Forgot your password?

typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Adobe Flash security is extremely disappointing (Score 1) 286

by quazee (#28863063) Attached to: 92% of Windows PCs Vulnerable To Zero-Day Attacks On Flash
> Can you explain how installing a second separate program improves security in the first? For intranet applications, it may make sense.
If your intranet does not use Flash, you can avoid rolling out Flash in your corporate network in the first place, thus reducing potential attack surface.
Of course, there is still YouTube, news sites, etc., so this is only applicable in highly restricted workplaces where users aren't supposed to complain about that.

Comment: Re:Adobe Flash security is extremely disappointing (Score 1) 286

by quazee (#28856027) Attached to: 92% of Windows PCs Vulnerable To Zero-Day Attacks On Flash
No, it doesn't.
Windows XP originally came with Macromedia Flash Player 5 (http://www.adobe.com/macromedia/proom/pr/2001/fp5_msxp.html)
This Microsoft update only applies to this ancient Flash Player distributed with Windows XP as a part of that agreement (versions 5 and 6).

Comment: Adobe Flash security is extremely disappointing (Score 3, Informative) 286

by quazee (#28853583) Attached to: 92% of Windows PCs Vulnerable To Zero-Day Attacks On Flash
Flash is now among the top attack vectors for Windows, and it isn't even covered by Windows Update.
There were 23 reported security issues in the last 2 years, including at least 4 browse-and-get-owned vulnerabilities.
In comparison, Silverlight has had no security bulletins since its 1.0 release (it's now at 3.0).
This may be just yet another reason to migrate to Silverlight, especially for intranet applications.
Security

Another Adobe Reader/Arobat/Flash 0day->

Submitted by tsu doh nimh
tsu doh nimh writes "Tuesday it is investigating reports that attackers are exploiting a previously unknown security hole in its Acrobat, Flash and PDF Reader applications, The Washington Post reports. Adobe has apparently known about this flaw since December 2008, and attackers have been exploiting it since at least July 9."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Time Warner is already doing this in Brooklyn/N (Score 1) 281

by quazee (#28381037) Attached to: Comcast To Bring IPv6 To Residential US In 2010
Anything from an 6to4 address typically gets routed to 192.88.99.1 (IPv4, protocol number 41), unless IPv6 is configured in a really weird way.
Since your ISP does not have their own router with the 192.88.99.1 anycast address, *all* IPv6 traffic goes through one of their peers who advertises their route to 192.88.99.1.
The actual destination IPv6 address doesn't matter (unless the destination is also a 6to4 address, in which case, the traffic is typically routed directly to the encoded IPv4 address instead of 192.88.99.1).

Comment: Re:Time Warner is already doing this in Brooklyn/N (Score 3, Informative) 281

by quazee (#28374983) Attached to: Comcast To Bring IPv6 To Residential US In 2010
That's because you are using an IPv6 address in the 6to4 address space, not a native IPv6 address.
And according to trace, your ISP doesn't have their own 6to4 router deployed, so the traffic gets sent to whoever announces the shortest route to 192.88.99.1 route via BGP.
(192.88.99.1 is a special IP which means 'any 6to4 router')

Comment: Re:Potential data recovery problems (Score 1) 196

by quazee (#28368491) Attached to: Solid State Drives Tested With TRIM Support
This will only work if the drive doesn't do background 'scrubbing' to improve future write performance.
Or, even if the drive didn't erase physical Flash cells yet, it could already mangle the mapping between the logical and physical blocks.
In fact, I have a cheap CompactFlash card that does exactly that when you yank power from it while writing - the drive appears completely scrambled (with blocks reordered) when you restore power to it.

Comment: Potential data recovery problems (Score 2, Interesting) 196

by quazee (#28368319) Attached to: Solid State Drives Tested With TRIM Support
Something as simple as deleting the wrong partition becomes an irreversible operation if you do it using a tool that supports TRIM on TRIM-enabled hardware.
Even if you restore the partition table from a backup, you will likely suffer silent file system corruption, which may even not be apparent until it's too late.
If TRIM support is actually implemented on the device, the device is free to 'lose' data on TRIMmed blocks until they are written at least once.

Where do you go to get anorexia? -- Shelley Winters

Working...