Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Submission Summary: 0 pending, 4 declined, 2 accepted (6 total, 33.33% accepted)

Submission + - Ask Slashdot: Recommendations for Home Surveillance Systems?

Chewbacon writes: At the repeated recommendations of a friend and rise of theft in my area, I have been looking around for a home surveillance system. I have researched doing a DIY system with Zoneminder and POE cameras as I have a home server for backup and media storage that could get the job done, but that seems to be an expensive route compared to the packaged systems. Some of these packaged systems are linux based and would lead me to believe I could add my own touch to the configuration and add my own offsite redundancy. I at least need HD video, weather proof/very resistant cameras, infrared at night, and only about 4 cameras. We already have a monitored home security system, but I'm not interested in their products or increase in monitoring fees. What is the community's experience and recommendations for this?

Submission + - Xbox One Used Game Policy Leaks: Publishers Get a Cut of Sale->

Chewbacon writes: The policy explains how used game retailers can survive Xbox One destroying the used game market as we know it: they have to agree to their terms and conditions to do so. In summary, the used game retailer can still buy the game from the consumer, they report the consumer relinquishing their license to play the game to a Microsoft database, and sell it at a market price, but the publisher will get a cut of the price. This will undoubtedly only hurt the trade in value for consumers and will not allow the private sale of games between two consumers. The article goes on to explain Xbox One will phone home every 24 hours to verify a player hasn't sold the game according to the mentioned database. Suspicions among gamers are correct, and it should be no surprise: this plan for used games has nothing to do with countering piracy, but only serves corporate greed.
Link to Original Source

Submission + - Vudu Resets User Passwords After Burglary->

Chewbacon writes: If you can't hack it, smash and grab it. Video streaming service Vudu has emailed customers informing them of the theft of hard drives containing customer information. CNET reports the information on the stolen drives included: names, e-mail addresses, postal addresses, phone numbers, account activity, dates of birth, and the last four digits of some credit card numbers. Vudu's Chief Technology Officer Prasanna Ganesan said while no complete credit card numbers were stored on the hard drives and expressed confidence in password encryption, he felt the need to be proactive with the password reset and encouraged users to be proactive as well should the encrypted passwords become compromised. Vudu fails to mention, perhaps in a downplaying move, the last 4 digits of a credit card and much of the other information stolen is often enough to access an account through virtually any company's phone support.
Link to Original Source
Apple

Submission + - "Authentication chip" found in Apple's Lightning Cable->

Chewbacon writes: Looking for a third-party charger for your iPhone 5? AppleInsider says hold off on buying one. A tear-down of the Lightning cable, the new connector introduced with the iPhone 5, reveals an "authentication chip" which may render third-party cables useless. Many people buy these third-party cables to avoid the Apple premium, but Apple has decided to literally block the competition from charging their latest iDevice. How is this not an antitrust issue?
Link to Original Source
The Almighty Buck

Submission + - Can ISPs really police file sharing for the RIAA?

Chewbacon writes: I've read a number of stories about the RIAA going after ISPs for file sharing such as Limewire or torrent services. My provider was featured in a local newspaper for not threatening to turn over file sharers, but disabling their service and forcing customers to call their security department to have it restored and even as far as adding hefty fines to their bill. The first scenario happened to someone I worked with and he said, "Oh, we have Wi-Fi, it wasn't us." The ISP even told him what file was being downloaded. They lectured him on Wi-Fi security and how he's responsible for protecting his network from unauthorized access and illegal activity. I discussed this with someone I know working for the ISP and he backed up what his company told my colleague. When I explained Wi-Fi encryption standards are compromised all the time and how MAC addresses can be spoofed to circumvent filters, he said the company still has ground to punish their customers for file sharing even if the perpetrator is someone who compromises a customer's protected network. Are there any other ISPs doing this? Has anyone heard of this backfiring for providers or impacting the lives of innocent people?

6.023 x 10 to the 23rd power alligator pears = Avocado's number

Working...