No point in all these rants. It's indeed just a bug (for now).

(There are plenty of other good reasons to rant at Oracle)

The seventies magazines I was referring to were not Playboy. If you consider Playboy to be pornography, then you really have a problem.

I agree. And I also noticed that children tend to go sites for children because that is where they find what they want.
The "pornography" they might stumble upon accidentally is soft, and they don't even notice it because it's not intersting
Once they start finding pornography interesting, you cannot prevent them from finding it, and why would you anyway.
As teenagers, before the Internet, we had some pornographic magazines which someone would have found and which we would look at in a far away corner of the school yard. It hasn't traumatized me.

In short, my children who are now almost adult always had access to the Internet, and I have never noticed a problem with pornography.

The title says "Attack from inside India". But the quote only seems to say "Since the target is Pakistan, the attacker can only be India". That doesn't sound like very solid evidence...

Of course, I haven't read the article (yet?), but the summary doesn't really suggest I would learn anything more.

I'm wondering too. Reading the /. discussion in the hope of finding the answer, but all I read so far was just the usual MS-bashing and MS-defense blabber.

How can a browser vulnerability compromise a server? Or are the redirects only happening in the browser? Then the summary is misleading.

Yes, but those would have been shot in 2011. Didn't Kodak file for bankrupcy since?

.

No, I meant another animal, just in case the person who did the dictionary is an xkcd fan, and put that in for fun.

But for the number of characters, I think you may have to revisit your math, as other have already pointed out. And this is an online attack, which severely limits the speed anyway (not the speed of trying, but the speed of getting a reply from the server).

If that's the case, that may an incentive for ffmpeg to support 10 bit encoding into DNxHD, which would be nice to have. Currently, it decodes 10 bit, but only encodes into 8 bit (for DNxHD). Unless they use ProRes. Are there any other formats that are NLE-friendly (intra-frame compresion only)? Maybe MJPEG? But MJPEG would be 8-bit only, I think. Then again, 8-bit may be sufficient for what a b&w negative is able to capture... :-)

Can you still actually buy 35 mm. motion picture camera negative? As far as I know, one should be able to buy Orwo negative from Russia. But is Kodak still manufacturing B&W? Even Color negatives from Kodak are not so easy to get any more.

Maybe there is good b&w photo film available. I don't know. But for motion pictures, the stock has not really evolved for decades. So cinematographers started using Kodak Vision color negative even for b&w movies. Or digital. In the end, if the shoot is indeed done on 35mm, the negative will be scanned so that grading and VFX can be done in digital.

But anyway, it sounds like a fun project. And 35 mm cameras are definitely a pleasure to work with. It will be interesting to see if this project will contribute to push for the addition of professional features to Linux NLEs. That would be great.

The useful part of that blog post seems to be:

RewriteEngine on
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_METHOD} =POST
RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://(.*)?.example.com [NC]
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} ^/wp-login\.php(.*)$ [OR]
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} ^/wp-admin$
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ - [R=403,L]

(The logic makes sense. I haven't tested the syntax yet)

It also suggests an insane 30-character password abomination:

I prefer "wrong chicken battery staple", which is probably not in attacker's dictionnary.

In theory, yes. But you picked a particularly bad example with gardening. A programmer whose hobby is programming really needs that little exercise he would get from gardening. Replacing it with more programming will lead to his brain rotting, and his programming skills declining rapidly.

Mediahint seems to be a free proxy with a FF extension. Running a proxy costs money. I wonder how this mysterious extension earns the developer(s) the money needed to pay for the proxy. The extension doesn't have an on/off switch, and the web site is completely silent about how it works or what it does. Am I too paranoid?

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/02/27/2051209/ship-anchor-damages-african-undersea-cables

http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/08/02/01/1912220/third-undersea-cable-cut

They do. But they are not concerned about things like password theft, because neither the bank nor their customers lose money that way.

So nobody cares about what you may perceive as bad security. As this PDF linked from this recent /. story shows, only third-party suckers lose money when a bank password is abused.