Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

+ - Oracle Releases Massive Security Update->

Submitted by wiredmikey
wiredmikey (1824622) writes "Oracle has pushed out a massive security update, including critical fixes for Java SE and the Oracle Sun Systems Products Suite. Overall, the update contains nearly 170 new security vulnerability fixes, including 36 for Oracle Fusion Middleware. Twenty-eight of these may be remotely exploitable without authentication and can possibly be exploited over a network without the need for a username and password."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Not new (Score 1) 145

by CBravo (#48683251) Attached to: Google and Apple Weaseling Out of "Do Not Track"
There could be a P2P-like-sharing of cookies from those sources. Got to watch out for special cases (login stuff or after viewing private content). You could swap out cookies after every page visit (given certain pages).

I am still wondering why my browser would care for cookies from those domains when being on a whole different site. Or limits their lifetimes better (sure google maps can set a cookie when visiting a website, but after closing the page it should be gone).

Comment: Re:"Unconventional research" is fine (Score 1) 139

by CBravo (#48665851) Attached to: Does Journal Peer Review Miss Best and Brightest?
Scientists are not free to follow hunches if they are, in effect, not payed for. Hunches are a hobby in the NL. The effect is that mindnumb people do science here. I was good at hunches.

Your argument about reliability has a place. One should know how reliable it is. But your conclusion that non-proven stuff has no place in the scientific process is invalid imo. Because the scientific process is limited to journals.

Suppose our science is that 'we want to find a place to shop'. Some scientist went out some day and saw on the outskirts of a city, a shop. He now reports on that in a journal but it get rejected. Because he did not prove you could buy something there. For real people it would be silly. But for scientists with their peer reviewed journals it is fine; I would call this both scientific and requiring more research.

I will admit that it would not be easy to do, practically, with the scientific method (using journals) we are using today.

BTW There is another very good reason why creativity is not very high in science: Because it is not taught. The first 4 years of your education you only teach to reproduce (and get up to current knowledge). In that you follow what others have discovered in the past. But you are not taught how to discover the next book. Creativity is very different from learning standard stuff and can be taught (but it also needs time to get better).

Comment: Re:"Unconventional research" is fine (Score 1) 139

by CBravo (#48658443) Attached to: Does Journal Peer Review Miss Best and Brightest?
I disagree.

Your opinion here, because you did not provide proof, should be taken with a few grains of salt. People do all sorts of things that are perfectly valid without proof. Science is not only the stuff that can be proven without a doubt (philosophy as an extreme). How would science ever have evolved without mediocre proof that were later confirmed with strong proof?

Now don't get me wrong. I like proof because it often gives insight and might reject other plausible explanations, etc. And there should be way to describe to what degree a paper is formally proven (i.e. what the risks are when you follow the reasoning in the paper).

But in the evolving state of a field of science, there are 'well-confined' areas that should use more proof and 'new' areas that are hardly explored. Don't confuse the two (both have value). The later does not have definitions yet, does not have methods of describing a method, ... Do not require writing a book for such new areas.

Your kind of opinion got me out of science. Creativity has no place there at this moment in time.

Comment: Re:There is a reason for this! (Score 1) 317

by CBravo (#48562213) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Are Any Certifications Worth Going For?
We are a service provider and therefore create our own traffic and it is not extremely timing sensitive. We do monitor download times and they are always in acceptable limits (i.e. fast). The ports of our data centres are also monitored and spew out exactly our traffic numbers.

The load on our routers and the memory use is extremely low. They have been tested to see what happens under certain conditions. Vyatta takes a little memory per connection and we have seen a DDoS killing us because there was no more memory (when we had a low end machine do the work: Dell 1850, 2GB) and we upgraded the machine at that point to rediculous standards. But I will say that there certainly is a place for specialized equipment.

"Don't think; let the machine do it for you!" -- E. C. Berkeley

Working...