This is a second-order attack that only affects MDM clients, and then only if they've installed a rogue app AND the MDM is pre-provisioning with sensitive data. It's also already patched. It's easy to check the OS version on iOS devices tied to an MDM so that the IT department knows which ones need updates.
Nice catch on the security side, but not a real humdinger.
The US government has lost sight of the larger issue here. The tail (NSA and law enforcement) is wagging the dog.
The NSA and law enforcement agencies want to be able to intercept anything, since it makes their jobs easier. However, this runs counter to the larger national interest of the United States.
Which country has the highest level of connectedness and dependence on the Internet? Which country would be worst hurt if a sophisticated attacker was able to penetrate and conduct malicious actions using the systems connected to the Internet? The US, that's who. It is by far in the US's overall national interest to properly secure the Internet and communications infrastructure. Eavesdropping on everyone else is a secondary benefit, in comparison.
The proper role of the President and the Attorney General is to separate the desire of the NSA and law enforcement to make their jobs easier from the greater benefit to the country as a whole. They need to tell the ambitious underlings "NO" in unequivocal terms, then bitch slap them if they keep whining about it.
FFS, doesn't anyone do any research before posting stories? 60 seconds of research would turn up the Wikipedia entry on End-to-end audible voting systems. The problem of being able to verify that your vote is recorded as you intended without revealing the actual content of your vote has been solved by several teams. The ones that seem to have the best handle on things are Scantegrity, Pret-a-Voter, and Punchscan (the predecessor of Scantegrity) .
Using Bitcoin (which in fact has anti-anonymity properties) as an engine for voting is like attaching a tractor to a horse carriage. It may get you where you want to go, but it's nothing like a proper motor vehicle.
The evidence here is really, really weak. The connection is tenuous enough and the original pool of possible suspects via their methodology is large enough that I sure as heck wouldn't rule out a connection via random chance. Until we get better evidence, this isn't worth very much.
Norse Security says as much in The Fine Article:
Stammberger was careful to note that his company's findings are hardly conclusive, and may just add wrinkles to an already wrinkled picture of what happened at Sony Pictures. He said Norse employees will be briefing the FBI on Monday about their findings.
"They're the investigators," Stammberger said. "We're going to show them our data and where it points us. As far as whether it is proof that would stand up in a court of law? That's not our job to determine, it is theirs," he said of the FBI.
Geez how the press gets this sort of thing so wrong. It's not a tank, it's an Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV). It's lightly armored against small arms and small-bore auto-cannon rounds, not against ATGMs, tank main guns, or RPGs.
The weight at 34 tonnes is much less than that of any current front-line tank (according to Wikipedia the Challenger 2 is 62.5 tonnes, almost double the Scout SV). It is a lot heavier than most current IFV's (e.g., the German Marder at 28 tonnes or BMP-3 at 18.7 tonnes), but that may not be such a good thing. It makes strategic mobility more of a problem and ensures that the Scout SV can't swim across rivers by itself.
Some reporter just cut and pasted from the press release. Feh!
My son took the course last year as a senior in high school via iTunesU.
It's also available on EdX.
Heck, I took it way back thirty-odd years ago.
Also, here's a link to the original article in the Harvard Crimson:
In chronological order looking forward:
MacTech Boot Camps - http://www.mactech.com/bootcam...
Small, local, inexpensive. Check to see if there's one close to you.
MacTech Conference - http://www.mactech.com/confere...
Larger, both sysadmin and developer tracks
MacIT - http://www.macitconf.com/
Larger, multiple tracks and levels of knowledge
WWDC - https://developer.apple.com/ww...
The granddaddy of them all, but next to impossible to get into these days. Mostly developer focused. May not be useful if you don't already have a deep knowledge base.
MacAdmins - http://macadmins.psu.edu/
The most education-focused of the conferences. Very knowledgeable presenters.
FWIW, I've been a presenter at MacTech Boot Camps, MacIT, and WWDC.
Damn, nothing worse than someone else beating you to the punchline...
See the commentary at the top of the page from this link:
He didn't jump back because he was physically incapable of doing so. In Eve: Online, other ships can use ship modules on you that prevents you from leaving the area. It's called "tackling." The pilot in question, upon erroneously jumping into the system, was tackled by enemy forces before he could escape. Instead of eating the loss, he called up on his allies to jump in to attempt to destroy the ships that were tackling him. (A titan-class vessel is largely unable to destroy the much smaller Heavy Interdictor-class vessels that are capable of tackling it due to the ship's poor tracking and large guns, and requires help if it is tackled. A good analogy here is trying to kill a fly with a cannonball at 30 kilometers -- guns in Eve work similarly.)
When the pilot's allies arrived, the enemies called THEIR allies and joined the fight. With the amount of tackling ships on the field, neither party could easily escape, and things snowballed considerably. The enemy forces in this case had the upper hand of available pilots and were able to inflict heavy losses.
You are right, but I can clarify the matter. In Eve: Online, other ships (typically your enemies) can use a ship module on you that prevents you from leaving the area, making you vulnerable to weapons fire. It's called "tackling." Tackling a titan-class vessel in Eve is difficult, requiring a special class of ship and a special weapon, but possible if you are coordinated enough and have enough espionage available to determine where your enemies will be.
Your assertion is that green capacity is always fully utilized, which is incorrect. Your second assertion is that non-renewable capacity is also fully utilized, which is also incorrect. This process yields a benefit when there is slack capacity in the system -- cases where it is generating more power than is actually needed. Instead of wasting that energy, it can be used for some useful purpose.
% "Every morning, I get up and look through the 'Forbes' list of the richest people in America. If I'm not there, I go to work" -- Robert Orben