Consider for example what happen to Wi-Fi. The IEEE has a fairly detailed patent policy, and the Wi-Fi standards have been very successful. But after millions of cards were sold, CSIRO came out of the blue and asserted a patent on indoor OFDM that they said covered Wi-Fi. The resulting lawsuits have costed millions.
The list of password that the worm tries is interesting. Apart from the obvious abc123 and the like, the worm tries "RavMonD" and "zhudongfangyu". Is that a clue? Some Chinese hommage to the bazar?
Pretty much every PC, server or even smart phone OS ships with dual stack. Enable IPv6 on your home gateway and poof, IPv6 in your PC lights up. AT the same time, your PC can keep using IPv4 for non IPv6 web sites, or for that old Ethernet enabled printer in the basement. It works pretty much as expected. Not having unique IPv4 addresses does not change anything to the question -- IPv4 goes through NAT, IPv6 goes direct.
They would go under the name of "internet governance" and argue against "US domination", but he dream of dictatures is clear. In addition to control what can be written within the borders of their countries, they would very much like to extend censorship world-wide.
And if it can creates a few more cosy positions for international bureaucrats, the UN will love it!
There are so many ways this suggestion is wrong, it is not even funny.
TFA says WPA2 negotiates unique encryption keys with every computer that connects to it. This means you and I cannot spy on one another's traffic even when sharing access on the same access point. That's true, but anyone who can listen to the exchange and know the shared key will be able to learn the key. Plus, there is a very neat man in the middle attack.
Suppose that I am an evil sheep herder near a Starbuck cafe. Nothing prevents me from broadcasting a Wi-Fi beacon that announces that I am running a Starbuck access point. Here comes the sheep, who is really happyto see that the connection is secure. Hey, he used WPA2 and the "free" password, his packets are encrypted. Except they are all coming to my laptop. Oops!
Encrypted files have maximum entropy, just like absolutely random files. Basically, you can't tell which one is which. However, absolute random noise on a disk isn't all that usual, so any encrypted file (or pure random file) will stand like a sore thumb: it will be highly visible. But, again, you can't tell the difference.
Absolutely correct. Any "investigator" who finds a pure random file will immediately suppose that it contains encrypted data. I mean, what else? Compressed files are not random, and there is no real good reason to store gobs of random data on a disk. OK, maybe you can come with a good reason, such as doing research on random numbers, but that will be highly suspicious.
On the other hand, it is possible to systematically add entropy to a file. One very simple way may be to consider the random bits as codes in a variable length alphabet, much like a Huffman code. You can then "decompress" the random file using the variable length code. Voila, a larger file with the desired entropy/redundancy. It will look like binary data, not encrypted data.
Instead, we get this implausible thumb drive scenario. And guess what, instead dof applying $0.02 of common sense, we will see a proposal to spend $2B on intelligence system upgrades and military contracts. Of course, senator, we have earmarked 20% of that for your state...
-- Loaurnkoz
So we have a few photographs and the conclusion that the ice loss is devastating--despite no investigation as to whether the photographs were taken during the same day of the year nor as to what the internal variability is. But still, the editors immediately jump to the ice loss is devastating....
Glaciers do not change much with the seasons. Ever heard of things moving "at glacier pace"? Normal movements are in inches. What we see on the photos are differences in miles. No way you can explain that by spring versus fall! This glacier did melt.
"A car is just a big purse on wheels." -- Johanna Reynolds