Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:The answer is a RESOUNDING **NO**! (Score 1) 315

Fact is that chip and pin has fraud at around 0.7p per £100, and other methods have about 7.5p per £100. It's far far safer.

Just because someone doesn't understand how it works and rants online doesn't make it a valid resource to link to.

If you write your pin on your card, you are a stupid idiot and deserve to lose your money.

Comment Re:Is this obsolete already? (Score 1) 315

Referring to something like this?

Which is odd, because for Cardholder Not Present, you need to know the card's house number and postcode, as well as the CVV, for the transaction to be approved. That was put in place in the UK about 12 years ago. I know many online retailers only require the CVV once when registering the card (Amazon, Paypal, etc), but you would then also need to access the attackee's amazon account, change the delivery address ...

And for cloned cards, you need to know the pin.

Something isn't right with the story.

Comment Re:Open-source tool to read Chip and Pin cards (Score 1) 315

You can still be mugged for the card.

But the mugger will have to force the pin out of you. And hope you don't cancel the card before they get to use it.

Or forge a signature, as this system appears to be implemented in this case - I presume the signature is encoded on the card chip and only visible to the cashier? Dunno how that's meant to work if the user can forge the signature from a physical signature on the card.

A retailer can tell you they're charging $10 but actually bill $1000.

How hard is it to verify the amount on the screen when tapping in your pin? Or is the American system done by the cashier entirely, because it's too hard for typical Americans to cope with?

Comment Re:Online retailers (Score 1) 315

The cashier should have checked the signature on the paper, against the signature on the card. It's to prevent card theft purchases.

Something the contactless payment system completely bypasses, unless you are unlucky enough to get asked for a pin on your contactless purchase. However as there is a limit (£30 UK) you might get a free lunch, some beers and a couple of movies before the card is cancelled, but not much more.

At least chip and pin is something you have (the card) and something you know (the pin), which is fairly reasonable. Since introduction, card fraud has dropped massively in countries using it. I don't know what contactless has done for these figures however.

Comment What a total and utter nutjob (Score 1) 576

So he is a raving racist lunatic?

First warning sign - can't discriminate between immigrants and refugees.

Second warning sign - totally incorrect about immigrant benefits to societies, because immigrants provide a net benefit to their host economies.

Obviously the license change is not enforceable, as it's totally racist, but I do hope that all researchers stop using this software.

I would also hope that this guy is done for hate speech in the near future, after reading the article. He's a bona-fide nutjob that would appear to be on the verge of a terrorist act against those his discriminates against.

Comment Re: How much will it cost. (Score 1) 396

You'll have traded in the car for a newer Tesla by then.

And the sap that buys the second hand Tesla from Tesla will likely get the same guarantee.

The supercharger network is a classic sunk cost once installed (and Tesla are installing their own solar farms too IIRC to reduce or negate their electric bills) that has low ongoing costs, so free electricity isn't a massive burden for Tesla to have.

Comment Re: How much will it cost. (Score 1) 396

If flying is too expensive, I guess a Tesla is going to be too expensive too...

But yeah, if you are one of the few people that do this, then maybe a Tesla isn't the right car right now.

This is also another reason why I think that Tesla really should concentrate on the UK and Europe more, as it's very rare that people do such long journeys (apart from the EU-wide festival goers that drive from England to Slovenia for obscure heavy metal festivals).

Comment Re:Nail everyone? (Score 1) 618

Get fired. Sue. Make yourself unemployable except in non-for-profit organisations. Earn 1/5th of previous earnings. Never own a house. Always live in squalor. Wife leaves you for being an asshat originally. Get drink problem. Die early.

Or: "sure, btw about my pay review..."

Comment Re:Sometimes the ethical path is very clear (Score 5, Interesting) 618

The engineers who designed the engine - yes.

The engineers who coded the software for the engine computer? Why would they know what this does? The software is enabling a signal, hell the signal might even have a vague name, when a condition is met. The condition's name might not very clear.

Yes, a spec saying "when the car is undergoing a test then enabled the cheat mode to get past the test" would clearly implicate the developers.

But most likely it was: "when sig_x and sig_y and indicator_a are set, then set sig_Z to 1 in pattern P for n nanoseconds blah blah blah"

Someone knew what they were doing, and it probably went like this:

Engineer: We can't make this engine pass NOx tests.
Message goes up the chain to a certain decision making level, possibly the board. Marketing chimes in: We can't have this, we're already sending out teasers about our new urea-less engine technology, etc, etc.
Eventually a message comes down to fix it, in vague terms, entirely forgetting the original message that it's unfixable.
Engineers: struggle for ages.
In pub: Well, we could enable a special testing mode to pass the tests?
In work: Shall we do this -> up the chain. Original context is half forgotten. Approved.
Changes made. Software specs made. Timebomb implemented.

Comment Re:Nail everyone? (Score 1) 618

Luckily we're talking about a major piece of software here - the engine computer.

This is well planned, has teams of developers, code review, QA, and the feature list is well known. For a safety critical feature, test coverage is going to be good. So much so, that I bet there is a test called "engineEnablesUreaInjectionWhenDiagnosticModeEnabled", that was signed off by a QA against a checklist.

If not - then tbh the entire software of the engine computer should be written off.

The software devs aren't engine engineers. They don't know what the urea injection does, or what it is for. It's a signal that they have to deal with, and they coded it to the specifications given to them, probably from the engine engineering division who realised that their Urea-less engine had terrible NOx emissions and they needed a quick resolution. In fact if the software teams are strung up for this, then we will know directly that there is a cover up and the wrong people are getting the blame for this.

Comment Re:Get used to it, this is the future (Score 1) 279

Yeah, Apple are missing an opportunity here with their interest free loan and market rate prices!

Rent to Own shops have always been a ripoff however, but they do spread the cost, albeit at a high price. Useful for washing machines (launderettes are very expensive, and you need to wash clothes today, not in six months), etc. But people just can't resist the shiny and they buy things they don't need. But they're young and make poor decisions because they haven't the experience of life to actually understand what is important or not.

Shopping catalogues were the same in the 80s and 90s (and possibly still today). Overpriced goods on a repayment plan targeting the less wealthy.

Machines have less problems. I'd like to be a machine. -- Andy Warhol