Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Yup, questions do linger (Score 1) 1

Per El Reg:

1. By 2011 "GCHQ, with the knowledge and apparent cooperation of the NSA, acquired the capability to covertly exploit security vulnerabilities in 13 different models of firewalls made by Juniper Networks"
2. An external researcher or internal engineer found the security flaws. "The company said it discovered the backdoors during an internal code review, but it didn't say if this was a routine review or if it had examined the code specifically after receiving a tip that something suspicious was in it."
3. Juniper sat on it until the discoverer was at the point of going public.
4. Juniper's CTO made the "During a recent internal code review, Juniper discovered unauthorized code in ScreenOS that could allow a knowledgeable attacker to gain administrative access to NetScreen devices and to decrypt VPN connections" announcement to own the discovery
5. Juniper issues fixes that don't fix all the security issues

A damning piece of circumstantial evidence is that Juniper won't be explicit about who/how/when the security flaws came to light. It would be to their credit to claim that they found it, but being caught lying (as opposed to evasive) would make their situation and trustworthiness so much worse. That implies that Juniper's hand was forced by the discoverer who was not under their control.

So, Cisco, got anything you need to need to do? Like go to court to get any NSA instructions to you judged illegal before you get caught?

Comment Re:Another year, another video codec... (Score 3, Interesting) 285

I remember ripping my CD collection to ogg, only have to do it again years later to flac when space got cheaper. The ogg was fine, but not a good source for re-encoding to another format such as mp3.

If I was going to rip movies, I'd keep the original streams. You'll never spare the time again to re-rip, even if you you think now that you will.

Comment What? (Score 1) 1

1. TFA states "paramount mission" not "primary mission". Not the same thing.
2. GG doesn't state "Silicon Valley wants to defend user privacy against government surveillance". That's your presumeption, not GG's. He actually just says in TFA "The real objective is to depict Silicon Valley as terrorist-helpers for the crime of offering privacy protections to Internet users, in order to force those companies to give the U.S. government "backdoor" access into everyone's communications."
3. What's this "But then again he's never presented himself as a radical critic, has he?" attempt at an ad-honimem smear for? Who do you represent, Tricky Nicky?

Slashdot Top Deals

A good supervisor can step on your toes without messing up your shine.