Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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:Alternatives? (Score 1) 605

by Jaseoldboss (#36087352) Attached to: Microsoft Buying Skype for $8.5B
STUN helps clients behind a NAT discover how to talk to each other through UDP ports, eg when operating peer to peer. When you talk about the IP address of the PBX are you sure you aren't referring to a SIP Proxy?

I'm no expert but I've been having endless fun recently messing with Asterisk and it refused to talk to my SIP provider unless I gave it their proxy server's address.

Comment: Re:Microsoft will do this for you (Score 1) 609

by Jaseoldboss (#35142810) Attached to: An Open Letter To PC Makers: Ditch Bloatware, Now!
Not sure why you got downmodded but it's worth remembering that the Bing Toolbar was in the news recently as being responsible for sending detailed tracking data back to Microsoft. (google for Bing Sting).

I personally wouldn't let Bing or any other toolbar anywhere near my browser.

Comment: Re:ZoneAlarm still exists? (Score 2, Insightful) 216

by Jaseoldboss (#33647712) Attached to: ZoneAlarm Employs Scare Tactics Against Its Users
I came across a great illustration of why you need a good firewall that can be used to control outbound traffic the other day. I was installing CPUID and the installer tried to contact before it had even asked me whether I wanted the Ask toolbar installed or not.

Windows firewall would have just let that through but I was using the Sphinx Software firewall app that configures Windows Firewall so that you can use it to stop unauthorised outbound traffic.

Comment: Re:Less & less control (Score 1) 205

by Jaseoldboss (#33081146) Attached to: FTC Wants Browsers To Block Online Tracking
I'm afraid all of this is wrong. The option to block third party cookies was renamed

As for the anti-phishing filter, Firefox downloads an offline blacklist from Google whereas Internet Explorer checks sites online. Whilst doing this, IE sends 'Standard computer information' (read unique ID) as well as the address of the site to Microsoft. So pretty much the opposite of what you said unfortunatley.

Comment: Re:Not Correct (Score 1) 522

by Jaseoldboss (#31699194) Attached to: Microsoft Claims Google Chrome Steals Your Privacy
Only for very high volume sites, the rest are tracked in real time.

SmartScreen Filter is designed to help warn you about unsafe websites that are impersonating trusted websites (phishing) or contain threats to your computer. If you opt in to SmartScreen Filter, it first checks the address of the website you are visiting against a list of high traffic website addresses stored on your computer that are believed by Microsoft to be legitimate. Addresses that are not on the local list and the addresses of files you are downloading will be sent to Microsoft and checked against a frequently updated list of websites and downloads that have been reported to Microsoft as unsafe or suspicious. You may also choose to use SmartScreen Filter manually to verify individual sites with Microsoft. When you use SmartScreen Filter to check websites automatically or manually, the address of the website you are visiting will be sent to Microsoft, together with standard computer information and the SmartScreen Filter version number. To help protect your privacy, the information sent to Microsoft is encrypted.

Emphasis mine.
Source here

The perversity of nature is nowhere better demonstrated by the fact that, when exposed to the same atmosphere, bread becomes hard while crackers become soft.