Easy, option C. RAID is not a backup.
Easy, option C. RAID is not a backup.
A minor perception problem that we need to work past, and partly have already. Modern browsers all show special symbols in the URL bar for verified HTTPS connections - usually green or blue highlighting. In line with plaintext connection behavior, these shouldn't be shown for self-signed certs.
I think that countries need to switch to an open ballot because of the conflicts between the secret ballot and hybrid direct/representative democratic systems and electronic voting (which thanks to advances in cryptography becomes more viable every day). However the only reason the US didn't have huge trouble with an open ballot was the decreased motive for vote buying, since all voters in that time were white males - and usually from the upper classes at that (during much of that period, the white males also had to own land and/or pass an "intelligence test" and travel in ways that weren't practical for the working class in order to vote). In short, the country club crowd had no reason to pay or coerce each other to vote the way they all wanted. The fledgling democracy would've been clearly identified as an oligopoly by today's standards.
An open ballot being shoehorned into today's world would cause corruption and vote fraud to skyrocket. A switch to an open ballot system, which again I think is a worthwhile pursuit, will need to be accompanied with very strong technical and legal countermeasures to prevent this.
How has the CA that sold the cert to the wifi company not been blacklisted? I assume they've legally cleared themselves by putting notification of this in the wifi portal EULA, but that is ethically wrong as hell. The CA sold a cert for use in what is effectively a blackhat SSL MITM appliance that is supposedly being used with the best of intentions.
Ethically the right thing to do would be to spell out how the airline wifi works on the portal page and include instructions on how to accept a self-signed MITM cert for those who wish to continue.
I think Firefox handles self-signed certs that same way as most other browsers, so you should be able to permanently trust the cert at the first use. It sounds like you might be using temporary profiles or private browsing sessions.
That said, the usual system of handling self-signed certs is a stupid one. Self-signed certs should be treated exactly the same as unencrypted traffic. There should be no "DANGER WILL ROBINSON!" warning when one is encountered. A self-signed cert is in no way less secure than a plaintext connection. The user should have the option to store and permanently trust a self-signed cert at any time.
That's not inspecting the traffic content, that's a NIDS that builds a profile of "normal operation" based on traffic patterns and checks against it. It would stop all your file shares from being uploaded at full speed over HTTPS to a novel server for example, but nothing much less blatant than that. It wouldn't do anything about a user passing malware back and forth all day long over their usual SSL'ed webmail or web chat service for example.
D'oh, I meant "A CA-signed cert saves you that trouble,"
Keep doing what you're doing now. A self-signed cert saves you that trouble, but the downside is that it's already been leaked to a convenient centralized key repository which can be accessed by TPTB and any sufficiently skilled hackers.
Look into using key pinning to reduce the effort involved.
PowerShell is a way to force Scripters to become
There are many limitations and bugs with PowerShell commands and if you want it to work on all win boxes you need to use
IOW: Oracle use some of the SQL query language from IBM and created an entire company around it.
Good thing Oracle lost. IBM could have sued them into oblivion!
That would only be useful if it secretly added code to call home.
If I were Putin, and I had dirt on Clinton, I'd hang on to it until she were President. Much more leverage that way.
Why? Then you have someone with a head on their shoulders running your rival country and all you can do is try to get leverage on them after the fact with dirt on someone who is already covered in it (both candidates are well-covered, in fact). If you release the dirt before the election, you might get a fawning fanboy of yours who thinks like a 12-year-old boy running the US instead, giving you far more leverage overall than threatening Hillary with yet another skeleton for her cavernous walk-in wardrobe full of them.
You're wrong about H.265. It offers massive compression improvements but also requires massively greater processing power to play back.
If anything, they should just turn the pylon sideways so it looks like a "Play" symbol, maybe that will silence the complainers
If you would know the value of money, go try to borrow some. -- Ben Franklin