Similar to sibling, I have previously worked for a defense contractor, subject to similar regulations... and among my duties, I was the primary sysadmin on the email MTAs (both the company and the DoD/DLA-owned ones).

If I would have merely seen someone in the company do what the Clintons did, and had not reported it? I would have immediately lost my IT-1 clearance, gotten fired on the spot, my employer would have probably been kicked off the contract, then we'd both be blacklisted from any further DoD consideration.

If I had done it myself? Getting fired would have been the least of my worries.

Err, in order for an SSH brute force vuln to work against a Mac, sshd has to be on (it's not - you need to go to System Preferences -> Sharing, enable Remote Login, and then include the specific users in "Allow Access For..." )

Well, that and get them to configure and launch sshd... it's off by default on OSX.

Bullshit - mopeds full of backup tapes is the new standard for that size range now.

I believe it was a joke...

Funny-but-true: A buddy I work with tried that on a developer's MacBook Pro today. He wound up munging /etc/sudoers instead. Now they're currently trying to figure down how to get a live distro running that can mount Mac filesystems so they can fix that. It's kind of hilarious from my POV..

Overall, if you already have physical access to the box, it's game-over anyway, and given the astronomically tiny percentage of Macs running OSX 10.10, that has sshd running, and happens to be on a publicly accessible network (either public wifi or a public IP addy)? Prolly not a really big concern...

No, Bart Sibrel is just a generally offensive cock-bag. Decking his ass is reflexive and as natural as breathing.

Fuck sakes, he was most likely referring to threads.h , which is the std. C++ library for multithreading.

Strangely enough, that's why I voted "Don't care" - mostly because I can't scrape up any sympathy for the hackers, the site, or its customers... they can all die in a fire for all I care.

Man, this misanthropy really does creep up with age... scary part is, I kinda enjoy it.

I'm just hoping the NSA doesn't get any ideas.

It does lead to a question, though - could someone in North Korea (with a sufficient level of ability) remove or obfuscate those, or is the source code even available to the typical user in NoKo?

If you cannot bring yourself to keep your dick in your pants and it didn't involve your being raped, you have no one to blame but yourself. Like I said, it's not that hard to do for someone with a sufficient level of emotional maturity.

If you want to have sex outside of a relationship so bad, then at least be man enough to either say as much to your S/O directly, and/or end the relationship first.

This isn't one of those gray-area fuzzy moral issues where circumstances could excuse the actions... it's a very simple task: Remain faithful to the person you made the commitment to, or don't enter into a commitment until you are capable.

The reasons why folks marry have changed over time, but until recently, the basic principles of it has not (even if people routinely violate said principles.)

Yes, I'm fully aware of "open" marriages - few of them last very long, at least judging from folks in my social circles. Then again, why would they be embarrassed by the revelation of their names on such a website? Are you saying that even a quorum (let alone a majority) of the folks on that site practice such relationships? If so, the revelation of their names shouldn't be a problem (though actively seeking to hook up with folks from non-open marriages is rather questionable). I'm more than willing to wager that the vast majority of the users are keeping up a façade at home while cruising for some strange on the website.

Sleep with dogs, wake up with fleas. There are most likely websites out there for folks in open marriages to meet up and do whatever they please... can't really bring myself to feel sorry for 'em.

There is no puritanism here, merely a respect for marital trust, and the unwillingness to violate it.

Marriage isn't a mere contract that you can seek out loopholes for, or something you do just so that you can have sex-on-demand. It's a commitment; a sacred trust between two individuals who become as one in spirit. You do this for life, and bind your lives and fortunes together.

Many things are negotiable in this world, even in marriage - but remaining faithful to someone you are married to is not something you can (or should ever) negotiate over. If you haven't the maturity to understand that, then don't get married.

The question isn't how you feel, but the level of commitment you made. If you married someone, you have made it known to one and all that you love that person (outside of countries where contractual marriage is still a thing, anyway). This carries a certain level of responsibility - unless both partners know up-front that the marriage is "open", then avoiding adultery at all costs is automatically and universally assumed to be one of those responsibilities.