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


Forgot your password?

+ - FAA-2014-0396: Only a 8 more days to comment.->

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: There's only 8 days left to comment on the FAA's proposed rule — (FAA 2014-0396) "The Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft" — also known as the "Retribution for we lost the Trappy Case Interpretation" — to prevent the FAA from implementing draconian regulations on owners, flyers, and operators of radio control aircraft.
Link to Original Source

+ - Energy Firms in Europe, US Hit by Cyberattack ->

Submitted by wiredmikey
wiredmikey writes: Symantec said on Monday that it has identified malware targeting industrial control systems which could sabotage electric grids, power generators and pipelines. Known as the "Dragonfly group" or 'Energetic Bear', the attackers are believed to have been in operation since at least 2011. Initially, its targets were in the defense and aviation industry in the United States and Canada. In early 2013, it shifted its focus to energy firms in the U.S. and Europe.

The attacks on the energy sector began with malware sent via phishing emails to targeted personnel. Symantec observed the spear phishing attempts hitting organizations in the form of PDF attachments between February 2013 and June 2013, mostly targeting the US and UK. They emails were disguised as messages about administration issues such as delivery problems or issues with an account.

Later on, the group added watering hole attacks into its repertoire by compromising websites likely to be visited by people working in the industry and redirecting them to sites hosting an exploit kit known as Lightsout. The Lightsout kit has been upgraded over time, and eventually became known as the Hello exploit kit.

The third phase of the campaign involved the Trojanizing of legitimate software bundles belonging to three different industrial control system (ICS) equipment manufacturers using malware detected as Backdoor.Oldrea (Havex), according to Symantec's report (PDF). "The Dragonfly group is technically adept and able to think strategically," the researchers noted. "Given the size of some of its targets, the group found a “soft underbelly” by compromising their suppliers, which are invariably smaller, less protected companies."

Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:What logic! (Score 1) 139

by FaxeTheCat (#47346481) Attached to: Norway Scraps Online Voting

Perhaps access to voting facilities was also a problem with their e-Voting trials. In order to cast a vote electronically; voters needed to receive a polling card.
The ability to receive the card through the mail on a timely basis and follow the instructions would be necessary to participate.

All voters in Norway receive a voting card in the mail, and I can assure you that the norwegian mail system is very reliable as well as the cards being sent out well in advance of the election.
Regarding the learning curve... Norwegians have been able to file the tax returns electronically for a number of years, and in 2012, approx 75 % of those who filed did it electronically. Also we have one of the worlds highest use of electronic banking (I have been physically to a bank exactly once during the last ten years, and my current bank does not even have such facilities. Everything is net based).

So basically, it is reasonable to assume that the results are as presented. Turnout is not due to lack of easy access to voting facilities.

Comment: Re:What logic! (Score 1) 139

by FaxeTheCat (#47336397) Attached to: Norway Scraps Online Voting

paper voters have no way of verifying that either, you are simply talking nonsense.

When I vote, I pick a list for the party I vote for, and put it (unmarked) into the ballot box where it is mixed with a significant number of other similar lists. There is no way to track exactly what piece of paper I put in that box. So my vote is anonymous.

by the way increased turnout is not at all the benefit, you not only do know nothing about the system, you fail to grasp what democracy is about. if turnout is a matter of comfort or marketing, democracy is worth a crap.

The aim of this test was to measure if there would be an increased turnout. By the design criterium, the test was no success. As I did not create the design cirteria for the test, I can hardly be blamed if the test used irrelevant criteria?

Comment: Re:What logic! (Score 1) 139

by FaxeTheCat (#47335913) Attached to: Norway Scraps Online Voting
Any system relies on a certain amount of trust, but a lot more people are involved in a paper ballot. The votes are counted locally, and all the numbers are available online. The paper ballots are kept in case there is a reason for a re.count.
That means to corrupt such a system an entity would need to control a significant number of people. That is a lot more difficult than to fix a centralized electronic system.

Comment: Re:What logic! (Score 3, Interesting) 139

by FaxeTheCat (#47335843) Attached to: Norway Scraps Online Voting
The goal of this test was to test technology and to check if easier access to voting would increase turnout.
If you test somethig for a specific purpose, then surely accepting the outcome cannot be a problem?

As for the reason for the low turnout, that is a mixed issue. At least we can now assume that access to voting facilities is not one of the problems. As for the country in question, a few reasons may be a generally high standard of living combined with no major fundamental differences between the political blocks. (I live in that country, and my family all vote.)

Comment: Re:What logic! (Score 2) 139

by FaxeTheCat (#47335601) Attached to: Norway Scraps Online Voting

From voting machines

There are no voting machines involved, as the online voting was done from the voters own PC. There is already systems in place in Norway to ensure user authentication (used for filign tax returns etc...), so any issue would be with the central systems. In its simplest form, it is a question of trust.

Comment: Re:What logic! (Score 3, Informative) 139

by FaxeTheCat (#47335551) Attached to: Norway Scraps Online Voting
The problem was that the overall turnout did not increase. So 38% of those who would have voted anyway chose to do it electronically. As developing and maintaining a complex system that is used every second year would be quite expensive, along with privacy issues etc., making it a little more convenent to vote is just not a good enough reason. At least not at this time.

"Your attitude determines your attitude." -- Zig Ziglar, self-improvement doofus