Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Wrong paradigm here (Score 2) 186

by Lesrahpem (#46671745) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: User-Friendly Firewall For a Brand-New Linux User?

For example on a CentOS system you might allow your webserver to make outgoing SMTP connections via something fun like this: "iptables -A OUTPUT -m owner --cmd-owner httpd --dest-port 25 -j ACCEPT". (Why CentOS? Because it matches the command against HTTPD. On Debian systems the webserver process is more typically called 'apache2'.)

The cmd-owner match was removed in kernel 2.6.14 because it was broken with SMP.

Comment: Re:Wrong paradigm here (Score 3, Insightful) 186

by Lesrahpem (#46671399) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: User-Friendly Firewall For a Brand-New Linux User?
The parent poster is correct. Windows and Linux are totally different animals in regards to firewalls. There is only one firewall for Linux and it is built into the system. IPTables is how the firewall is configured. All other tools are just front-ends or wrappers for IPTables.

IPTables doesn't have support for application-based firewalling. You can do that kind of thing using something lilke the Grsecurity patch for the kernel, but it is not for beginners.

Grsecurity will let you create policies exactly like what you're talking about and then some. For example, it will allow you to create a policy limiting which files and folders a given program can access. To be specific, on my machine I have a policy that Firefox can only write data to it's own folders and to my Downloads directory, and can't execute/run any files inside those folders. That way, if somebody hits me with a drive-by download or something it simply won't work.

Comment: Re:Invasion of Privacy (Score 1) 356

yes because one is much cheaper and easier, thus, there will be much less accountability and much more likelihood of unethical operation. It's not just what it's used for today, it's what it will be used for 5 years from now, if there is no public blowback.

This is in fact a slippery scope, because we haven't developed city-wide immune systems* yet, unless i've missed something /as seen in the book "Diamond Age"

Comment: Invasion of Privacy (Score 0) 356

One of the things about most of Colorado is that the people that live there experience privacy in their homes and land that is unknown in places like urban Maryland or New York.

As a policy, i am completely cool with maintaining that privacy against an influx of civilian, largely un-regulatable (as opposed to unregulated) drone activity. No thanks!

Comment: Re:Despite all of the complaining about it... (Score 1) 627

by Lesrahpem (#44550671) Attached to: Your preferred Linux distribution for 2013?

Where ALSA fails in it's most basic configuration is it's ability to handle multiple simultaneous audio streams. One stream going directly to an ALSA device, locks that device for playback thereby preventing any other application from using it.

This is only true if you have a shite sound card which doesn't support multiple audio streams.

+ - SPAM: What is Secure Programmable Social Media?

Submitted by TheCouchPotatoFamine
TheCouchPotatoFamine (628797) writes "A new technology from DOM Algebra called "Nametag" has turned the concept of client-server applications distributed via HTML on it's head, providing an permanent system of creating secure social media apps, right in the browser itself, between you and your friends without ever asking you to trust the service provider not to reveal your information; they never have it.

The recent NSA debacles have made for a good introduction into the need for privacy in everyday activities. Your web browser can act as a "social computer", fully capable (via high-quality RSA/AES encryption written in pure Javascript), to deliver a rich social media experience without sending anything to anyone other than your friends "in the clear". You can see a working demo at "TagOS" (but please view the demo in Google Chrome or Apple's Safari, because they have fast math routines)

Developers can go farther, creating entire apps they can share with friends via social media, authoring right in the browser using javascript. They never share their code with anyone but their friends. It works, today.

Is the world ready for web-applications available anywhere, totally secure, that meet your social media needs with fun and immediacy, without any tradeoffs? What do you think?"

Link to Original Source

+ - Nametag is Secure Programmable Social Media; no more data-mining you.->

Submitted by TheCouchPotatoFamine
TheCouchPotatoFamine (628797) writes "A new technology from DOM Algebra called "Nametag" has turned the concept of client-server applications distributed via HTML on it's head, providing an enduring basis to create secure social media apps, right in the browser itself, without ever trusting the service provider.

The recent NSA debacles have made for a good segueway into the need for privacy, even though Nametag was envisioned nearly two years ago. It is powered by high-quality RSA/AES encryption, written pure Javascript, and integrated with a new state-of-the-art HTML5 Environment called "TagOS" to form the worlds first "Social Computer" (please view the demo in Google Chrome, or Apple's Safari. The core tech is complete while a few CSS issues are not.)

The result? It transforms your web-browser from an over-abused public "billboard" into a "safe-house" that normal people can use, complete with the familiar feed- friend- and group-based interfaces they expect from HTML5/CSS3 powered sites. Developers can go farther, creating and exporting any of those apps into their own sites, all without sharing anything with your service provider; it's that powerful. Finally, it already has two social media apps ready to go, to get people started.

The IndieGoGo campaign is the first public unveiling. From web hosting, to hiring designers, it will take resources I no longer have; my savings bought full-time research to create the kernel, if you will. In fact, the demo itself is just "frozen" from the actual working version I use everyday! With your help, a world where you can speak honestly and openly with your friends and family is possible; Is it important to you? I hope the community backs the idea; this is how it will be done.

With so much self-censorship and risk attached to the daily use of traditonal, insecure personal social media, how long will we allow it to continue?

Disclaimer: i'm the author of TagOS"

Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Brain discrimination (Score 1) 187

by Lesrahpem (#43292427) Attached to: Brain Scans Predict Which Criminals Are More Likely To Re-offend

It's not illegal to discriminate against people on the basis of their brain activity. Should it be? Can you judge someone on the basis of their biology? Is it really that person's fault anymore if a part of their body predelects them to wrongdoing? Where does liability start? Can you fix people? Should you?

Too many questions about really understanding the brain that our primitive moral system could begin to address.

Does it really matter whose "fault" something is? Discrimination based on assumptions, regardless of the basis, should certainly be illegal. However, discrimination based on objective, observable things shouldn't be. For example, it should be illegal to discriminate against potential employees based on ethnicity. It should not be illegal to discriminate against people with a measurably low IQ when the job can be shown to require a higher IQ. It doesn't, or shouldn't, matter that a person's intelligence quotient isn't exactly their fault.

Comment: Re:Good (Score 1) 459

This information was on a public webserver without any type of authentication. If a large company like AT&T is irresponsibly handling customer data in this way the public should absolutely be informed immediately. Mr. Aurenheimer could have handled the situation better, but I do not think his actions should be criminalized at this level. Did he endanger people by blowing a whistle? Yes. Did he compromise a secure computer system to do so? No. IMHO this should fall more under "creating a panic" or something.

Comment: Re:YAWN (Score 1) 242

by Lesrahpem (#43043099) Attached to: China Says It Is the Target of US Hack Attacks

Wake me when American military hackers are targeting Chinese civilians.

Is it so hard to believe that something like that may actually be happening already? Afterall, many of the operations conducted by our intelligence agencies (namely the CIA) are aimed at people many would consider civilians.

If I'm a national intelligence service and I want to create a botnet for military purposes, I also want to have plausible deniability. So, I construct my botnet the same general way criminals do. I hijack civilian computers, I purchase services through stolen credentials and fake ID's, etc.

Money is the root of all wealth.

Working...