Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re: Why not? (Score 1) 972

And nobody has yet explained how the recipient of a classified email could have prevented it from being sent.

When you have a clearance, you (at least contractors do, I suppose government types might be different) have to undergo "training" on how to handle classified information. One of the things that you're taught is how to deal with receiving classified material on an unapproved computer.

Bottom line (for contractors at least) is that basically you immediately disconnect from the Internet, immediately stop using the computer (but do not close any running programs or turn it off), and immediately contact security who will start making arrangements to deal with it. Failure to do so is essentially a crime. (Or at least I sure thought it was. Apparently it isn't, if you're a Clinton.)

Receiving classified information isn't itself a crime, but receiving it and then not doing anything about it is. Or, at least, that's what I've been taught every time I'm forced to retake the Security Clearance Refresher Training.

Comment Re:Trump Trolling (Score 1) 972

ie the DNC generating good speeches and endorsements

They are? Everything I've heard about the DNC is that it's been an absolute disaster, with Bernie supporters constantly interrupting speakers who are spending most of their time castigating Bernie supporters for not falling into line after the DNC rigged the nomination for Hillary Clinton, to the point where something like half the delegates walked out after her coronation. Er, nomination. Sure, we'll pretend it was a fair nomination.

All the while Clinton is swinging rapidly back to her pre-Bernie positions, proving that she'll say anything for votes but her real priorities are supporting her Wall Street backers.

I'm not sure why Trump bothered to comment since the DNC convention so far is proving to be a complete disaster compared to the RNC convention.

Comment Re:The basest, vilest (Score 4, Informative) 972

Wrong. They recovered some of her emails, but not all of them. Some of the emails they were able to recover from the official state.gov servers, but an unknown quantity of emails were never recovered. To quote from Comey himself:

It is also likely that there are other work-related e-mails that they did not produce to State and that we did not find elsewhere, and that are now gone because they deleted all e-mails they did not return to State, and the lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery.

The bottom line is that we'll never know just how bad Clinton's handling of email was, unless someone (like Russia) comes forward with the emails they copied off her insecure server during the time it was running.

Comment Re:Oh boy (Score 1) 382

Almost certainly, but it has to piss Bernie Sanders supporters off. This is a guy who supports deregulating banks, who's anti-abortion, who didn't support LGBT rights until 2011.

The choice makes it clear that any Sanders supporter hoping that at the very least he'd help pull Clinton further left: he failed to do so.

It's unlikely it'll make any difference in the election, but it'll be interesting to see if this helps Hillary's recent collapse in the polls. (My guess is no - 538 says they expect it to make an 0.7% difference in her chances overall. Sanders supporters were never in swing states so for the most part they simply don't matter.)

Comment Re:Why? (Score 5, Insightful) 460

They haven't nominated Hillary yet. Her coronation is next week at the Democratic National Convention. Which means it's still conceptually possible that they could nominate someone else.

They won't, of course. But it's still theoretically possible. In some other universe where criminals get charged for their crimes.

Comment Re:They misread Sony's comment (Score 1) 57

I don't buy that explanation because they already stopped updating the game last year. If they're keeping the servers running (they are) and they're no longer doing any development (they aren't) there's no reason to arbitrarily kill cross platform support. Unless they're being forced to by some outside party.

It's not like they updated the PC client in such a way that the PS2 client stopped working. They actively removed support for a previously functional PS2 client, for no explained reason.

Comment Re:Someone Please Explain The Glitch (Score 2) 82

Some of the Pokestops are apparently paid ads from businesses. (I know that Ingress portals could be paid ads for businesses as well, so this isn't surprising.)

If we're going to talk about this stupid game, might as well mention that apparently their method of monetizing is making it impossible to catch Pokemon after you break a certain level, requiring you to buy "better" Pokeballs for real money or something along those lines.

Comment Re: Just what the world needs (Score 1) 268

Why? Destroying Gawker is probably the single most noble thing he's ever done. It almost makes up for founding PayPal.

Gawker is a shitty, entirely morally bankrupt "news" website and needed to be destroyed. If every one of Gawker's website vanished tomorrow, the world would be a better place. No one will miss Gawker.

Comment Re:Try polling people with security clearances (Score 1) 482

Yep. Every year I'm forced to go through a "refresher course" that includes reminders not to send classified material through email, you morons. Complete with the world's simplest multiple choice quiz to prove that I did, in fact, understand that "don't send classified material through email" means "don't send classified material through email." (Along with a whole bunch of other silly things, like "do you give that hot lady at the bar classified information so she'll sleep with you? A) Yes, I'm David Petraeus, B) No, I understand that classified material can only be given to others in a very specific set of circumstances.")

I thought everyone with a clearance was supposed to take some form of training class but I'm betting Hillary Clinton somehow, for some reason, managed to skip it and that's why they can't show "intent."

I'm also betting that the real reason that "no reasonable prosecutor" would indict is because they don't want to risk the chance of losing the case or it going all the way to the Supreme Court. Because you know that, Hillary Clinton being a lawyer, such a case would drag out for years. Would you want to the prosecutor that derailed the campaign of the who might have been the first woman president, only to end up with an acquittal? Or, worse, with the case going to the Supreme Court and a precedent being set that, yes, you in fact do need clear criminal intent to prosecute? Your career would be over.

That's the major issue - apparently the statutes are vague enough that it's possible Clinton could successfully argue that as there was no clear criminal intent, she can't be charged. And nobody really wants to test it - so she skates instead.

And we're already moving on to the inevitable Phase Two of this whole thing, where her aides that set up the server and were forced to use it as the only way to reach her get their careers ended as the State Department punishes them for Hillary Clinton's misdeeds.

Comment Re:so....gamergate was right (Score 2) 81

Really? Were you just ignoring it then?

It was even covered on Slashdot at the time.

There was plenty of outrage at the time.

Even in 2007 you can see plenty of people with the opinion that the game journalism industry is simply corrupt to the core and aren't surprised at all to see a journalist fired for giving an advertiser a bad review.

Comment Re:So, in short... (Score 2) 109

Pretty much.

This is exactly the same as those old Windows apps that would only run as admin, even if they didn't really need admin privileges. Sure, they might not do anything particular evil with admin privileges that they don't really need.

But only half the issue with Windows programs requiring admin access was the potential for the program itself doing something evil. Half the problem was security flaws in said programs being used by malicious third parties.

It gets worse with games like Pokemon Go where half the game is on the server. Sure, Niantic may not be doing anything with their complete access to your Google account today. But if they get hacked in the future or if they later decide they do want to make access of that full access... what then?

The entire reason behind granular permissions is to reduce the damage that can happen when something goes wrong.

And there's also the point where apparently Google never asks you if you want to hand over full control of your Google account to what's now a third party.

Comment Re:And on iOS, you compromise your Google account (Score 1) 110

Beats me, I haven't tried the app yet, I was basing my post on this Ars Technica article.

The comments are suggesting that this issue exists for some Android users as well, but not all.

But, yeah, apparently it skips the part where it asks for permissions (sometimes, always for iOS?) and just gives Niantic full control of your Google account.

Slashdot Top Deals

Can't open /usr/fortunes. Lid stuck on cookie jar.

Working...