Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


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

Comment Re:Exposing those who store plaintext passwords (Score 2) 119

There are a few companies that might respond, but generally the answer is no. Because they have legal resources to threaten you. For exposing their lack of security. Cheaper for them to lawyer up than secure up.

It's kind of hard to get those "legal resources" to work for you when they suddenly discover you have no revenue left to pay them, due to an incessant stream of constant and successful hacking.

By not addressing security, at some point you'll either run out of customers or money. Either way means death in business unless you're smart enough to respect all of the risks to prevent a premature demise.

Comment Re:An utterly pointless filter. (Score 1) 273

I suspect it's not primarily celebrities that want their age removed. Their age will be known anyway. This is for nobodies and maybe C-list celebs that will no longer pass the first filter. "Damn, more than 200 applicants. Throw out anyone over 40!". When this happens it does not matter how much plastic surgery you have had to look younger.

So, in an industry that practically showcases age discrimination, you honestly believe that the application to work in such an industry would somehow be devoid of the box marked "birth date"..??

Hiding this on IMDB won't prevent shit, as many people who are not even applicants have pointed out.

Comment Re:This may be somewhat accurate .... (Score 1) 147

Once you start taking an interest in dishonest play in a computer game and experience the thrill of successfully beating the system to do it -- you're exhibiting the same characteristics the common criminal does (enjoys the challenge of outsmarting the system for personal gain).

I would argue that those are the characteristics of any successful businessman.

To put a finer point on it, I would say that the behavior of cheating and continuing to cheat due to laughable "punishment" is more akin to banking executives, as recently demonstrated by Wells Fargo getting slapped on the wrist.

Comment Re:An utterly pointless filter. (Score 1) 273

Problem is not twenty-somethings, it's expiring 30-somethings submitting photos taken when they were 20.

I'm sorry, I didn't quite catch that...did you say expiring 30-somethings who feel entitled to use utter bullshit to land a job?

Seems to me the problem has little to do with age, and everything to do with accepting that kind of moronic behavior.

Comment Re:Comment (Score 1) 273

Acting is one of those professions where age discrimination probably isn't going away.... type casting isn't going away either.

Carry Fisher and Harrison Ford aren't going to be the stars of the any teen movies unless they are cast as mom and dad.

The world is one of those places where age discrimination probably isn't going away.

And I'm pretty sure the aforementioned celebrities both understand why they're no longer being cast in bikini/topless roles, and do not assume they're an unfair victim of discrimination when asked to play Grandma or Grandpa roles these days. Common sense.

We humans don't stay pretty forever, no matter what a plastic surgeon is selling.

Comment An utterly pointless filter. (Score 4, Insightful) 273

If Hollywood actually gave a shit about age as much as this article claims they do, then plastic surgery wouldn't still be running rampant today.

Hollywood cares about how you look, not how old a piece of paper says you are. They've cast plenty of twenty-somethings as teenagers, and the sheer power of makeup has allowed actors and actresses of all ages to portray dozens of roles that are either much younger or much older than their actual age. I find this particular information filter totally pointless.

Comment Re:Am A Noob Too (Score 1) 269

Telling people to put their baby monitor in the DMZ is not going to solve any of their concerns and is also not going to keep them from being part of a botnet.

Most of the devices in their normal network aren't going to be quite so shittily secured by design. You want to protect your internal network from IoT devices, sure, but you really want to protect those IoT devices from the internet at large.

I'm not quite sure when or where you've figured out how to actually secure an IoT device well enough to prevent it from being used as an attack vector without essentially breaking it's functionality, but my entire point regarding DMZ was to address another risk with potentially open file shares on a network.

