Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Telling people what can and cant do with (Score 4, Informative) 83

Telling people what can and cant do with their own property is called Communism.

No, under Communism there is no private property at all — it is all communal. What you are describing is Fascism. It is generally better than Communism, but still quite nasty — and inefficient.

Submission + - "Most serious" Linux privilege-escalation bug ever is under active exploit (

operator_error writes: Lurking in the kernel for nine years, flaw gives untrusted users unfettered root access.

By Dan Goodin — 10/20/2016

A serious vulnerability that has been present for nine years in virtually all versions of the Linux operating system is under active exploit, according to researchers who are advising users to install a patch as soon as possible.

While CVE-2016-5195, as the bug is cataloged, amounts to a mere privilege-escalation vulnerability rather than a more serious code-execution vulnerability, there are several reasons many researchers are taking it extremely seriously. For one thing, it's not hard to develop exploits that work reliably. For another, the flaw is located in a section of the Linux kernel that's a part of virtually every distribution of the open-source OS released for almost a decade. What's more, researchers have discovered attack code that indicates the vulnerability is being actively and maliciously exploited in the wild.

"It's probably the most serious Linux local privilege escalation ever," Dan Rosenberg, a senior researcher at Azimuth Security, told Ars. "The nature of the vulnerability lends itself to extremely reliable exploitation. This vulnerability has been present for nine years, which is an extremely long period of time."

The underlying bug was patched this week by the maintainers of the official Linux kernel. Downstream distributors are in the process of releasing updates that incorporate the fix. Red Hat has classified the vulnerability as "important."

Comment Re:But it was Ok to ban most of California voters? (Score 1) 545

Eich publicly supported Proposition 8, and donated a large sum of money

It was not deliberately public — only inasmuch, as largish donations must be registered (in violation of the First Amendment, which is usually understood to protect anonymous speech).

all to deny certain people the right

Whatever. My point was, 52% of California voters voted for the same thing. Which means, the entire State should've been boycotted until it purged those thought-criminals somehow.

He was a bad cultural fit for Mozilla.

He was a perfectly fine "cultural fit" for Mozilla for many years before that, and would've remained just fine after that — just as Mr. Thiel remains fine for Facebook.

But the boycott threatened to dent Firefox' market share and that is why they panicked. The fears were completely unjustified, of course, as Chick-Fill-A has shown, SJWs lack the stamina for any sort of long-lasting damage.

Comment But it was Ok to ban most of California voters? (Score 3, Insightful) 545

"We can't create a culture that says it cares about diversity and then excludes almost half the country because they back a political candidate,"

When Brendan Eich was ousted from Mozilla, it was for his private backing of California Proposition 8, which won the backing of over 52% of California voters. By the hateful logic of Mr. Eich's detractors, the entire State of California should've been boycotted by the freedom-loving web-sites until the State purged their thought-criminals.

Where Mr. Zuckerberg stood on that boycott is unclear, but the words he is preaching now, should've been uttered then.

Submission + - Soros-linked corporation supplies voting machines to 16 States (

mi writes: Remember, how suspicious (and wrong!) it was for Diebold, whose management openly supported Bush, to be supplying voting machines? We even discussed it here over the years...

Well, a Soros-linked company from the UK is supplying 16 States with voting hardware this year. Will there be a comparable amount of suspicion?

Submission + - SPAM: Soros-linked corporation supplies voting machines to 16 States

mi writes: Remember, how suspicious (and wrong!) it was for Diebold, whose management openly supported Bush, to be supplying voting machines? We even discussed it here over the years...

Well, a Soros-linked company is supplying 16 States with voting hardware this year. Will there be a comparable amount of suspicion?

Link to Original Source

Submission + - SPAM: Google's Eric Schmidt Working Directly With the Clinton Campaign

An anonymous reader writes: Eric Schmidt, the chief executive of Alphabet, Google’s parent company, is working directly with Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, according to a memo contained within an email released by WikiLeaks.

