Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:Hooray! (Score 0) 774

I read that. It was interesting. However it's definitely the exception rather than the rule.

Things like Truecrypt are fine and "secure" in isolation, but it's very difficult to clear up all the crap that the operating system leaves behind. Windows is especially bad, but nothing I've seen is immune from it. Typically there's enough evidence left in unencrypted temporary files, or in unallocated space that the content of the encrypted volume doesn't really need to be considered. Of course there are exceptions, but I've never been so troubled by encryption that the job has to be abandoned. Even if an IIoC suspect has fully encrypted a drive (Truecrypt WDE, say) there's usually a few CD/DVDs of images lying around for easy access.

As with most aspects of computer security, people are the weak link.

Comment Re:Hooray! (Score 0) 774

So you believe all computer forensics done by law enforcement is done in a "perfect" manner and is 100% reliable and interpeted and presented by said law enforcement 100% accurately?

No. That's not what I wrote.

I fully agree that the system surrounding computer forensics needs some fixing. High-Tech Crime units are typically understaffed and overworked. Members of the legal profession generally have no understanding of the technical issues (although mostly, in my experience, due to lack of interest rather than lack of intelligence), and jury members can be even worse. I'm just sick of the knee-jerk comments that always appear on posts like this which assume that all computer forensics work is done by corrupt idiots. More than half of the members of my local HTCU have Masters degrees in computer forensics and the rest have more than enough "real world" experience to match.

Comment Hooray! (Score 0) 774

Oh great! Another forensics-bashing thread. I predict a well-informed and reasoned discussion of the issues facing law enforcement computer forensics in the UK. No, actually I think a whole load of uninformed rubbish about Truecrypt and forensics folk being completely lost when faced with anything but a Windows box with a directory labelled "CP is here" is far more likely. I wonder how many of Happy as a Monkey's commentard stereotypes will appear.

Comment Re:Bill Gates (Score 1, Insightful) 737

Bill Gates is a philanthropist? Puhleese! That man is merely trying to buy his way into heaven after all the evil he has done

I'm by no means a fan of his business practices, but evil? Puhleese!

I understand that if anyone can give away billions of dollars and barely miss it, it's Bill Gates, but what would you rather he did with it? Stick it under his mattress?

The huge sums of money he's acquired are never going to be taken from him. The fact that he got it through an illegal computer software monopoly is mostly irrelevant at this point. The money is his now. And so what if he's "trying to buy his way into heaven"? I don't believe in Heaven, but if he can improve Earth by putting a few billion dollars into vaccine research why should I try to stop him?

Math

Man Uses Drake Equation To Explain Girlfriend Woes 538

artemis67 writes "A man studying in London has taken a mathematical equation that predicts the possibility of alien life in the universe to explain why he can't find a girlfriend. Peter Backus, a native of Seattle and PhD candidate and Teaching Fellow in the Department of Economics at the University of Warwick, near London, in his paper, 'Why I don't have a girlfriend: An application of the Drake Equation to love in the UK,' used math to estimate the number of potential girlfriends in the UK. In describing the paper on the university Web site he wrote 'the results are not encouraging. The probability of finding love in the UK is only about 100 times better than the probability of finding intelligent life in our galaxy.'"

Comment Confirms the spam is being read by someone (Score 0, Redundant) 481

I've no data on the subject so take with a pinch of salt, but I remember being told a few years ago that responding in any way (even opting out) just confirms that the spam is not only being delivered, but being read, and that this may just lead to more spam being sent to your address. As I said, I don't know how true it is, but it makes sense to me.
Wireless Networking

Submission + - Wi-Fi - Health Risk?

Ynot_82 writes: Yesterday, the UK Panorama programme ran a section on Wi-Fi and recent health concerns.
With some schools reportedly removing their Wi-Fi networks amid the concerns, many are calling for a detailed investigation into the safety of Wi-Fi Networks.Is this overkill, or are there real concerns here? Scientists are divided on the issue, and in the mean time, IT in the education sector looks to be taking the cautionary route.

The goal of science is to build better mousetraps. The goal of nature is to build better mice.

Working...