No, he would not have been able to use the victim's internet as source address. The internet gateway/NAT should not forward to/from Interent anythign that is not on the VPN 'network'.
Consider the Wifi network as "open" and use it only to connect VPN nodes (such as OpenVPN, for example.) This does require that you use a PC as the Internet gateway/NAT/VPN server.
Unfortunately for Google E-books, Kobo has already released the Touch. It took the compnay 3 tries, but they finally got it right. You can tap the side of the page to turn page (Sony requires a swipe if you use the touch screen, which does becomes tiresome by comparison.)
You probably won't see it on display models, (unfortunately), but with the new firmware update, it also allows you to install your own fonts, (as well as a built in selectoin of 5), as well as the ability to adjust page margins and line height to your comfort. And it sells for less.... so yeah, this device is too little too late.
By no means would I ever encourage anyone put up with DRM. However, for those interested, it's worth knowing that Adobe Digital editions works great on Linux via Wine, (and as a bonus, De-DRM tools are able to extract the key it uses to fix the DRM)
No, not a dose likely to cause cancer. A dose that has a measurable effect on increasing your lifelong chances of getting cancer. The base chance of a random person, with no extra-ordinary risk factors, getting cancer is somewhere around 46%. It's assumed that any exposure to radiation increases this, but with radiation doses less than 100mSv, the increase chance of getting cancer is so small it can't be measured/detected. (and I'm pretty sure, though don't remember exactly, that the first level of increased cancer detection is less than 1% increase.) I'm sorry for the vague numbers, I'm quoting from memory and not looking them up for exact figures. But the take away is that being exposed to 100 mSv radiation is not good, but does not mean it's likely you'll suddenly get cancer from it.
When it comes to radiation and chance of getting cancer, all doses are cumulative. Being exposed to 100mSv once by itself doesn't do much, but add that to all your chest x-rays, high altitude flights, bananas, etc will eventually lead to an increase chance of cancer.
That challenge doesn't even try to prove anything. I don't want to perpetuate the myth that you need anything fancier than a single pass of 0's to wipe modern drive's before disposing on e-bay, but any theory about recovery data from a wiped drive, real or paranoid, involves removing the platter to scan it directly. The so called challenge was to recover data without dismantling the drive, so it was a dead end to begin with.
By scanning the surface of the platter with specialized equipment, it's possible to detect residual magnetization 'around' the area written by the drive head and determine where there used to be a bit. Actually using this technique to recover anything outside of a laboratory experiment (where the drive was only written to and erased with 0's once) is a myth, however. No one does this, not even CTU.
If the image can't be re-encoded or re-scaled without the watermark becoming visible, then it probably can't be resized for viewing either. So the only images can can really make use of this 'tech' are the ones that are already shrunk to their smallest desirable viewing size. I'm not sure how much use this will really have.
I thought the whole point of the patent system was that the Inventions became public knowledge, such that inventors (and researchers) *could* in fact, learn from them and improve on them.
Of course, if a researcher did make a breakthrough, actually bringing a product to market would require co-operation with the original patent holder for licensing / cross-licensing, but that is not a barrier to research.
That is Microsoft's new definition of zero day. Traditionally, Zero day exploit means that the software maintainer/creator did not know about the flaw until after an exploit is in the wild. However, according to the summary, this flaw was publicly announced at a security conference December 15. So in Microsoft speach, Zero-day now means an exploit to a known flaw they never bothered to patch.
How long does a year last in your world?
I tried to create a website that had to present some 480p videos. I encoded them to Ogg Theora, and figured I could forgo Internet explorer compatibility by encouraging visitors to use either Firefox or Chrome. Unfortunately, for all the noise Firefox makes about supporting open standard, their insistence on implementing their own video support rather than relying on Underlying os ability is completely messed up. Every platform I tested on exposed different bugs in Firefox that prevented the site from working. On Windows, some of the videos would freeze on first frame. On Ubuntu Karmic version of firefox, (3.5) the videos played well, but was unable to control position, (no forward or backwards seeking, even when buffering was full.). On Ubuntu Lucid, the videos would stutter and even while paused, made Firefox slow to respond to window scrolling. In the end, if I wanted to use HTML5 video, the only browser currently working well is Google Chrome. If I instead decided to use the de-facto x264 standard, I increase my browser compatibility across the board (except for Firefox.)... So yes, while I know video is only a small part of the changes, using the new specs is far premature.
Looks like national cyber security is about to get a much higher priority than copyright protection.
Probably too late for Ubuntu 10.10, but I would expect these to be included with 11.04
"Here's something to think about: How come you never see a headline like `Psychic Wins Lottery.'" -- Comedian Jay Leno
