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


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

Comment Re:I'm Confused (Score 1) 111

Indeed, if we are talking about untrustworthy countries, most places are looking kinda bad these days. The US has some really bad laws (DMCA etc.) and registrars based there are likely infiltrated by or actively cooperating with the NSA. UK registrars have similar issues withe GCHQ.

The other issue, is related to privacy and whether your 'trusted' registrar chain is sharing information with other entities, for which you did not explicitly agree to, in a clear and understandable contract?

Comment Re:I'm Confused (Score 2) 111

Why in the hell would anyone trust certificates signed by a Chinese CA to begin with?

Maybe ask the question differently: Why would you trust any company? In the end it comes down to the chain of trust, for which due diligence is part of, along with the fact no flags have been raised at any point. The flag here is that there is behaviour to create doubt, but why should it just be 'because it is Chinese'?

Comment Re:Allow opt-out (Score 2) 194

Nothing should *ever* be opt-out. The default should always be to opt-in. If you can't make that enabling process easy to do and successfully sell the idea to your prospective end users (AKA "source of data" - because they are absolutely going to be saving all your DNS queries as "metadata"), then maybe it wasn't such a good idea to start with.

I won't argue with that, though I was more thinking about the alternative of not having a choice (opt-in or opt-out), as to having this imposed. I just don't want to see a 'Great Moat of Britain', being imposed. There are enough right wing isolationist attitudes at play, in the country today, that we don't need another one added to the fray.

Comment Re:Legally logical -- but leads to certain things (Score 1) 238

I would also argue that when they present the product they present it as a "computer with MS Windows installed", so it is clear from the outset what is being offered. If the person doesn't want that configuration, then they should look elsewhere. There are plenty of alternatives, and based on the opinions of the /. readership, better ones.

At the same time, then could also include a refund cost of $0 and charge $100 admin and support fee as part of the small print?

Comment Re:Failure on the *pad* not the rocket (Score 2) 338

It all depends how you read the quote. Just like exam questions. I read it the same way you did, now see they probably meant this was the 'exact same configuration', as opposed to 'previously flown'. Choice of words can be a huge thing in conveying a clear message. Of course, they may have chosen the wording to confuse?

BTW I got my clarification that it wasn't a previously flown stage from:

Comment Inter-connection (Score 1) 94

Well, if the federal government forced on messaging systems a requirement to interchange with other messaging systems, then some of this may be reduced? Back in the 20th century this was done for the voice-landline networks and in many ways has resulted in the only non-fragmented, multi-vendor, communications system we have today. GSMA was formed because of the fragmentation of the analogue cellular networks at the time, but inherited to a certain extent the regulatory requirements to interconnect.

XMPP held a certain promise there, but because there was no regulatory requirement, businesses just said 'screw this and lets keep our little nation states isolated for more money'. We saw this happen with both Facebook and Google. Other systems just made it difficult for apps such as Pidgin to talk to their systems from the start.

Myself I would welcome any move to interconnect, since I have 5 messaging apps just to be able to keep up with friends, since the favoured platform varies with region. SMS isn't the best, but most friends still have a phone number.

Comment Re:In the meantime Canada ISPs are behind (Score 1) 150

This story was more about cellular carriers rather than ISPs: even in the US, ISPs are really pathetic in terms of IPv6 support. How are Canadian cellular carriers, like Rogers, in terms of IPv6 support?

Non-existant. They don't even know what IPv6 is. In the US there is already a move and while some may be dual stack, they are ultimately going pure IPv6 with NAT64 and DNS64, for performance reasons. This is part of the reason Apple required iOS apps to be IPv6 capable to be in the App Store.

Comment Re:She needs some crowdfunding herself (Score 1) 84

I am not blaming the victims. I am simply saying that you try to reduce risk where possible. Even with the belief that you have covered all risk scenarios, there is still a possibility that people will get screwed.

For the scenario you provided, while the ultimate blame is still on the attacker, you can still argue that they increased the risk factor by choosing the passage they did. I experienced a similar situation recently, where my bag was stolen. While the ultimate issue is with person who took the bag (frigging low life of a person), I need to accept that I was a little too trusting in where I put my bag and that I didn't factor in how I was facilitating the opportunity for a crime.

Slashdot Top Deals

!07/11 PDP a ni deppart m'I !pleH