Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:stealthy? (Score 5, Interesting) 179

slow and stealthy denial of service attacks

I don't think a DOS can be stealthy......if it's denying service, are people going to notice?

A stealthy DOS is when the attack looks like a normal occurrence, and not an attack. It is not the DOS that is stealthy, it is the attack or, rather, the reason for the lack of service.

It is a very neat thing, actually. Say you have a very long, segmented fence. There are 1000000 segments, and every day 1 of those will break and stay broken for 10 seconds. You can't explore that, because it is random, and you can't try all 1000000 segments in 10 seconds. However, if you can force the dice and make a specific segment tail, you can be there and exploit it, because you know which one and when. To the external observer, however, it was just a normal, run of the mill segment fail.

It is the same concept. The failure is there, they notice it, but it is done in such a way they don't notice it is an attack.

Comment Re:Hey look at us, we are still relevant! (Score 1) 394

If their "mission" is openness - and the info is that damning - shouldn't they be publishing it? I mean, isn't that sort of the point of Wikileaks? Or just attention whoring?

Or they are worried about responsible disclosure?
It is one thing to show the USA is spying. It is another thing to provide names e description of the spies themselves.

Comment Re: Incompetence (Score 1) 225

Neither. 3) Partial panopticians do not work much better than minimal surveillance, and no matter how hard or diligently people work to stop destructive assholes, a few are always going to slip through. Honestly, the effectiveness of even a hypothetical full panopticon is dubious.

You do not need these hyperbolic, extreme scenarios to explain reality.

^^^^^^^ Stupidity and Incompetence. Your #3 is just an extrapolation of my #2.

Comment Re:Incompetence (Score 1) 225

They needed the Boston bombing to justify the surveillance. They probably let it happen just like they let happen the 9/11 attacks.

Which is more likely:

1) They are evil and secretly let these attacks happen, which could costs the lives of people they know and people from their families (something can always go wrong...)
2) They are stupid and incompetent

Comment So, more OPENSOURCE encryption? (Score 3, Informative) 207

This has nothing to do with encryption, and has everything with software you can't audit and verify yourself is secure.

I mean, do you really think it is that unlikely there are backdoors and/or monitoring hooks in your Cisco router? Or your Linksys AP? Or whatever?

The moment you trust blindly, be it the government or companies in a position to be influenced by others, you are putting yourself at risk.

Saying this is a cryptography issue, and not a "blackbox" issue, makes me wonder about ulterior motives...

Comment Re:sounds like they're running exchange (Score 1) 165

As an Exchange administrator, I can say that searching across an entire mail database is absolutely possible, and also very simple to do from the Management Shell. They're either lying, or just don't want to do it.

It is also possible on Notes, any Unix mailbox format (maildir, mbox, maildir+, w/e), and any other e-mail system I can think of.

Slashdot Top Deals

The trouble with being punctual is that people think you have nothing more important to do.

Working...