Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: it's not not an effort (Score 2) 125

"that may result in an unauthorized effort to adversely impact the security, availability, confidentiality, or integrity of an information system or information that is stored on, processed by, or transiting an information system."

It's not an effort (authorized or unauthorized) to adversely impact any of those things. It is an effort to deliver video.

You changed "effort" to "impact". You're changing the meaning of the sentence.

If someone were to hijack Netflix' traffic to create an effort to deny service, then that would be a denial of service attack and ISPs could counter that, as ISPs already counter DoS attacks.

Comment: no, it's not true (Score 5, Informative) 125

According to the bill a threat is anything which is anything which is part of an unauthorized effort to deny access. Netflix streaming which inadvertently leads to a denial of access would not be part of an effort to deny access.

Here is the bill.

http://www.feinstein.senate.go...

Comment: they do have redundancy (Score 1) 179

by YesIAmAScript (#47241353) Attached to: Russian RD-180 Embargo Could Boost American Rocket Industry

One of the companies who makes the launch system was required to take out a license to produce the boosters themselves. This is the backup plan.

It's not a great backup plan, because just having the plans and license doesn't mean you necessarily can make them, especially with the reliability needed for defense launches.

Comment: Re:Shame the light itself sucks (Score 1) 103

What 900 lumen light are you using?

I've got a couple 900 lumen lights and they're bright enough that if I shine them at cars the drivers are mildly upset about the brightness. It's like hitting them with high beams (although not covering as much area as a headlight).

I agree 200 lumens and the down-facing output is strange. I expect this is for urban riders who mostly use the streetlights to see.

Comment: in simplified terms, it's forward error correction (Score 1) 129

And why do they use TCP if they are trying to avoid retransmissions due to lost/corrupt packets?

This seems to say that it's most trying to avoid link-layer retransmission, not transport-layer. So somehow I need to figure out all the links my transmission is traversing and disable link-layer retransmission on all of them?

Comment: people complain about the DRM (Score 2) 477

But there is no legal alternative. AACS may suck in principle, but it has been broken. I can buy a Blu-Ray and rip it bit-for-bit. There is no other HD content you are offered you can do this for. Netflix? Nope. Amazon/iTunes/UltraViolet/etc.? Nope.

And HDCP? It sure is a pain in the butt. But it is on every other bit of legal HD studio content too. You cannot watch Hollywood HD content on any device in your house unless it has a built-in display (like a laptop, tablet or phone) or has HDCP. It's not just Blu-Ray, it's Netflix, iTunes, etc. So if you're going to put down Blu-Ray for that, you're just going to have to turn pirate or else watch in SD.

The thing that really gets me about Blu-Ray, which other systems don't have, is all those stupid forced previews before the movies. As long as the studios put that junk on their Blu-Ray discs, they are going to discourage people from buying Blu-Ray discs. And that's on top of the existing discouragement of having to buy a drive.

Comment: you missed some (Score 2) 477

3/4 U-matic was a huge success. Betacam was a huge success. 8mm was a big success. 3.5" floppy was a HUGE success.

DAT was a failure.

MiniDisc was not a failure. It was big in Europe and Japan.

DVD was partially Sony's work (split with Matsushita, just as CD was split with Philips).

A lot of the reason people think Sony has a penchant for failed formats is Sony creates a lot of formats. You can't fail if you don't try.

Comment: that's not true (Score 1) 210

by YesIAmAScript (#46882151) Attached to: Target Moves To Chip and Pin Cards To Boost Security

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...

Although most of these attacks require you be able to clone the data reaped from EMV onto a stripe card and use it in a place that accepts stripe swipes. If the US stops accepting those, it will reduce fraud by presenting less opportunity. But it won't be because EMV prevented data extraction, but because you can't (currently) clone onto an EMV card.

Comment: if that card is Chip and sign, you're boned (Score 2) 210

by YesIAmAScript (#46882093) Attached to: Target Moves To Chip and Pin Cards To Boost Security

It still has to be swiped in Europe.

You need a Chip and PIN card. Wells Fargo issues them now. And Chase does for some cards too. You really should be getting one of those before you go.

If you don't have the PIN for your card, you don't have a Chip and PIN card and you'll be in a slightly worse boat in Europe than a card that doesn't have a chip because you'll usually have to tell them "ignore that chip, you have to swipe that" every time you use the card.

Comment: their terminals already had it (Score 1) 210

by YesIAmAScript (#46881873) Attached to: Target Moves To Chip and Pin Cards To Boost Security

The terminals that had the problem were their new (few months old) chip and PIN-capable EMV terminals.

Chip and PIN doesn't fix the breach Target had. Only Chip and PIN with tokenization does.

I already have one Chip and PIN card from my bank (US bank) and I'm trying to get my other one switched too. But it doesn't fix this problem.

Target, if you replace your terminals again, please get ones that do Chip and PIN and also NFC and PIN please?

"Morality is one thing. Ratings are everything." - A Network 23 executive on "Max Headroom"

Working...