contents where it "sank it's hooks" and you can't tell it's there from its replies to dump requests.

JTAG seems safer.

Yep. JTAG, in principle, could be corrupted. But it would require substantial hardware support that almost certainly isn't there (yet!)

Which is why I always laugh my ass off at all these people who use PGP to sign things and put a hash on the same website you download it from ... look you can verify this file you downloaded from the website hasn't changed because theres no way anyone would be smart enough to update the hash as well!

That's why you SIGN the hash. Then only the public key needs to be published by a different route.

And it doesn't HURT to publish it on the web site as well: Then someone tampering by substituting a different public key sets off alarm bells when that differs from the public key obtained from another site or by another path. Blocking that makes man-in-the-middle more complex: The attacker has to have essentially total control of the path to the victim and be able to recognize and substitute the public key whenever it shows up. One slip-up and somebody may raise the alarm.

Meanwhile: Even if publishing hashes on the same site may not provide additional security against MITM, it DOES let you check the download wasnt corrupted in transit (in ways other than malicious substitution). With modern protocols that's less of a problem these days than it used to be, but a check would be comforting.

... blue and brown. Just now, I opened the Washington Post link on my 24" screen in a sunlit room, and it was clearly white and gold.

Though the sensations are vastly different, brown is really dark yellow. The underlying color of that part of this dress seems to be very near the perceptual boundary (probably just on the yellow side of it). This picture seems to have the dress in a non-obvious shadow, so when it is viewed by someone whose visual system doesn't adequately pick up the shadowing and compensate, it crosses the boundary and appears light brown rather than dark yellow.

Another perceptual oddity is that a very slight bluish tinge to white makes it appear "whiter than white", especially in sunlight or other strong lighting. (I suspect this works by mimicing the differential response of the various color sensors in the eye when exposed to very bright light, though blue may also "cancel out" a bit of the yellowing of aging cloth.) Laundry products up through the 1950s or so included "bluing", a mild blue dye for producing the effect. (It fell out of use when it was replaced by a fluorescent dye that reradated energy from ultraviolet as blue, making the cloth literally "brighter than white" {where "white" is defined as diffuse reflection of 100% of the incoming light}, and which, if mixed with detergent products, would stick to the cloth while the surficant was rinsed away.) I suspect some of the "blueish is brighter" effect is going on here.

When I view the picture straight-on on my LCD display, the light cloth on the upper part of the dress appears about white and the image appears somewhat washed out. Meanwhile the lower half has a bluish tinge. So I suspect the cloth is actually nearly-white with a bit of blue. (Viewed off-axis it's very blue, but the other colors are over-saturated and/or otherwise visibly off-color. So off-axis viewing makes it look more blue and this probably adds to the controversy.)

Another color-perception issue is "teal", a color between blue and green. There are paint formulations of this color that give the sensation of "distinctly blue with a greenish tinge" to some people and "distinctly green with a bluish tinge" to others, even under the same lighting and viewed from the same angle. (I'm in the "slightly-bluish-green" camp.)

The first place I encountered this was on the guitar of the filksinger Clif Flint. (On which he played _Unreality Warp_: "... I'm being followed by maroon shadows ..." B-) ) Apparently his fans occasionally had arguments about whether his guitar was blue or green, so he sometimes headed this off (or started it off on a more friendly levl) by commenting on the effect.

Perhaps they should be asking for a ".google" gTLD, for that purpose, instead of trying to monopolize a generic identifier.

I was about to suggest the same, but with ".goog", to make it shorter. (Can't think of a less-than-three-letter symbol that points to them as strongly.)

(It's also their stock ticker symbol, so maybe it's not such a good idea - it could cause a land rush and litigation from all the other publicly traded companies.)

Lawmakers Seek Information On Funding For Climate Change Critics

Its simple to get right. You didn't, and still haven't.

And yet you still haven't successfully identified either the topic of the story or who the story is centered on. If you can't comprehend something that simple it's a safe bet that you don't have a meaningful understanding of the science of climate change, which leaves you in the cargo cult enthusiast category.

Maybe you should be planting trees, it would be more useful than your post, and it would keep you out of trouble.

So you are claiming that George Soros is a climate scientiest producing climate models and studies that dispute various aspects of climate change in addition to being a currency manipulator, business man, one of the richest men in the world, and a left wing activist and financier? That is fascinating. I don't suppose you have any documentation to back that up, do you?

"Nope" ??? "Nope"?? I would call that a failure of comprehension. You do realize that the US government funds a great deal of climate research, right? And who approves the funding?? Who is it that is demanding the information?

I'm glad you managed to work the "Koch brothers" in there. It shows you're "serious." (eyes rolling)

There are many catalysts for laughter, ignorance being one of them. I expect you are quite easily amused.

The idea of bread mold curing infections is probably going to keep you giggling for hours.

That might be insightful if it were true. Unforunately there are plenty of academics that are silenced by threats to their funding if they buck the (forced) "concensus". Witch hunts used to be concerned with brooms and cats, now they are concerned with models and views that don't conform.

It isn't the "scientific community" that is making this demand, it is the people that fund the "scientific community" producing the claims regarding global warming ^H^H "climate change." You know, the "global warming" ^H^H "climate change" studies that are used to justify calls for the government to seize all control of the economy and society to "prevent" "climate change." They want to protect their investment.

I wonder how much funding George Soros and his cronies have into this now?

That's odd. You posted in reply to me, but I see nothing in it that addresses me. You should exercise more care in posting.

Civil asset forture isn't related to any of that. Parallel construction isn't either.

As to "fantasyland," it's aways a pleasure to deal with the uninformed and mistaken.

That Time China's State Media Ran An Article About Nuclear Strikes Against Los Angeles

That's funny, in reading your post I didn't find a single shred of evidence that I'm wrong about that. Whereas you, on the other hand .....

That Time China's State Media Ran An Article About Nuclear Strikes Against Los Angeles

At the moment your courtesy and understanding seem to have converged. But perhaps there is hope. If you live another 50 years do you think you'll be able to process new facts that contradict your poorly founded beliefs?

I don't work for either the government or defense contractors, so that is another area you don't have right.

From the "Questions we'll never hear department": "Is she live, or paper tape?"*

* Homage to old Memorex ad.