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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:B is the new F? (Score 1) 315

It was over a decade ago. It was a busy box, running a DNS sever, SSH daemon, mail and web with Postgres and MySql. Python and a host of other stuff was installed. It wasn't static html. Like I said I never patched it, and there were security patches that had come out. I believe at least one was a buffer overflow issue. It was vulnerable by the time it got hacked. It happens. Linux isn't immune to attack, just harder. If you don't patch, it makes it less hard. I also didn't do any hardening. Don't recall which distro it was, possibly a RH distro before I switched over to debian for servers.

Comment Re:The Clintons (Score 3, Informative) 315

Yet cited email as a tertiary reason for firing the African ambassador.

Installing a private Internet connection in your Dept. Of State office bathroom, in order to bypass the government link is a far cry from running a mail server out of your home.

There's a massive difference in setting up a server you own and are the only one to have 24/7 unfettered access vs using a free email provider.

That's for sure! We've all seen how secure Yahoo, AOL and Google email accounts are. That is not to say running a private email server is a walk in the park. Just because someone uses a free email provider doesn't mean they'll have a more secure server.

So you are aware there was a memo put out by Pres O. 24 August 2012 concerning use of private email for state business.

You do realize she'd set this server up in 2009 and left in Feb 2013? So she continued to use her own server her last five months, rather than do a disruptive move to the State server, when she already knew she was leaving in a few months. Your point?

Comment Re:B is the new F? (Score 3, Informative) 315

The rating is an F because it supports SSL2. Yet, they didn't show a single example where it permitted an SSL2 handshake or connection. Every email server supports SSL2. The real question is does it actually permit SSL2 connections. Hell my server "supports" SSL2, but I have it connections disabled in the configuration. This security rating is just a load of political crap. Everyone picking on poor ol' Hillary for using a private server. It must be weak because it's not based at the State Department. Because we all know the best and brightest computer nerds work for the Fed?

Now given what I see there from this scan, she's using SHA-1 for signatures. Definitely not best practice. I'd rate that server as a C or a D. The server appears to be an IIS server. A hardened Linux server would have been the way to go. Just because it's not a guvmint server doesn't mean it is automatically weak. My server gets attacked all day long and hasn't been hacked. Sure, I'm not a big target either. I once conducted an experiment to see how long it would take for someone to hack my Linux system. So I put one out there, and didn't patch it, did a minimal security setup, like you might get from a Linux Servers for Dummies tutorial (there are plenty out there). It took 4 months for my relatvely unknown server. But that was years ago. I haven't been hacked since, and no that is not an invitation to try. I get DDOSed on a semi-regular basis. Not much I can do about that, other than what I am doing. I haven't got a 1000 servers to offload attacks to.

In the end, a well configured and maintained server stands as much of a chance of being secure as any server out there, save perhaps the DOD. Bigger is not necessarily better.

Comment Re:Defense? (Score 1) 274

One little mistake where you aim the laser at something reflective, and you'd blind yourself.

One little mistake where you hit something reflective, and you'd kill yourself. A 50 KW laser may take seconds to burn through a iron engine block but will burn through soft flesh and bone MUCH faster. TFTFY

Comment Re:how much it took (Score 1) 274

There are two real questions to ask here:
1) is if the laser is in visible light or not. If you can't see the red dot source a mile off, you can't evade it.
2) what is the range of the weapon. The range matters mostly inside the atmostphere. This weapon mounted on a spacecraft (satellite, etc) would have almost unlimited range, since the density of space is so minimal. Inside the atmosphere is another issue.

Let x = number of seconds to disable a target.
Let x > 2.
Let y = range of laser in miles.
let y > 1
Ergo y/x is less than or equal to 1800mph

So the weapon would only be effective against something travelling less than 1800mph, given the internal tracking system of the weapon can keep the laser position in the same area. If the range of the weapon is say 5 miles then you could take out something going very fast indeed, and if the device couldn't see the beam, it wouldn't know it was under attack until it was too late. Ultraviolet lasers have higher powr ratings than visible light. The weapon is likely in the UV range. Hence any defensive protocol would require having a UV detector. You'd have to be able to detect the beam from any location. Since this laser is a fiber laser, and those are metal doped fibers, it is almost certainly a UV laser. Hence notihng to see with the naked eye even staring straight into it, for that brief time before you die.

Comment Re:Just damn (Score 1) 411

This is true today, but it wasn't always true. I grew up watching and seeing smoking commercials and movies that glamourized smoking. Tobacco companies spent loads of money advertising and figuring out how to make cigarettes more addictive (like adding arsenic and cyanide), and more legal and dirty tricks. Tobacco companies are not blameless in the addiction of smokers.