And do I really want to protect these devices from the internet at large? What exactly is MY direct level of personal responsibility to secure what is essentially being sold to us as a black box piece of hardware that's supposed to be "plug and play"? You know what, how about fuck that shit. I say let the damn things run rampant on a botnet somewhere until it becomes obvious who the culprit hardware and vendor is. Only when manufacturers suffer rather massive public embarrassments that affect thousands of their customers will they actually even remotely try and address the issue. Remember the problem has to be large enough for a manufacturer to actually give a shit (legally, morally, and ethically, which you should already know will take a LOT of financial impact.)

TL; DR - Fuck helping secure black box consumerware. That's the vendors job, not mine.

Comment Re:Am A Noob Too (Score 1) 269

Dude, I'm not a network technician but I've been putting computers together since the late 80s and have been running Linux OSs as my desktop OS for over a decade now...

And I couldn't set up the network you described without some serious googling.

How are we supposed to expect normal people to do it? Do routers come with VLAN set up out of the box, jailed so that it doesn't send data out of your network?

No, but most routers these days come with a configuration that allows you to define a DMZ segment, which would likely be even easier for the "average" consumer to at least try and learn how to set up.

Really, this is what is the crux of IoT security; simply firewall it off from your normal internal network where your other computing devices live. Doing this one step does mitigate quite a bit of risk to your other home devices, since there's probably not much you're going to be able to do to convince the manufacturer of the IoT device that their default security sucks ass.

Comment Re:How do you know? (Score 1) 269

If it needs to connect to a subscription service outside your home it has the potential to become part of a bot net.

Can you trust your thermostat to not browse your files?

Guess that depends on the "required" app permissions, since that side of IoT is the part that is far more blatantly in the obtrusiveness of IoT.

Comment Re:How do you know? (Score 4, Interesting) 269

Just install Norton AV on it, and add McAfee to be sure. Then, even a botnet wouldn't want to anymore run on that device

Yeah, that's it! "Should I have run MacAfee on my FirstAlert online smoke detectors?" you say to yourself as you gaze at the remains of your house.

IoT or not, odd how you made me wonder if the smoke alarm itself has ever been the source of a fire...

I need coffee. It's too early for this.

Comment Re:Companies must be embarassed (Score 1) 183

If you find a vulnerability, companies must be exposed loudly and embarrassingly as possible. That (or legal threats) are the only things that can stop them. Remember, there are companies out there that still don't hash passwords.

One major flaw in your theory here. When everyone these days gets hacked, it's not really embarrassing for anyone to admit it's happened.

It's kind of like admitting you've had diarrhea before. Big fucking deal. So has the other 99.9% of the human race.

Comment Let's limit CFO pay and bonuses, see how it works. (Score 1) 222

Hey there Mr. CFO. Time for some lessons in business. First of all, customers don't like to be told what they need and don't need. If demand exists, you provide. Or you lose customers to those who are willing to listen to demand.

The more critical lesson here is humans don't like limits. Perhaps this would be more obvious to you if your Board of Directors suddenly announced salary and bonus caps for all executives at half your current rate. You know, because one "doesn't need" to be paid more than they can consume in a year.

If Verizon customers don't speak with their wallets now on this, rest assured this will be standard practice for every major carrier within 6 months. Don't assume it won't. They're easily labeled an oligopoly for valid reasons.

Comment Re:criteria for advanced technology? (Score 1) 137

take a history class and pay attention this time.

We invented, built and used nuclear weapons all without the aid of anything you'd consider technologically advanced today, decades before the internet.

Speaking of history, I'll do my best to constrain myself to not point out the sheer stupidity of your example by pointing out the simple fact that only one of the topics of discussion here actually holds a use and benefit to mankind.

The other one humanity could have fucking done without. Forever.

Comment Re:kthxapple (Score 2) 97

Apple responded to the news by saying, "Apple strongly cautions against installing any software that hacks iOS."

Luca responded that it took "courage" to talk about his exploit and possibly withholding it from Apple.

I say he offers it in exchange for a headphone jack.

Slashdot Top Deals

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (8) I'm on the committee and I *still* don't know what the hell #pragma is for.