66 posts • joined 25 Mar 2008
I'm posting this blindly without reading all of the other comments first, but...
...just so no one else makes the same confusing mistake I did when reading this, please note that there is a difference between cert.org and us-cert.gov.
Two different groups using the Computer Emergency Response Team moniker. One is a part of the federal government, and the other is a part of a university (that I believe receives federal funding, so... tomato/tomato).
This post has been deleted by a moderator
"On the other hand, this might give them a fighting chance to do something correctly, but my breath is not being held in and I believe there are no rashers of bacon at 30,000 ft. The teachers are already illiterates."
I'm assuming that there's something lost in translation here, but at least in The States, depending on the airline, bacon can be found at 30,000 feet above sea level.
One of the last paragraphs of the article caused one of those little light bulbs to switch on in my mind:
"It's easy to do, after all: when you buy the gadget, whatever it might be, you need only ignore its demands that you configure it to access your WiFi network."
What about when the IoT is all about devices with their own built in 4G/LTE modems with its own IPv6 address? This is what worries me. I fear that there will come a day where all my appliances will be able to dial home irrespective of my WiFi set-up or outbound firewall rules. Personally, I may decide "To hell with the warranty" and open the device and remove or destroy the transceiver.
I think many people reading this comment will say "Every device having it's own 4G/LTE modem and IPv6 address? It will never happen" and my God, I hope you're right that it never does.
On the other hand, a refrigerator that texts me a reminder that I'm out of milk and eggs BEFORE I make it all the way home from a long day at work is very tempting...
"Ready to go for a jog?"
"Yeah, but hold on. Let me turn on my shoes, first."
"Oh crap! My shoes are almost out of battery!"
"Wait up guys, I just have to reboot my shoes first. I'll catch up to you later."
"UGH! My shoes can't get a signal in here!"
"Oh, no, sorry, I can't come with you right now. I just plugged my shoes in. They're still charging. I... have to... charge my shoes before I can go outside."
I've had two break ins, my wife has had three (one before we met)
We live in what's described as an "okay" neighborhood - obviously not okay enough!
I have to re-do my surveillance system thanks to a server crash, but before that I had a little Debian Linux server running the "motion" daemon that handled the three wireless, infrared, IP cameras ($25 each) that I have in my house. Each new frame from the cameras is passed on to my web server (on the same box) which is protected by SSL, so I can logon remotely for live views. The web server also has buttons in the WebGUI to take snapshots.
I also have motion detection turned on so that on motion events (set to ignore the house-cats), video and stills are archived on my 2TB external drive. The server also sends an email to my (and my wife's) cellphone on motion - but sends it as a text. This is so that we can use our texting apps to assign a unique ringtone - that way we'll know that even if we're in a meeting, not to ignore the texts with the "Red Alart" ringtone because it's not some obnoxious tweet or friend or something, it's some one breaking in.
This is all behind my router running DD-WRT - admittedly, I need to upgrade my firewall to something more robust.
I found that a little humorous.
Steve Knox, Tomislav, et al.,
I'm deeply disturbed to learn that there is some one intentionally jamming emergency communications channels, and what's worse, only when there is an emergency occurring. I had originally read these comments about four hours ago, and only just now had the chance to reply. Your second post, Mr. Knox, makes me fear that one of my suspicions is correct; the perpetrator is somehow receiving information about the investigation. I must surmise that he or she is either currently involved in the agency or agencies using those emergency channels, or has a person or persons working in or with this agency or agencies, feeding information to the person doing the transmitting.
It seems to me that the most simple way to get around this problem would be to switch to a different type of transmission. The most effective solution would be going to fully encrypted digital voice communications, but budgets, and most probably legislation, would prevent that. A less expensive alternative would be switching from analog to digital (if you haven't already), or switching to a trunked system. Although, I should point out that even fully encrypted digital transmissions can fall victim to something as simple as a third party pressing their transmit key at just the right time, even if all they're using is an analog transceiver.
It seems to me that the best bet in finding this bozo would be if the agency or agencies could set up, at separate locations, DF receivers (receivers that also show direction) capable of logging the direction a transmission comes from, and the date and time. Then, after a case of illegal transmission during an emergency, those records can be checked against dispatch log tapes and interviews with the personnel involved to rule out the locations of legitimate transmitters. At that time, only the illegitimate transmitter's location will remain.
If some how the agency or agencies involved have the budget to do this - and I hope that they do - either a), the perpetrator will catch wind of this plan, and stop transmitting, thus solving the problem, or b) will continue to transmit either because he/she was not aware of the plan to locate him/her, or he/she wants to be caught.
I'm guessing that the agencies are police and fire/EMT, and that it's either at the local or county level, and that a local or county sized budget is why a solution like this has not been tried yet.
I sincerely hope that the perpetrator is caught.
Lets say this is legit - that some one bought a fully working 720 SDK box - would that give the homebrew / modding community any real advantage if this box (or its secrets) fell into their hands? I'd like to think this is some sort of finding the Holy Grail eureka moment, but I bet there are enough tricks up Micro$oft's sleeves to negate whatever they may learn.
