Re: Rigged definition of an employee
I'm about 90% sure that's satire.....but I would also 90% not be suprised to read that on a recruitment agency website.
199 publicly visible posts • joined 11 May 2007
That is OUTRAGEOUSLY perverse! I can't believe it, there should be jail time for such disgusting behavior. Even thinking about that makes me feel physically sick.
Unless you actually sent Buytaert an ICMP packet and are currently waiting for an Echo Reply you should not be using that rather horrific business word on a tech journal.
(but seriously, that's sexual discrimination and I hope they get some kind of kicking for it)
"The current position after Thursday's explosive anti-Brexit judgment"
How many times did the rather senior judge in this case point out that this isn't a political procedure, it's one of constitutional law in this country. We live in a parliamentary democracy, thus the government doesn't have the right to change parliamentary law without their permission.
Then please don't ever get a job as a Sys Admin.
Defense in depth is key to security, UAC prevents people running bad software that compromise the machine because the easiest, simplest way to hack a computer nowadays is to get a user to run your evil code. If that user is running your evil code as an admin UAC goes a little way to protecting your machine outside of your user profile.
A low-level user who demands to run as a local admin (because, users) runs something, it pops their UAC and infects the machine.
User then calls front line support guy, who has networking privileges but nothing scary, he cant see anything so calls the 'big sysadmin' down to fix the problem. He logs on to the machine, you just lost your network.
No, no there really isn't.
As the FCA publish everything online fancy pointing us to these rules?
But you raise a good point - with an API you can use token based authentication instead of passing online banking credentials to a third party which IS HOW EVERYONE DOES IT AT THE MOMENT.
Which is what makes this awesome.
It's already happening, all the CMA are doing is making the tech more robust.
There are already companies offering this service for customers but with the transfer of online banking details and screen scraping, and while their security is top notch (we use one of them at work and their security guy is one incredible chap,) an API to access would make the whole process much more robust for us and our customers.
As a customer of a bank I could allow access to my data with granularity and tightly control who got what, I could allow my smart phone access to my balance and transaction alerts, I could allow my family access to our balance buy not our spend (got to hide the pub spend somehow!) and restrict what third parties could see and access.
That is, if people get behind this and do it well. If they don't we will end up with another MiData.
If you did a blood test and charged £1000 if you found booze you would get the same effect, but limit the splash damage.
Of course having an ID and linking the test to said ID, then charging £1000 on the SECOND time would probably generate the same income but limit the splash damage even further.
Was that sarcasm there? Don't mock the cycle paramedics - it's about range of facility.
Sending out a paramedic on a bike is a damn sight cheaper than sending a fully kitted out, expensive ambulance with full EMT crew aboard - better to send a bike to check on the guy who ate a sandwich than said ambulance.
For example, nut allergy sufferer (me) goes in to anaphylactic shock a motor bike (it was ten years ago, they didn't have the push bikes then) can speed up and apply drugs while we wait for the ambulance. mmmdrugs.
Think 1st, 2nd and 3rd line IT support - this is an IT rag right?
That's a stupid way of looking at it, what are you going to do, load all 2 million of them in to a van and ship them back across the continent?
PS before you reply I should warn you it's a trick question.
When you start thinking of people, PEOPLE, as 'them' your doing life wrong. Europe is trying to do something good for the world, get over it.
"Something the author should consider is the fact that most British people (myself included) don't consider themselves european."
And you have some statistics on that do you? Maybe the people in your little world but for those of us who have met more than, say, ten people in our lives I would probably say most people would punch you if you tried to tell them what they are or are not.
"We don't speak a latin language."
Neither does Germany (as one example), what's your point?
"We make few rules but we stick to them, unlike continentals who make many rules and ignore the ones they don't like."
Yes, like the rules Bankers have to adhere to, or Politicians when claiming expenses. And the few rules we stick to, how many laws does this country have? When you take a black taxi do you make sure the bale of hay is in the boot of the car?
"There are more differences than similarities."
Yes, that's a good thing. Go check out evolution. The theory, not the film.
"We just happen to share a continental shelf."
We could try and cut ourselves off of that if you wanted, I'm pretty sure we have the technology?
It's probably worth mentioning OpenStack at this point, while AWS tends to be the go-to nowadays for cloud we have a rather neat solution with them.
We have physical database servers, connected to a disk array, with an ESX cluster hosting our site in their intensive hosting environment. We then burst a rather chunky data processing job out to the RackSpace Cloud and because it's all run in the same data center we get near LAN speeds connecting to it (plus it rather neatly cleans up any privacy issues someone could have not knowing where our data is geographically)
You would be surprised at the things you can do which would make it easy to break.
In your setup above you shuffle the data, OK it seems like that would make it more secure, I agree with that
However, then you encrypt and store the shuffle order. Now, that's a problem, I assume your using your data encrypting key as having more than one key to decrypt the data is a pain.
