Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:what? (Score 1) 52

You had to side-load it, right? That's the point, you can't install another App Store without side-loading, which is riskier than third-party app stores.

And of course other stores aren't on Google Play That would be like Walmat allowing a Bestbuy to setup inside its walls

The problem with you analogy is that Walmart (Google Play in your analogy) is the only store where you can "legally" shop. Every other store is considered "under the table" and "use at your own risk"--kind of like buying from the guy on the street corner in front of Walmart.

A better analogy for what I would like Google Play to be, is a shopping mall. Lots of stores under one roof.

Comment Solution in search of a problem (Score 1) 88

There are a few interesting and useful applications for IoT. Home security systems and remote medical devices, for example. But for the most part, it's just an excuse to charge you more for a product. Do I really need my lights, air conditioning, sprinklers, refrigerator, coffee maker connected to the Internet? Yeah, some of it's cool, but is it worth the added risk?

Comment Re:You need an adblocker (Score 2) 52

Google IS currently free to do what they want. But should they be?

I'd like to see alternate app stores become available, giving users a real choice. Yes, I know Amazon and Samsung have their own stores, but they are available only to users of their own branded devices. Of course, you can side-load apps, but then you open the door to all kinds of security issues. What I want is alternative stores that are completely integrated. THAT would give us some true competition, and maybe some better rates for developers.

Comment Private mode and forensics (Score 0, Troll) 159

Locard's exchange principle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locard%27s_exchange_principle) says that the perpetrator of a crime will always bring something into the crime scene, and leave something behind. This is one of the foundational principles of forensics.

Although private browsing doesn't equate to criminal activity, the principle applies. Electronically, you will always bring something with you, and leave something behind. There is not, and never will be, a truly "private" browsing experience, regardless of browser. There will always be trace evidence that can lead to discovery of what you were browsing, and what you did while there.

More broadly, this principle is true in all of life.

Comment Re:Simple solution, 100% effective (Score 1) 262

You are not thinking like a cheater. Of course, it's unlikely to defeat the x-ray itself. So you do what any cheater does: find holes in the process.

For example, it's unlikely that all bikes could be x-rayed at the same time, in the seconds just before the race. The process takes time. That means that bikes will be sitting somewhere--theoretically in a secure area--for some period of time after the x-ray. This leaves open an opportunity to bribe someone, or breach security in some other way, to make the desired modifications after inspection.

Another possibility is to find a way to swap out a look-alike cheater model, for the duly inspected version. In any long bike race, it's unlikely that every foot of the course is under the watchful eye of officials, leaving room for a secret exchange. Or even if every foot is being watched, there's still the possibility of paying someone off to look the other way.

So yes, your x-ray itself would be hard to defeat. But that does not make the method foolproof.

Comment Medicine worse than the disease (Score 1) 70

Remedies like whitelisting might be effective, but if you've ever worked in a corporation--typically large ones--that use it, you know that it's a nightmare to manage. When you need to get something done, waiting for your whitelist request to be approved can take so long that you might as well not try to use the tool.

It's interesting that the author said NOTHING about password complexity. This is one of the stupidest security measures, at least in the way it is typically implemented. For example, you must change your password every month, it must have three different punctuation characters, numbers, upper, and lower case, and can't be any one of your last 50 passwords. All this type of rule list does is make people write down their passwords (because they can't remember them) or find some pattern that defeats the system. Two-factor authentication is far better and more secure.

Comment Two kinds of investors (Score 3, Insightful) 138

There are two kinds of investors:

1. People who trade on the ups and downs, hoping to outsmart the market. If you're in this game, the computers will always win. They can do it much faster, and much more accurately, than you can.

2. People who buy stocks because they want to own a piece of a company they believe in. These kinds of investors are in it for the long haul, and if they do their homework, they will beat the computers every time.

Slashdot Top Deals

If at first you don't succeed, you are running about average.

Working...