The information I really want to see is a statement clarifying this as either technical as in a failure of the security software somewhere, or administrative, as in someone left something open through error or poor security design choices.

It's important to know if this is a bug which is on all Linux systems, or someone made a human error.

Hell yes, and for key management sanity it is good to use a clear comment on keys so you know what they are for.

You also have to rebuild authorized_keys to check that no new or modified keys have been added. That would allow the hackers right back in at some future time. I keep a copy and cksum of authorized keys for every machine where I use keys, just so I can check. Yes, I'm paranoid.

I don't know if that's the case, but they could certainly set up a fake server if they have your public key and the server host keys. So generating a new host key pair is really required, forcing every user to change the key.

What a mess!

Actually some pretty modest hardware will generate very high thruput if tuned properly. The network stack default parameters we use today are remnants of what we did in the the 90s, when 16MB RAM was big, 4Mbit token ring was used, and 100k for a network buffer was a lot.

To increase thruput there are several things which can be done. The first is to increase the window size so that data can flow until the ACK packets get back. The second is to increase the packet size (aka jumbo packets, or MTU). After that you need to allocate enough buffer space to keep the pipe full on the transmit end and prevent buffer overflow on the receiving end. The OS needs to prioritize interrupt handling so the incoming data get handled, it doesn't need a lot of CPU, but it needs it NOW.

Finally, realize that the disk subsystem may become a bottleneck at Gbit speeds, sustained transfer to/from disk may take more than the minimal bargain drive. You don't need super hardware to use that Gbit, but you do need some optimal use of the hardware you have.

You sound a bit like a patent attorney explaining why something isn't prior art. We have found exoplanets by star wobble and solar planets by planet wobble, I think "unprecedented" is an overstatement, just my opinion. The method was certainly used previously in this system.

This method uses a beer can, of course it's measured in bars, where would you measure it, in churches?

That sounds great, what energy source is that? Because people living on the east coast of the US would sure like to get all those nasty polluting coal plants in the west shut down. The ones that put so much sulpher in the air that the acid rain makes the limestone bubble? Similar to the ones in Japan where you can develop photographs in some of the lakes?

Please let us know what power source you are talking about, because "Clean Coal" is an advertising slogan, not a reality. The technology to capture the SO2 and CO2 would raise the cost higher than buying politicians.

Not true, at least in the UK:

And there's the rub, if the mail is delivered as addressed, can it be said to be delivered incorrectly? This is why lawyers exist, to convince a judge or jury that what the law says is not what it means.

I have seen several articles lately (Example) suggesting the Viagra is useful in some people for fighting migraine and similar headaches. I don't know if old age or biofeedback was my solution, but I'm sure before I found relief I would have tried almost anything.

Previous articles about phones being bricked by Exchange mail admins led VMware to develop a phone hypervisor to run a 2nd copy of the phone OS, so you could have a business phone VM (with a separate number) and if something was done to the business phone, the personal phone would still be functional. Note that clearing all mail and contacts information seems to be a "feature" of Exchange, ie. a requirement rather than optional. While this is acceptable for a company provided phone, it's not for a personal phone being used for business for the benefit of the company.

Running a full function OS on a phone may or may not be as useful, in general the UI is not optimized for a small touch screen, so usability might be less than desired. This would make more sense on a tablet, using a netbook spin of Fedora or Ubuntu as a base, or Meego, or one of the small distributions like Puppy (build it for ARM?).

Other than providing some extra CPU power, I don't see that being dual core is in any way a requirement, unless the HVM is missing in the single core models.

When I was doing work requiring clearance (DoD and DoE at various times) there was a lot of stuff to understand about need to know. Having low level clerks see things I would restrict to cabinet level access is stupid, and no new research needed, just applying principles practiced in the 1970s.

Given the chance to design an access system, I would have a "can see" bit map and put characterizing bits (flags, whatever) on each item, so unless someone was cleared for all characteristics of a document or folder, they wouldn't even see that it exists.

I'm skipping some implementation details which are important, this isn't a technical forum, and I know they exist.

The problem is not the media, but the access to data. Given the breadth of the information topics, no one below cabinet level should have been able to see it all, much less some low level clerk. This was a failure of the need to know policy, and the attempt to blame wikileaks or the clerk for the release is clearly an attempt to disguise the failure of method. I covered the technology and ethical issues at length in a blog post when it happened.

I have held DoD and DoE clearance, and have worked with information control for companies like GE and SBC (now at&t)

This comes as no surprise. In any activity which is mostly limited by CPU in user mode, not much changes, you can track that over a number of operating systems. What has gotten slower is disk io and network transfer time, and some tests, such as web serving, may be using all or mostly pages in memory, so this is not as obvious as it might be.

In addition, the test was run in a virtual machine, so to some extent the huge host memory provided more resources, and the very fast disk hides poor choices in the io scheduling and provides additional write cache and buffers. In other words, neither the tests chosen, or the environment used, were typical for small server or generous desktop.

For a meaningful test no more than four CPUs (or two with hyperthreading) should be used, and all io should go to a real rotating disk, like a $100 1TB WD or Seagate, and the filesystems should be on that, not some fancy large SSD. Then some numbers can be identified which reflect the performance on machines in the small server or fast desktop price range of a motivated home user or budget limited small business. Then the limitations of the CPU and io scheduler changes will be more evident, and perhaps the performance using the deadline scheduler should be included, since discussions on Linux-RAID mailing list indicate that many of us find the default scheduler is a bottleneck for typical loads (particularly raid-[56]).

And they let college students vote at school if they bother to register. Since the colleges are all tax exempt we now have representation without taxation.

The saving is in that he isn't starting a company. So he has no costs for inventory, advertising, shipping, distributor discounts, etc. If he is building a dozen systems he can't win on cost over the hardware lifetime, but if he is building hundreds, he says he needs that many, he probably can shave quite a bit of the cost. But how much hardware is going on those machines, to drive the cost that high? Dell sells a reasonable office machine for just under $600, without massive discounts. Companies like eMachines go lower than that, and have similar performance. There is something driving up the cost we haven't been told.

The next obvious question is how much of the cost is software, and how much of that (possibly including the OS) is required cost? The old "easier if they're all the same" argument is usually made by a salesman or lazy purchasing agent, and often doesn't match reality. Data entry jobs which are poking numbers into web forms or spreadsheets don't require proprietary software. That doesn't mean that there may not be some need for commercial software, just that there's a lot of tasks in most enterprises which don't. And the "retraining cost" FUD is just that, people doing data entry, or any activity where the browser is the computer, need to learn login and start application from a menu or icon. Just like Windows. And free software will read/write most proprietary formats, so the need for a proprietary data format doesn't mean proprietary software is necessarily needed. One size does not fit all, there is probably room for saving in software, too.

This might even be a case for thin clients and a few servers, and get the cost way down, not enough information to guess, but a possible large saving. The problem is convincing management that the best approach is finding the most cost effective solution, not in finding the best price on the "way we always did it."

Okay, I admit I don't know if the Finnish state church service is called a mass, but the term was irresistable.