As we don't want to use security through obscurity lets assume your encryption algorithm is published and people know how it works, or at least can pull your systems apart and figure it out worst case.
So you now have a known, small and finite (there is an infinite amount of data to encrypt, but only so many shuffle patterns) amount of data which is encrypted with your data encryption key.
Which means you just gave an attacker your keys.
That's the point of encryption systems like this, for mere mortals like ourselves its usually best to trust the hardcore maths guys, because if something seems intuitive it usually means its mathematically weak.
"London's iconic black cabs could disappear from the capital's streets in a few years due to an unfair playing field created by Uber."
1) A cheaper competitor comes in to the market and kills the older, more expensive rival though consumer choice.
2) Abuse the law and regulate the competition out of the market and keep the monopoly.
Which is the unfair playing field again?
According to the Steam update here: http://store.steampowered.com/news/19852/ the config tweak was in response to a DOS attack against them.
I guess they should have just asked the people DOSing them to do it on a lower-risk day as config changes on Christmas day are out of schedule?
"The other point that needs to be made is that profit, per se, is not a reliable guide. The main objective of commerce should be to provide required goods and services and thereby make a profit. If the main objective is making a profit this leads to oversupply of unnecessary items. The fashion industry is a good example of this. Why oh why do I need a new jumper this year that is (say) blue merely because last year's is green and no longer in fashion. Madness."
(disclaimer: Doesn't mean I don't agree with you, it is madness, just not madness based with the companies)
What we have at the moment is a blend that works, on the whole privatisation is great at keeping things progressing and the government is there is ensure things get fixed where it falls apart (*cough*Banks*cough*), as people have said on this here comment thread, government is there to keep the framework of society running. Where it fails miserably is at micro-managing that framework.
To analogise with our industry, think of government as the IT manager and the private companies like the BOFH - without the IT manager the BOFH would have no one to scapegoat, without the BOFH the manager is sitting scratching his nuts trying to figure out where to stick the paper in his shredder to make it print.
Your comment is based around what goverment is 'supposed' to do yet who decides what something is supposed to do? If we stuck with that idea we would still have the monarchy in charge and that didn't work out so well, the more important question to ask is 'what works?' and so far this country is still working pretty well.
We now have an interesting development happening in the private sector in the marketing department. With review services like TrustPilot (who I will defend against the BBC here and say they are pretty good at tracking down fake reviews, not perfect but they are pretty good), companies can no longer shape their own brand, the consumers shape the brand with actual output from the company putting much more pressure on a private company to perform and keep their customers happy. This accountability is bringing much more exposure to the market and something we could not have with a monopoly.
Assuming they actually de-dupe the data right now of course, it might just be in there to give them the oppotunity to dedupe in the future (however they decided to do it) without getting everyone to re-agree to the T&Cs.
If I were going to be doing a file hosting service of that size, I'd certainly want the oppotunity to save space at some point in the future.
In 3's defence - on the topic of subsidising the few - I just called them up to 'upgrade' my blackberry plan (1000 free minutes, 800ish free txts and a few gig of data (AUP style)) which clocked in at £40 a month and got a shiny new Samsung Galaxy s2 with twice as many free minutes and txts, and the true unlimited data plan for £10 less than I was paying before.
I'm sure people are going to rat all over my monthly bill, but I was under the impresion £30 a month isn't that bad a deal - especially as I now don't need an internet connection at home (I'm in the docklands - 3g is faster than anything BT can deliver across copper and Virgin don't come to my home)
My issue with this, isn't in the bug itself, but how Apple missed it - Windows was inherently insecure because of the 'it's single user so lets just patch security over the top' model they used to use. If Apple are thinking the same way with this then what ELSE is inside the thousands of lines of code in there?
I guess the real 'problem' here then, is that Skype tries to use direct connection for its communicatoin instead of routing all calls through a CDN (and that would have to be one hell of a CDN to handle that data.)
So the attack goes:
Attacker: "Skype server, where can I contact x for a call?"
Server: "Here: IP"
Attacker: "HAHAHAHAHA I PWNED YOU WITH TCP/IP!"
The whole point of an IP address is that people know what it is, it would kinda break the Internet Tubes if no one knew each others IP.
PS Dear El Reg, I know you track the IP of my comments - can you please stop invading my personal spaces with your Interweb Servers. Kthxbai.
PPS: Actual 'attack' I've used once.
Someone is pingflooding me through MSN (it was a while ago).
One blank, large, jpeg named 'britneyspears.jpg' was created and sent to them.
Stupid kid accepted the file.
One quick netstat later to find his host name (which was someone's name at AOL) and a message "If I call this lady here: [Name] and tell her what you are doing with her internet connection.....what will she say?" and stupid kid vanishes into the air, assumedly to cry.
This is not new news.