“Discreet conversations” of forming “working relationships” with companies such as Facebook and Apple were also facilitated as early as October 2014, the memo stated. This is at least six months prior to when Clinton announced her candidacy for president.

The document was attached to an Oct. 26, 2014 email sent from Robby Mook, now Clinton’s campaign manager, to Cheryl Mills, a longtime Clinton aide; David Plouffe, Barack Obama’s previous campaign manager; and John Podesta, Clinton’s current campaign chairman whose email account was compromised.

The email was posted to Wikileaks after hackers believed to be working with the Russian government breached Podesta’s email account.

Link to Original Source

Comment Re:Still using Russian equipment? (Score 1) 65

if you're not going to listen to Trump's own words which you can watch with a minute long visit to YouTube

You make claims, you supply proof. As far as I know, Trump never expressed the sentiments you attribute to him (without any evidence).

And when President Clinton starts giving Ukraine Javelins, I expect you to write an apology.

Deal. Will you apologize, when she starts talking about "the need to move one beyond past hostilities" or "work out a reasonable compromise" — such as, when Putin is replaced by someone new in Kremlin, still without any intention to return Crimea?

Comment Re:Still using Russian equipment? (Score 0) 65

But you're comparing Obama's naivite

It was not just Obama's naivette — Hillary Clinton was running the State Department at the time. More to the point, it was not just the two of them either — the entire Democratic Establishment thought so, dismissing "Republican hawks" as "war-mongers". Whether they did it for personal gain, like Clinton, or out of sheer idiocy, like Biden ( the fount of foreign policy expertise, according to Democrats), they'll keep doing it.

You undercut your case when you link sources like "freebeacon", "powerlineblog", "breitbart"

No, I don't. First of all, my sources also include WSJ, NYTimes, and even Politifact. For someone, who offers no citations at all, it is rather rich to complain about mine.

Second, a fact remains a fact, no matter, who reports it.

the Clinton foundation is one of the highest rated major charities in the US

Yeah, sure. And Obama is a Nobel Peace Prize winner.

what you have against a charity that spends nearly 90% of its funds on stamping out AIDS and other diseases [...]

See? No citation again. Let me help you. Of the $91.3mln spent by the foundation in 2014, according to their own tax-filings, only $5.2 million went to charitable grants.

Your "Podesta story" is about Podesta (not Clinton) [...] he probably divested

You mentioned a number of things about Trump's advisors, including Manafort, who once help Yanukovich. It is perfectly fair for me to bring up Podesta. And I can keep doing it, too.

Versus Trump, who personally has owned and run businesses heavily backed by Russians

Citations are missing again, khmm... Let's see, if I can help. This? No... Sorry, you'll have to do it yourself.

Russians occasionally making investments in companies related to people related to Clinton

Clintons received — both directly and via their Foundation — billions of dollars. A lot of that came from Putin-controlled entities. Just in 2015, for example, when she was already actively engaged in elections, they reported as much $10 million in income. What do you suppose, they sold, other than some more cattle futures?

person who currently, actively, and strongly personally supports Putin

False. Pants on Fire.

has publicly advocated eliminating NATO

False. Pants on Fire.

wants to give Russia Crimea

False. Pants on Fire.

parades around information from Sputnik

Half true — irrelevant.

Comment Re:Still using Russian equipment? (Score 1) 65

Because it is irrelevant. First, all space launches, even those ostensibly for civilian use, are related to national security. Second, the real reason for a ban is not the fear, Russia may suddenly take over an ascending rocket and send it into Miami, but a desire to choke — or, at least, stop helping — Russia's rocket industry. Which it is already using to update/increase its collection of ICBMs — mostly pointed at us.

You don't have to be a "hawk" to realize this...

Slashdot Top Deals

When I left you, I was but the pupil. Now, I am the master. - Darth Vader