it is a good start ...
yes: more to do, but follows in the Open Source philosophy: release early. They can get a next step done in the next months, then release that. Eventually they will have something that will please even you!
2820 publicly visible posts • joined 29 May 2007
The big problem with the current legislation is that it does not distinguish between session and other cookies.
Session cookies are used to tie together the pages viewed on one visit and are auto-destroyed by the browser some 20-30 minutes after the visitor has left the site - these are reasonably benign.
Other cookies have a long life, potentially years.
I presume they don't store payment card details.
See their T&Cs section 3.2: "We will not charge your credit or debit card until we despatch your order." which means that they do keep your card details ... I would not be surprised if, once they have them, they keep them for a lot longer.
Why can't Micro-shaft JUST COME CLEAN on what they're collecting on everyone?
That could be fixed by the Dutch legislators insisting that Microsoft provide a tool that will show everything that has been slurped in the last couple of months -- complete with an explanation of what the tool shows.
After all: it is (supposedly) your Personal Computer and thus you should be able to find out anything that relates to you or the operation of the PC.
Please do not use the Camelot marketing department's word 'play' - which implies that the lottery is a bit of fun, not serious. For many, reasonably well off, el-reg readers that might be true, but I have seen people at my local newsagent gambling money that it was plain that they could not afford -- it is harmful.
People are taken in by the con that they will get rich - the adverts try to convince people that they will be more lucky than their neighbour - clearly that cannot be true.
Would you make an investment that returned 25% of your original stake ? That is what you are likely to get when gambling on the lottery.
This DDOS has saved many people money that they could not afford to loose.
compared to what some long term XX wetware require.
Married for 7 years, been paying alimony for 22 years; spent a fortune in the courts just to see the kids - one of who now lives with me, another I'm paying Uni fees (mature student).
At $3,000 it would have been cheaper to buy several a year - and less emotionally stressful.
where they might have wanted to search his laptop to look for illegal opinions such as wanting to separate from Spain. At least the UK law is only used to stop people who might kill people; they will never use it to search people who have political opinions that the government of the day does not like.
</sarcasm>
Putting in proper security will just cost us to no benefit - ie we will not make more money.
It will cost us developer time & make our products more complicated so that we will have to deal with extra support calls from the Muppets who buy our stuff - someone has to pay for those support calls y'know!
If some of these do get cracked, they probably won't blame us, if they do we will just send out our press release blaming ''the bad guys'' - we have is already written, it just needs the date putting on it. After a fortnight the broohaha will have died down and our sales will just continue.
If the law were change to make us liable for customer losses we might take notice, we have our lobbyists ready just in case legislators think about this.
Love & kisses: Insteon PR department.
Some 8 years ago I opened a bank account with Santander, they did not understand security:
* they sent the username for on-line banking in a clear text email; the password was in another email sent 1/2 second later.
* we went in, took all the documents needed to open a bank account (passport, etc); they took a copy; a month later ''we have lost them, please scan and send the images by email". (I refused to do so)
* I complained that important, security related documents were lost. They assured me that they were quite safe: but were unable to explain how they knew so since they did not know where they were.
And so it went on. The account has been closed for many years, final statement showing a NIL balance - but every 6 months I get a letter telling me that there are a couple of quid there (I have checked - there is not).
Muppets
I don't understand how the security of a device is dependent upon its bus width.
More room for ASLR (Address Space Layout Randomisation), which makes buffer overflow attacks harder to exploit. Windows 10 uses so much RAM that there is not much left over for ASLR if all that you have are 32 bits of virtual address space.
My guess anyway.
But were the packages not signed with the public key of the software vendor/distributor ? Or are we dealing with a bunch like slack ?
OK: I don't know how this is done in the windows world, and if you have never installed anything from the vendor you will not have the key (so getting it could be spoofed) ... but Skype is from Microsoft and so the Windows machine will have their signing key ... so if the installer does not complain we need to ask how the spooks got their malware signed to make it look legitimate.
I suspect that you mean ''laptop left on train'', or similar, ie misplaced - and possibly in the wrong hands.
This is very different from ''data accidentally deleted''. There is sometimes a requirement for data to be kept for certain periods. I observe that embarrassing data, especially when asked for by a subject access request, has a propensity to become ''lost - accidentally deleted''.
These two should be counted separately.
Could we please start calling the ''left on train'' incidents ''misplaced'', not ''lost''.
This makes unsolicited goods something that the supplier cannot demand payment for. This is 123reg trying to indulge in inertia selling ... so if they renew the domain without the customer saying they want it: then they are acting illegally.
Not that acting illegally seems to bother many businesses these days.
If they grab the money from your bank account: just get the bank to reverse the charge and let 123reg whistle for their money.
Most people think that this means that the boffins has worked out how to do all manner of technical wonders.
Just as important is: have the politicians grown up enough to not destroy the planet. I used to think that this meant not throwing nukes around, but increasingly realise that it means controlling expansion and population growth to what the ecosystem can sustain.
Of the two: the harder is the politics. Politicians are just big children who have the gift of the gab and persuade the rest of us to vote for them (or self interested psychopaths who become dictators). They have little interest in the long term of anything (including the ecosystem) as long as they get what they want now.
is something that middle class people must do. It is not a burden that is to be felt by the very rich or by large corporations.
If large corporations were made to pay taxes just like the rest of us: where would all those nice consultant type jobs come from once MPs and top civil servants retire ?
to assure users that the the cable/... will not damage their expensive iBling.
I cannot see why Apple would want a chip in the cable ... to me this smells like printer vendors putting chips in printer ink cartridges - as a means of trying to stop perfectly good independent suppliers from undercutting their overpriced stuff.
the managers who knew about it and probably asked him to write the code. This needs to go up as high as possible in the management structure. Most of them are probably happy that someone else has taken the blame.
The only way of making change is my making it so painful for the read decision makers that they, and their successors, will never do this again.
This is much the same thing. Guy discovers gaping hole in computers, is held to blame and arrested - this is an attempt by the site owners (in this case USA military) from having to admit that their own staff are incompetent. It is called saving face that just ends up showing the site owner to be arrogant & stupid.
Fine £80,000 - new business as a result £xxx ??? The fine should be in excess of what they gained otherwise fines will just be seen as an extra cost.
Also: 1/2 the fine should be paid by board members, personally - out of income after tax. Unless it hurts someone in authority: behaviour will not change.