Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re: not the point (Score 2) 336

by Lumpy (#48926483) Attached to: Why Screen Lockers On X11 Cannot Be Secure

Not mine, when I get up the prox card reader sees that I am not near the workstation and instantly locks, it will not even offer an unlock until I am within proximity again.

Really cheap to put in place less than $10K for the whole company. and increases security 80 fold. Problem is most IT departments are not savvy enough to do it nor convince management that it's more important than a new Jaguar for the Director of marketing. Heck my old Dell laptop supported it.

Comment: Re:If it's accessing your X server, it's elevated (Score 1) 336

by Lumpy (#48926399) Attached to: Why Screen Lockers On X11 Cannot Be Secure

Yeah that doesnt work.

If it's sitting there on what looks like a normal login they will not hit CTL-ALT-DEL they will just type away. Hell it's hard to not get users to open up every single attachment no matter where it comes from or to not click on every pop up window they get.

Comment: Re:Frickin' Lasers! (Score 1) 233

by prisoner-of-enigma (#48925075) Attached to: White House Drone Incident Exposes Key Security Gap

You can get around this by using an array of lasers, each of which is individually rather harmless, but focused together would be enough to destroy such a target. The "danger area" would be restricted to the focal point. Anything outside/beyond/inside that point would receive much less laser power and likely escape damage.

Now if your drone is using active terrain masking, that makes it more difficult to hit at range. However, such a system would probably require a human remotely controlling it, making that susceptible to jamming. I don't think automated terrain avoidance (in real time) is practical just yet for anything a non-military entity could get its hands on. And in any event, such a terrain-avoidance system would likely need its own sensors (radar/lidar) which could be detected, jammed, or both.

Comment: Re:Stronger regs ? Try a better radar (Score 1) 233

by prisoner-of-enigma (#48924983) Attached to: White House Drone Incident Exposes Key Security Gap

If you shield a drone it becomes heavier and then needs to be bigger. Also at that point the drone needs to either be self guiding or have a communication/control system that won't be knocked out. You get the old little more weight little more propulsion to carry the weight cycle going and all of a sudden your drone isn't small anymore.

So what's your point? That a more capable drone is also bigger? So? So what? That's obvious. Do you think the added size/complexity of such a thing would be any impediment whatsoever to a determined aggressor? If you want to penetrate controlled airspace to do something nefarious, you're perforce going to want something that's difficult to detect, difficult to jam, difficult to shoot down, and has enough payload to carry whatever you need to cause the damage you're looking for.

That seems an incredibly strong statement. So strong that it looks like it doesn't have enough thought behind it.

Really? Then let's hear your alternative options. I already covered sensors and weapons, but let's recap. Radar is vulnerable to stealth, so it won't do the job alone. Lidar is too short ranged to do the job alone. Acoustic is even worse. But put together, a web of such sensors would be very difficult to overcome. If there are other sensors out there that are even remotely applicable, please enumerate them.

As for weapons, you have only three options: ballistic, missiles, or directed-energy weapons. Ballistic weapons have all kinds of downsides, from trajectory computation to wind to limited ammo, not to mention the inevitable collateral damage from misses (of which there will be MANY). Missiles have similar downsides. DEW's have (almost) none of these, the sole one being the potential for (minor) collateral damage in the case of a miss. You could even potentially mitigate this by using an array of low-power lasers, individually almost benign, but focused together to take down a drone.

Comment: Re:radar would have no problem distinguishing quad (Score 1) 233

by prisoner-of-enigma (#48924865) Attached to: White House Drone Incident Exposes Key Security Gap

This assumes you can get a good doppler signature on the rotors at all. I'm not an expert on radar/stealth construction, but I know a fair bit about it. A rotor made of radar-transparent (or absorbent) material would make it rather hard to detect, at least until it was well within range to do damage.

Comment: Re:Not need, but useful (Score 0) 259

by Lumpy (#48924161) Attached to: The iPad Is 5 Years Old This Week, But You Still Don't Need One

No it's to avoid people looking like idiots with a tablet against their head.
Problem is it seems that that is the trend lately with idiots having a tablet pressed to their head. Watched a low IQ woman driving down the road with a big ass Fad-let stuck to her head side swipe a pickup truck because she could not see past the stupidly large phone pasted against her head.

Comment: Re:Need? No. Useful? Yes. (Score 1) 259

by Lumpy (#48924131) Attached to: The iPad Is 5 Years Old This Week, But You Still Don't Need One

And as an owner of a Surface Pro... Microsoft failed at all of those even when they had a proper pen and proper setup.

It's not the OS or the UI available. It's the Applications. 90% of the applications I need on that Surface Pro suck to high hell in a touch environment. They are designed for keyboard+Mouse and that is how they work best. It's so overwhelming that all surface pro users typically always use the device with a keyboard and a mouse.

tablet use requires a dramatic shift in programming style and design. And almost no programmers for large productivity software suites are capable of it.

OS/2 must die!

Working...