Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Submission + - Ask the FCC to switch to sane software engineering practices for wifi! ( 2

mtaht writes: The CeroWrt project is collecting signatures for a letter to the FCC strongly suggesting they adopt saner software engineering practices for certifying wifi devices instead of pending regulations.

You can view the letter (signed by Dave Täht, Vint Cerf and many other notables) and add your signature,

Comment Re: No surprise (Score 1) 213

Given this is with a phone that is transmitting to the world saying "I am here", you are taking my statement out of context.

Last I looked most equipment doesn't broadcast to the world saying "I am here" to within a couple of feet
which is what I'm lead to believe is the resolution of the triangulation. Phones and the right triangulation equipment gets that resolution.

Military grade GPS gets that sort of resolution.

Comment Re:No surprise (Score 1) 213

Does the car stereo say to the world "I am here"? Phones talk to the world. They are not passive devices.

If the music is up too loud do the police / council rangers come and knock on the door saying turn the music down. You can broadcast in the EM spectrum or in the audio spectrum. With the right equipment you can
hear both.

Perhaps you should look at what I am saying rather than your preconceptions of what is being said.

Comment Re:No surprise (Score 1, Insightful) 213

What civil liberties are being broken when they search for a piece of stolen property? That property could be in a bin, ditch etc. Now to enter a premise they need reasonable suspicion that the property is in that premise. Triangulation of a signal from stolen property gives that suspicion at which time they need to get a warrant. The act of searching for a stolen device electronically itself shouldn't require a warrant.

This really is no different than seeing a stolen car in the driveway of a premise. The phone / car is visible to the world.

If you drive around in a stolen car you can expect to be pulled over. If you are carrying a stolen phone and it is turned on you can expect to be located. This doesn't require technology that is unknown to the general public. Triangulation of signals has been done for the last century. The precision of that triangulation has improved all that tine.

Putting a phone in a pocket does not hide it. Turning it off and putting it in a pocket hides it.

Comment Re:No surprise (Score -1, Troll) 213

There are some uses that should require a warrant, some uses that don't require a warrant.

Searching for stolen property without knowing the person who stole the property shouldn't require a warrant.
Searching for stolen property when you know the person who stole the property should require a warrant.

Searching for a phone of a presumed abductee with/without a warrant depends on the circumstances.
Searching for a phone of a presumed felon should require a warrant.

Attempting to correlate phone presence with a event or a sequence of events should require a warrant.

The whole secrecy issue is basically bogus these days as the technology has been disclosed.

Comment Re:No support for dynamic address assignment?!? (Score 2) 287

Firstly servers don't need DHCPv6 to assign them a address. They can just pick a address and register it in the DNS themselves. They really don't need a DHCP server to do it for them. HTTP/S doesn't care about the IP address that a machine has.

Secondly SLAAC is not only used with link locals.

Just because you want to do things one way doesn't make it a requirement.

You've been Berkeley'ed!