Speaking of next Gen consoles, the rumor is the PS3 has two unused GPUs in it, and that they can be "activated" with a software update push, should $ony decide to implement it. What's the deal with that? will we see that happen before the PS4 arrives?
About 15 years ago, I received an issue of Discover magazine that made me wonder "Why is Patrick Stewert's head on the cover?" (This was before his knighthood, so I purposefuly ommited the 'sir')
The article told of some science guys taking a super old skull (these are technical terms) that predated Clovis, and handed it over to one of those guys who does forensic reconstruction of faces with clay. The result was a very anglican face that even the author of the article likened to Sir Patrick Stewert.
I didn't follow up on it at all, but unless it has been refuted, it lends some cred to those poop poker's ideas.
It's old tech.
I had a (cheap) electric toothbrush that used induction to recharge the battery, and that was back in the 1990's.
It had no cords or metal contacts at all — just a plastic body that fit inside a plastic charging cradle.
Still, though, I'd love for my phone to have that feature.
I've been wondering what those blue squares were. I always thought they were from a book, like the other reCaptcha images.
It should be noted that those house number images, if that's what they are, have been showing up in reCapptchas since 2011. I guess it's news worthy if Google just made the announcement.
If you're not happy with identifying house numbers, you don't have to. Just correctly type the word used for identification (you'll be able to tell them apart after doing enough of them) and put gibberish of an appropriate length where the scanned image word (or house number) goes.
@Bradly You imply that you have yet to have met a woman with implants for purely cosmetic reasons, yet you already decided that no woman who has ever done that is of so little worth that you would not be able to "take her seriously as a human being.".
Boy howdy ya sure do sound smart!
I've met two nurses and one doctor with boob jobs. They seemed pretty human to me.
I recall reading an article (I believe it was on The Register) about a PhotoShop plugin that analyses a photo of a smartphone's screen to reveal hidden patterns in the smudges left on the screen — and supposedly this is impervious to wiping or cleaning the screen.
But I'm sure the federallies have already thought of that, though.
I agree with the Anon who's subject line was: Story: PBAS Lack of Security, but I see perhaps another scenario.
Say the script kiddie (or skiddie, as the kids are fond of saying) actually intended to get caught? Maybe he was just after the notoriety , and somehow came to the conclusion that his short lived infamy would be worth the jail time and black mark on his record.
That, or what Anon said.
I've not played the original. I don't have any intrest in playing an RTS. I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with an RTS, I simply don't enjoy them.
That being said, I *am* a fan of the first person shooter. And before you ask, yes, I'm a typical gun-toting 'Murikan.
More than a fan of the FPS, I am a fan of cyberpunk. To me, this is the closest thing to a Ghost in The Shell game that's been released in recent times (excluing the latest *Deus Ex* installment, of course)
So for people who like sci-fi cyberpunk shoot-em-ups, it's a great game. If you dislike playing an FPS or dislike cyberpunk for whatever reason (and I'm sure you think it's a good reason) then obviously this is not the game for you.
What I find funny is how many are complaining that this is not a rehash of the original, because when Halo3 came out, every one complained that it was hardly any different than Halo2.
So first the author comments that Troi and Riker were the most irritating. A matter of opinion, I guess, but one that displays a - no wait, what am I saying? It's a FACT that Wesley was the most irritating.
And then... @h4rm0ny's comment made me laugh so it's alright now. Unless that person was serious. Then I was just bewildered.
I want one. I would put an OS on it that can handle emulators, and some sort of easy-to-navigate-with-a-controller interface, and every emulator and ROM that I can imagine, so that I can finally play things like GoldenEye64 on the TV again. (not to mention all the Mario and Sonic I can get)
We'll just say that I'm living in a nation who's copyright laws allow this sort of thing.
"Duqu is also the world's first known modular plugin rootkit,[...] "
No it's not. Anyone remember Back Orifice 2000? BO2K allowed - um, users - to add or remove plugins on the fly. Sneak a tiny server on to a "victim" machine, and then once it's in, you can add in plugins that support strong encryption, keylogging, live desktop, IRC command and control, etc.
One thing I love about the people of The Register is that they don't go spewing hyperbole and buzz words like other "reputable" news outlets do (I'm looking at you, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, BBC, etc.) when it comes to things like stealth technology. This attention to detail, and the effort to NOT be sensationalistic, is the reason I trust this website more than any of the other tech news sites.
One aspect of emissions control not mentioned in the article, perhaps because it was likely not a part of the Abbottabad raid, is the stealth aircraft's use of an in-flight data link. Instead of having to use a "stealthy radar", aircraft such as the F-22 have the ability to fly with their nose cold (i.e. radar off or in standby) and rely on the radar data collected from an AWACS or JSTARS aircraft orbiting far inside friendly lines.
Mine's the coat with the wings on it.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021