Comment Re:Just damn (Score 1) 411

Actually, the average life expectancy of a 65 year old is about 17.6 years (so 83.6 years old).

Rhe average life expectancy of a 70 year old is ~14 years (so 84 years old).

The average life ecpectancy of an 80 year old is ~8 years (or 88 years old).

The average life expectancy of an 83 year old is ~6.6 years (or 89.6 years old).

So smoking probably chopped six or more years off his life, and most people who live to retirement have a good chance of living to 83.

Actuarially speaking. Since we're geeks here and this is pure logical math, and Spock could appreciate this.

Comment Re:Just damn (Score 1) 411

Nicotine is mildly addictive, but for years tobacco companies added some much more addictive poisons (cyanide and arsenic, among other things) to really hook people. Yes, it is a matter of mind over matter. If you want to quit badly enough you can, but withdrawal can be a very debillitating thing and not everyone has that kind of psychological strength to follow through. Although, pretty much anyone could have done the easy work to know smoking isn't good for you. Lots of things are bad for us, and we risk them anyway. It's human nature. We're pre-wired for risk-taking. Some brave soul tried eatting a tomato, a member of the very deadly family of plants known as nightshades. Ditto eggplants. Furthermore, there are many other species on the planet that override their instincts and can reason to varying degrees. You have a poor grasp of the biological diversity of the planet.

Comment Use a multilayered approach (Score 1) 260

1. Communicate with your children. Let them know what is acceptable surfing and what is not. Teach them about the good and the bad of the Internet and how to recognize it. Be specific and thorough.
2. Use the Internet router to control their devices access. You should be able to write rules to limit them by the device.
3. Use controls on the pcs and mobile devices. For example on the PC you could use Timekpr.
4. You can log their activity.

What level of monitoring you use depends on many factors. Factors include, but are not limited to: your ability to trust your children, the trustability of your children to follow your rules, your level of paranoia.

Note on item #1. Communication is an ongoing two way street. This means you can't just sit down once with them and unleash them on the world. It means being a parent and actually being involved.

Be prepared for your children to eventually be able to break every control you implement.

Only you know can know what level of monitoring is right, and which is too little and which is too Big Brother.

Eventually they'll be able to figure out how to hack into your PCs or devices and bypass every measure you institute. At which point you should hire them to work for you.

Comment Re:No soul (Score 2) 351

Except he killed off Saruman at Orthanc, which pretty much excludes an actual Scouring of the Shire, which happened in fact in the book, but due to Sharkey's death at Orthanc, eliminates even an extended version addition. What Frodo saw in the Mirror was no the Scouring of the Shire, but the enslavement of the Shire by Sauron.

Two differnt things. Galadriel, "This is what will come to pass if you should fail."

A pretty accurate scene taken from the book.

Comment Re:Second hand view from a teacher (Score 1) 351

Damn! I should have read this review before I took a 10 year old child to see this, who totally loved all three movies. She also read the book.

First let's clear the air a bit. The Hobbit is 303 pages long. The three movies are split fairly evenly in thirds of the book chapter wise, not page wise. The third movie covers seven chapters out of nineteen.

A lot of good and bad stuff added in. A lot of good and boring stuff taken out. Darker. Everything is darker it seems these days (except maybe the Night at the Museum series, which isn't saying much.)

What is with the Damn Spice Worms and where the Hell is Atreides?

I'm a true fan, having first read these stories at around 10 myself.

The sound was so bad in this movie, I couldn't hear most of the conversations. I'm very hearing challenged, but had my aid in. I never have a problem hearing movies in a theater, with or without an aid. Well until now.

The HFR gave me motion sickness headaches.

Loved Thranduil's mount!

Strange scene with the dragon slaying. It was ok, I guess.

With all that he did, would it have killed him to have put the final scene from the book in?

One review I read was done by an infidel. Who would have picked on a scene with a Hobbit picking up stones and slaying orcs with perfect aim? Only one who didn't know much about Hobbits.

As disappointing as TLOTR was, but I still enjoyed some of it, as I did TLOTR. This last one needs a bit more time in the edit room to remove a bunch of stupid, wasteful scenes. Almost as disappointing as when he killed Saruman off at Orthanc. WHAT!? No Scouring of the Shire?!! Sacrilege.

This will eventually make a fairly decent 45 minute movie.

Slashdot Top Deals

The only difference between a car salesman and a computer salesman is that the car salesman knows he's lying.

Working...