With every major Nation in the world trying to glean intelligence from Tor, every major law enforcement agency trying to track down child porn and drugs, and several very high profile leaks involving highly classified information that have caused extreme harm to several western countries (the US not being the only one), and with several academic professors intrigued; does it not surprise us that the protocol of Tor (to include Bridges and Hidden Services) would be analyzed and profiled to the tiniest of details to determine areas of exploitation of the protocol?

The problem with this idea is that as TPB migrates to additional domains, it leaves open a few possibilities. First, sites opposed to TPB will create malicious sites to try and spoof TPD to collect data, spread malware, and otherwise degrade the services that TPB offers. Second, while rapid DNS techniques are well implemented in malware like botnets, it's not a capability that the average Joe can keep track of, so without some form of front end that can track and change with the rotating DNS entries, people will get frustrated and stop using the service. And this is exactly what the opposition wants. It's time that many of these types of technologies go through redesign again. And they must be redesigned from the protocol level. TPB succeeded where Napster didn't because the content being traded was not hosted with TPB. But they are still centrally located for the purpose of search and front end to the users. Anytime a bellybutton can be poked, it will be. So the protocol must be designed to prevent ANY centralized management. Next, any protection mechanisms (trust models, etc) that are built into the protocols used must be extremely well thought out. When analyzing for protocol weakness, rules matter. If only certain nodes are allowed to be "trusted" ,then you can better bet that those wishing to exploit it will design a node to be trusted. Protocols must also be non-differential at all levels, from the handshake of the SSL layer down to the initial HELO to the transmission characteristics of how it sends data. If the protocol can be differentiated, it can be blocked, tracked, hacked, or otherwise interfered with. Simply wrapping it in Tor isn't going to work. There are ample talks out there on how Tor traffic can be characterized and interfered with.

Um, no. Keep your filthy Microsoft hands off of my system. Security! Security! Security!

When are we going to do something about the price and make it more competitive to driving?

Minecraft Mods are an excellent way. My youngest latched onto those with no issues. Ironically, I tried to teach my 13 year old Apple's Swift language and he was totally uninterested, but mu youngest is latching right onto it, finding ways to modify our test game we're working on, and reciting back to me what objects, methods, and attributes are. I think he even understands inheritance and method overrides. He's got the tree structure of nodes in SKNodeKit down as well. And he's 9. And to think, the 13 year old was the one who expressed a desire to learn how to write games. To each his own...

Cash payments, while really nice for the drivers, would open them up to attack. In markets like DC. Uber drivers have to have clear signage indicating they are driving for Uber (see how many you can spot on the street corner sometime). But if they have this signage, there's nothing saying they can't be carjacked or mugged.

It somehow doesn't surprise me that Apple is still hosting the exploited CA cert. They released patches to a number of openssl (which OSX does use) that supposedly fix the high level vulnerabilities of late (Security Update 2015-3?) But at the same time, the version that's running is 1.0.1g ... and there have been several high level vulnerabilities such as the down channel exportable encryption bug that still haven't been addressed. Thinking Apple needs to step up their game!

While I like Apple just as much as any other Mac fan and have been known to be ding as a troll when commenting on Microsoft posts, I have to ask my self one good question about all the litigation between Apple and the world. When will this litigation cross the threshold of aggressiveness and open up Apple to review by regulators as acting in a monopolistic fashion? (dread the thought! I have zero desire to run Internet Explorer on my iPhone.)

So, does this mean that when this "smashed" asteroid's new trajectory causes it to hit another planet with sentient life that we will at fault? How does that law suit work?

That's what shotguns are for.

Mental note, no making out in a Hertz Rental car...

Clearly some lawyer has some teenaged kids he's looking to put through school. But food for thought here. Having just gotten into analysing the ECMs in my car and figuring out how to analyse the performance characteristics of my car, I appreciate the ability to figure out what's going on with the vehicle without paying $1000's to the mechanic. That being said, I have serious doubts that a public/private key cryptographic authentication mechanism on the vehicle ECM would be shared with the consumer that purchased said vehicle and would ultimately eliminate the ability of people to work on their vehicles.

So Some cell providers in the US provide "x" amount of GB's of data on a rate plan and when that data is used up, they turn off access to the Internet (blocking) and other providers will allow you to use "x" amount of data and then throttle back your remaining data (throttling) to dial up modem speeds (EVDO or less). Since these rules prohibit blocking and throttling, what will Net Neutrality do to cell phone plans?

Gemalto is also a major supplier of US Government Common Access Cards (CAC's).