Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Guam is in the Maldives now? (Score 1) 175

by Scutter (#47406945) Attached to: US Arrests Son of Russian MP In Maldives For Hacking

I've seen two different stories. 1) He was arrested in Maldives and taken to Guam, and 2) He was arrested in Guam. In any case, there's obviously enough confusion about the story that we're not getting accurate information. Given that, if he were arrested in Maldives, it's certainly possible that it was with the help of the local police and just not being reported.

Comment: Re:Y2K (Score 1) 197

by Scutter (#47212783) Attached to: Latin America Exhausts IPv4 Addresses

This sounds like Y2K all over again...

What, that legitimate problem lots of people worked on successfully to avoid before it could have major consequences? Yeah, I agree.

Yeah, and after all that work to prepare, the rest of the world said "I don't know why you nerds made such a big deal out of this. Nothing happened!" It's enough to make you want to quit your job, cut the soles off your shoes, sit in a tree and learn to play the flute.

Comment: Not "obsolete" (Score 4, Insightful) 522

What does "obsolete" mean? If his writing instrument does what he needs it to do and he's happy using it, then more power to him. Who's to tell him he can't use it, or an IBM Selectric, or even a quill pen and vellum? Nothing is obsolete if it still works for your needs.

Comment: Re:Certificate extortion (Score 1) 60

by Scutter (#46960997) Attached to: One Month Later: 300,000 Servers Remain Vulnerable To Heartbleed

>If you have a site where an attacker would have bothered with the elaborate process of getting the private key, and then do MITM attacks with it on users, and it >would actually matter, you wouldn't have used StartSSL in the first place, and $25 would be absolutely nothing for you.

>Hint: not you

None of which has any bearing on my original point, which is that we need a better and more secure way of applying security to web servers that isn't reliant on the good graces of a third party (either through their schedule of fees or through their procedures and policies). If you want a more secure internet, you have to make it cheaper and easier for the guys who are just like me. As I mentioned in my top post, the admins I spoke of can't afford to replace their certificates and so their sites remain unsecured.

Comment: Re:Certificate extortion (Score 1) 60

by Scutter (#46960809) Attached to: One Month Later: 300,000 Servers Remain Vulnerable To Heartbleed

StartSSL won't revoke a certificate unless you pay the $25 revocation fee and they won't just let you cut a new certificate while the old one is unrevoked. How is that not extortion? The only option is to either pay up or find another provider (and leave your old, unrevoked certificate out there).

The person who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.

Working...