Like I said, if you want security, you have to keep it within your walls.
Like I said, if you want security, you have to keep it within your walls.
Why did this part only make it to page 3?
One issue that has yet to arise is whether offshoring the utility's IT services would create long-term security risks, particularly if work is moved offshore.
Of course it does. IMHO, IT shouldn't be outside of a secure environment's walls. Even with "good" IT people, when they can VPN in from home computers and do things, it can compromise the security of the network. When your entire shop is off-shore, there's no one standing guard to make sure things are safe.
The risks are huge. It can range from malware on a workstation, to malicious actions by a 3rd party or employee.
The "what could possibly go wrong" goes from the confines of their office, to
I'm surprised DHS hasn't said no to this. They're worried about critical infrastructure, including power utilities, being compromised by outside attackers. When all the work is being done by someone other than in-house staff, it's inviting exactly that kind of trouble.
I guess "best case" here is that they're trying to get a bunch of people to quit, so they can get fresh locals in for less pay, screwing the existing staff in the process.
There are a few instances where they have found the specific piece of electronics that were causing problems, and in some cases purchased it from the passenger.
1995, 737 airplane.
A passenger laptop computer was reported to cause autopilot disconnects during cruise. Boeing purchased the computer from the passenger and performed a laboratory testing
1996/1997, 767 airplane.
Over a period of eight months, Boeing received five reports on interference with various navigation equipment (uncommanded rolls, displays blanking, flight management computer [FMC]/ autopilot/standby altimeter inoperative, and autopilot disconnects) caused by passenger operation of a popular handheld electronic game device. In one of these cases, the flight crew confirmed the interference by turning the unit on and off to observe the correlation.
1998, 747 airplane.
A passengerâ(TM)s palmtop computer was reported to cause the airplane to initiate a shallow bank turn. One minute after turning the PED off, the airplane returned to "on course." When the unit was brought to the flight deck, the flight crew noticed a strong correlation by turning the unit back on and watching the anomaly return, then turning the unit off and watching the anomaly stop. Boeing was not able to purchase the actual PED...
Funny thing, all the cases of problems caused weren't cell phones.
Farther down the page, they discuss cell phones. They do put out more noise on critical frequencies, sometimes over what the FAA permits for the aircraft itself. In testing, none actually caused problems.
Boeing conducted a laboratory and airplane test with 16 cell phones typical of those carried by passengers, to determine the emission characteristics of these intentionally transmitting PEDs. The laboratory results indicated that the phones not only produce emissions at the operating frequency, but also produce other emissions that fall within airplane communication/navigation frequency bands
... Emissions at the operating frequency were as high as 60 dB over the airplane equipment emission limits ...
Boeing also performed an airplane test on the ground with the same 16 phones. The airplane was placed in a flight mode and the flight deck instruments, control surfaces, and communication/navigation systems were monitored. No susceptibility was observed.
Well.. Whales have a vestigial pelvis. Somehow the author, editor, and whoever else they have reviewing news stories failed to recognize the glaring mistake.
This is actually a good tangent, though...
I see what you did there.
Ya, I've seen this kind of troll before..
Most of his argument is that the UI is different. It's like saying that if you don't have a Gnome/KDE/Unity UI, you're not running Linux..
As a sysadmin, when I'm in a shell on Android, I see Linux. When I'm in a shell on a Mac, I see a Unix. When I open a cmd.exe window on Windows, I see Windows.
I was having some fun with some of my older Android phones a couple weeks ago. I put Dropbear Server II on. I had 4 shells open to 4 phones. I was remounting filesystems, moving files, using wget to collect stuff from my server, installpkg packages (with pm), chmod'ing files, and rebooting as I saw fit. It's just another *nix, and by his own admission a barely modified Linux kernel...
If it looks like a bear, and acts like a bear, and everything else says it's a bear, it must be a spherical chicken in a vacuum.
You're expecting too much.
Android is just another embedded *nix. I'm happy that it's Linux. You shouldn't expect it to have a whole bunch of scripting languages, and unnecessary servers.
With all that said, it is a functional embedded system, where you *do* have the ability. to extend it do to all kinds of neat things.
They provided hooks to just about everything in Java. I'm not terribly delighted with that decision, but it's what they went with.
For most purposes, play is their package manager. For the majority of users, they'll never open a terminal. I do 99% of my phone stuff through the happy little touchscreen. That's the nice interface provided.
If you really want the CLI package manager, you'll find pm, which does just about everything you'd expect from a package manager.
You can get Apache, Perl, and pretty much whatever else you want on there. Is it going to be like developing for an x86 server or desktop? Not really. It's a different platform.
If you're going to be developing for distribution, and not just for yourself, I'd recommend about the Android way to do it.. If you're doing it yourself, grab a copy of Perl for Android, and enjoy.
If you're going to complain, well, that's up to you. At least research it a little.
I don't know why anyone would have that problem.. At the end of the Great War, I shipped back plenty of barbed wire and landmines. More than enough to border my property. It was very useful during the Great Depression.
There have been a few stray animals that have caused problem, but no damned kids on the lawn.
Them youngins don't know how to protect their lawns.
I'll go back to watching those funny kids, Larry, Moe, and Curly. Great fun they are.
That's been discussed a lot on here in the past.
One in particular that I remember was about a laptop locking cable that you could unlock with a pen in just a few seconds.
If a criminal wants a laptop, and sees 3 sitting around. No one is at them, and he has a few moments of no one looking. One is on a desk with the easily defeated cable. One is on another desk, tied down with a piece of string. The third was just put into a laptop bag, and is on the floor by a chair.
He won't go for the one with the cable. Even if he was prepared and knew exactly how to do it, it is still an obstacle. Even the one in the string requires a little extra time to untie or cut. The one in the bag on the floor is easiest, as he can just pick it up and keep walking.
The only variation on this would be the perceived value. If the one in the bag looked like an antique, he'd disregard it in favor of one that he can sell. If it's the one with the cable, and may get someone's attention by picking the lock, he may just move on to somewhere else.
The same applies to homes. All things equal except for security, the insecure house is the easy target and will get broken into. If the insecure house is a dilapidated hovel, but there is a nicer house that's an easy enough target, he'll go for the nicer one or pick a different neighborhood with better targets.
That's some serious pressure. Do you make coal into diamonds in your spare time?
The way checkpoints have been enforced just about everywhere I've gone, it's not the volume of the liquid contained, but the potential volume of the container...
If you have a 1 gallon container with 1oz of liquid remaining, they'll still seize it.
... and a quick Google search says your wrong.
And a somewhat NSFW link with some glass objects that shouldn't be there.
Density makes a difference. It won't jump out like metal, but it should be visible. here are some examples and notes
Neutrinos are into physicists.