Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
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).
(Disclaimer: I'm a member of Google's Android security team, but the above represents only my own opinions not an official statement. You can certainly believe that they're opinions I will be sharing/pushing internally, though.)
Sweet. Please consider taking this concept back to the team. On the unlock screen have three unlock codes: 1) The normal unlock code, 2) A "limited" unlock code that would allow access to a limited set of applications (and perhaps make the device look like it was mostly empty), 3) a "wipe" unlock code that wipes the device (or nukes the encryption key.) An additional "distress mode" unlock code could be useful as well - this mode would start audio and video streaming to some off-phone storage. The key feature is that these special modes are activated by entering an alternate unlock code (or pattern). That way if the officer (or adversary) is asking you for the code and entering it on your behalf, you would still be able to activate these features.
So, I imagine the 3rd party is like a big call center with a bunch of people in it. When you say the activation phrase, "OK TV" it connects your tv to somebody's terminal and they hear you say your commands "Channel 20, volume medium" and they push the remote control buttons on their terminal for you.
More likely the recognition software assigns a confidence score to its recognition. High levels of confidence for a command are just executed. Low levels of confidence are probably filed for human review - probably not in real time, but for later analysis to tune the software.
It should be illegal to spoof caller ID. It's fraud.
Fraud is already illegal. Perhaps we should enforce that.
A device that broadcast over sufficiently large range random flood of mouse clicks would be a very effective DoS tool in a corporate settings.
Or a device that broadcast a very specific non-random set of keystrokes. For example you could send the keystrokes to open up a command window followed by the keystrokes to download and execute malware. You could even send the keystrokes to type in the source code and compile the malware or a malware bootstrap process.
A special new "Add rule 'source,destination,timer'' packet is added, to be sent to a router. This causes the router to initiate a 3-way handshake with 'destination' to confirm that they requested the new rule, and if so, they add the rule to their table and set the expiration timer.
How would you prevent malicious use of the "do not send to the source/destination" packets?
And ya im pissed, i have had my debit card used 3 times in the last 2 years no don't tell me i should be using a CC i don't want to pay the extortion fees they charge not going to happen..
There are plenty of credit cards out there that have no annual fees. If you pay your bill on time and in full each month, you don't have to pay any interest or other kinds of fees. If you can't manage to remember to pay your bill on time, you can pre-pay your credit card. You might have other reasons to avoid the general advice of using credit cards over debit cards, but "extortion fees" isn't really a valid reason.
Am I being overly cynical and just imagining things?
No, you are just old.
The idea behind the "increase power" and "repeat as necessary" parts was that if you increase power *enough*, you'll end up with line-of-sight, even if you didn't have it to start with.
I am glad someone got the joke. I considered talking about two modes of operation ("line of sight mode" and "make line of sight mode") instead of error correction algorithms, but I thought the error correction thing was more subtle and humorous. I guess it was too subtle. I don't plan on quitting my day job.
Lasers require line of sight, which is obviously a problem.
Not if you have the right error correction algorithm. If packet transmitted successfully, send next packet; otherwise increase power and try again. Repeat as necessary.