Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Krebs (Score 1) 224

He reported it AFTER exploring it en mass, and while his motives *may* have been pure... the degree he went to can and were used to harm him.

Contrary to what was reported from many sources, he DID go to them first, before publishing the exploit. The fault for not fixing it immediately rests on them, not him.

What he did was normal curiosity. Hell, I've done it. In fact I don't know of any web or security professionals who haven't. Got an ID in the URL? Increment it by one, see what happens. We all do it.

Granted, we don't normally explore it to the degree he did. But what he did was ridiculously simple, and hardly even deserves the term "hacking" at all. What THEY did was akin to leaving the back gate open and putting out a sign that says "Come on in!", then complaining about it when someone did.

Anyway, I'll repeat what I said about my own experience: I didn't need to go "fishing" for information in that case. It was being sent TO ME, just in a non-obvious way. I stumbled across it, I didn't go looking for it or trying to exploit it. I sure could have, though.

Comment: Re:Photos being separated (Score 1) 136

by Jane Q. Public (#49168013) Attached to: Google+ Divided Into Photos and Streams, With New Boss

Now if you seem to be insulted by my saying thing, think how the Google+ users feel insulted by what you say.

Why should I be insulted? You do as you please. I don't particularly care one way or the other.

Also, why should anybody else be insulted just because I don't want to use Google+??? I mean, I didn't even say why. I just didn't want to.

Comment: Re:*sighs* (Score 1) 140

by Jane Q. Public (#49167987) Attached to: AVG Announces Invisibility Glasses

The point of the emitters is not block IR but screw up the camera's exposure.

The point of my comment was that with IR cameras, that's probably not necessary.

If you had large, flat, regular glass lenses, IR cameras would not see your facial features behind them.

But if it's about screwing up regular cameras with IR (because most digital cameras are sensitive to IR to some degree), that's a different matter. But the idea still has problems because most "regular" digital cameras have IR filters on them anyway, for precisely the reason that IR screws up exposure. So I still don't see the point.

Comment: Re:*sighs* (Score 1) 140

by Jane Q. Public (#49167951) Attached to: AVG Announces Invisibility Glasses

How would you imagine than an IR emitter would block IR, in any case? The emitters are there to dazzle IR-sensitive cameras.

You missed my point.

I simply meant that large glass lenses -- even those clear to visible light -- will serve to hide any facial features behind them to IR. It probably wouldn't stop recognition of a face, but it would probably be sufficient to obscure your face.

I noticed in the pictures given as illustration, that was not true. Eyes were clearly visible behind the lenses. So either the lenses are not normal glass, or those pictures weren't actually involving much in the infrared spectrum.

Comment: Re:Photos being separated (Score 1) 136

by Jane Q. Public (#49166711) Attached to: Google+ Divided Into Photos and Streams, With New Boss

It would be nice to be able to comment on YouTube videos (even reply/respond to comments on my OWN videos), but I refuse to switch to G+ and give them that info.

Exactly. I didn't use Google+. I didn't WANT to use Google+. When Google tried to force everyone to use one identity (which didn't work, by the way), my response was simply to stop commenting on YouTube, and stop using Google+ altogether.

There is one person -- and only one -- who now occasionally chats with me via Google Hangouts, and I'm trying to quash that use as well.

All in all, it was a dick move on Google's part, and it drove users away in, well, droves. Have you notices how FEW comments there are on YouTube now, compared to before that switch?

I have been slowly but surely divorcing myself from Google's services. Now, they want to be the judge of how "factual" web pages are, based on dubious methodology. No thanks.

So it looks like Google Search will be the next to go.

Comment: Re:It should stand two degrees, for sure! (Score 1) 249

by meerling (#49162101) Attached to: 20-Year-Old Military Weather Satellite Explodes In Orbit
Some gear has something called a chemical battery.
A chemical battery is a one use short duration power supply.
I've never heard of one being used in a satellite, but the military doesn't give out specs on their satellites, which conceivably might have a need for such a resource.

Comment: Re:Krebs (Score 1) 224

Nobody took computer security seriously back in 2001. Things have changed a lot since then.

I have to agree with you in general, but banks should have been concerned about it. Online banking was a fairly new thing, but even then, I am pretty sure this mistake violated Federal regulations.

Comment: Re:Poor choice of example (Score 1) 340

by Jane Q. Public (#49161973) Attached to: We Stopped At Two Nuclear Bombs; We Can Stop At Two Degrees.

Wrong. You are the one trying to rewrite history. Japan did NOT want a war with the USA, instead believing that U.S. people had little resolve for war, and that knocking out Perl Harbor would remove U.S. presence and influence from South Pacific, so Japan could continue its colonization plan in Asia.

I have to agree with HornWumpus. Maybe it's a matter of terminology, but their expectation that America would itself not want to engage in war, is not the same as not wanting to go to war with America. Pearl Harbor was an act of war. You seem to be denying that.

But I'm willing to chalk it up to misunderstanding.

Comment: Re:Rocketboard (Score 1) 162

by Jane Q. Public (#49161959) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Whiteboard Substitutes For Distributed Teams?

In my own (quite extensive) experience working in distributed teams, you're almost never going to find the entire team using OS X; it's a near certainty that all OSs will be represented, so a single-platform solution is a non-starter, no matter how good it may be.

I don't know that I'd agree with "almost never". In my own experience, also extensive, and also distributed, most of the people I have had need to use a whiteboard with were already using OS X. It has a disproportionate presence among developers, although Apple lately seems less willing to support its developer base.

At the same time, I won't pretend that my own experience represents the typical situation. I'm not going to claim it's everybody's thing. Which is why I wrote "IF you're on OS X..."

Comment: Re:stop the pseudo-scientific bullshit (Score 1) 87

by Jane Q. Public (#49161927) Attached to: Mysterious Siberian Crater Is Just One of Many

Your glibly dismissive attitude overlooks so much, but instead of answering the points you play affronted, thereby not answering the points raised. You know damn well you were wrongly dismissive.

You didn't MAKE any points. Instead, you argued with something I didn't say. I merely stated that it USUALLY doesn't work that way, and explained why. My description was accurate. I didn't say it was impossible. But you glibly assumed that it was LIKELY. It was not.

End of discussion.

Comment: Re:Krebs (Score 1) 224

Notorious troll Weev" did the above (although he went to the media FIRST apparently) and included the exposed data, and as a result was sentenced to 41 months in federal prison and $73,000 in restitution. The EFF and many others condemned the prosecution.

Very different situation. This leak was TO computers, and didn't involve going to "unauthorized" addresses. The information was right there on your local machine if you knew where to look. No remote exploration necessary. I would rather not discuss the details but if you knew them I am sure you would agree that it was alarmingly stupid.

Agreed, though, that Weev was railroaded. He did nothing wrong except to piss off powerful people. It was (is) a travesty of justice. Same with Aaron Swartz.

Have you reconsidered a computer career?