Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:If you regulate properly, we'll stop our busine (Score 1) 286

Sounds like a serious threat. Better cave.

It sounds to me like the CEOs have been eating their Wheaties and reading up on their Ayn Rand... Seriously, though, I love how the letter makes it sound like all the brouhaha is coming from a "concerted publicity campaign by some advocacy groups". I just looked at the FCC's public docket for response to Wheeler's previous proposal, and there are at least 10,000 responses. Even my state of Tennessee, not necessarily the most friendly to to Federal regulation, had 500 comments. I looked at a random sampling from TN, and couldn't find one posting with any particular love for the current regime of large ISPs. Words like "oligarchy" and "monopoly" were quite common.

Comment: Re:errr that's Unpatched not Unpatchable (Score 1) 120

by Likes Microsoft (#46305267) Attached to: Drive-by Android Malware Exploits Unpatchable Vulnerability
I find this disturbing. I'm a latecomer to the Android phenomenon. As it turns out, I bought my daughter a Pantech Marauder phone (http://www.pantechusa.com/phones/marauder) in late 2012, which runs 4.1-JellyBean, and my sons just received Kurio 7 tablets for Christmas (4.0-IceCreamSandwich). Both devices are unlikely ever to get an official update to 4.2+. As far as I can tell, the patch in Android 4.2 is described here: https://developer.android.com/...

"WebView.addJavascriptInterface requires explicit annotations on methods for them to be accessible from Javascript"

Google appears to have treated this as an API issue. I.e., "the API up to 4.1 was insecure. We now will require method annotations going forward for the JS to execute them." I could care less if backporting this change to earlier versions broke a bunch of apps. It's an easy enough change for those apps to go and insert the explicit annotations. I think Google has made a conscious choice here to not cause apps to break in the name of security, so that their platform can appear to be "more stable".

+ - Self-Hosted E-mail Alternatives 1

Submitted by Likes Microsoft
Likes Microsoft (662147) writes "It seems likely that the NSA's PRISM program is an extension of previously known efforts to tap and record large portions of information-rich internet traffic. Namely, as discussed in Security Now #408, the NSA is probably tapping internet traffic close to where it goes in and out of the likes of Google, Microsoft and Yahoo, as well as large ISP's. Most SMTP e-mail traffic is unencrypted in any way, and I don't like the idea that even without a warrant, the government can be snooping my communications in a catch-all dragnet.

I read the Slashdot discussion, Ask Slashdot: Self-Hosted Gmail Alternatives. However, I am mainly interested in getting my e-mail traffic away from the fat pipes that the NSA is most likely to be drinking from. I would be willing to consider a high-quality, low-traffic webmail service that might sidestep at least some of the surveillance. Of course, since I subscribe to one of those large ISP's (Comcast), and don't have much other choice in my location, I would need to be able to connect using well-secured SSL in the browser or with POP/IMAP."

Comment: Re:Fakery (Score 1) 248

by Likes Microsoft (#43405999) Attached to: Fake Academic Journals Are a Very Real Problem
In fact, at least when it comes to the web presence of anything to purports to be a journal, one Web of Trust site would already be up to the task, with browser plugins available. Users just need to crank down the "Trustworthiness" know on any flim-flam journal site they come across. One just needs to hope that hordes of creationists and climate-change deniers don't then start gaming this for their own agendas.

Comment: Technology is not just computers/software (Score 2) 71

I've looked over the comments on this thread with frustration, seeing that the conversation swiftly derailed into being *just* about Crypto. The MCTL covers all areas of technology that may be deemed militarily critical. It is not really possible to find a publicly hosted .gov or .mil site that gives much info any more, but this university page stills shows the 20 areas covered: http://www.wright.edu/rsp/Security/T1threat/Mctl.htm , including things like space systems and nuclear technologies.

Comment: Re:Not very long term (Score 2) 61

by Likes Microsoft (#42671847) Attached to: LTSI Linux Kernel 3.4 Released

Ubuntu's current practice is a 5 year term for LTS. Microsoft's 10 years leads to supporting pretty ancient stuff (in Internet time, anyway). They were forced to extend XP support all the way to 13 years since Vista and Windows 7 can't run reasonably on a lot of the hardware that XP was happy on.

For the previous decade, I personally think 5-8 years somewhere is a good LTS term for operating systems and kernels.

Now that CPU's aren't really getting faster, just more cores and energy efficiency, perhaps 10-20 years may again be reasonable.

The first time, it's a KLUDGE! The second, a trick. Later, it's a well-established technique! -- Mike Broido, Intermetrics

Working...