But it's not April 1 yet!
I would suggest some hack at el Reg pressed the "publish" button a few days too early?
4 publicly visible posts • joined 28 Jun 2012
It is a telecoms company, so you would think there would be executive IT or technical presence on the board would you not. Or at least someone who might know something about the technology behind this (since the CEO obviously does not). Not so! Ms Harding's lamentable level of ignorance of all things technical seems to be echoed across the board - at least the executive board. The wider non-exec "jobs for the boys" board does include someone whose day job is being CTO for Nielson, but there seems to be no executive responsible for things technical. At least not in their job title.
It would not be quite so bad if this were the first time Talk Talk had been targeted and found wanting on the security front. But alas it is not as you can see earlier this year in http://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/mar/14/talktalk-fraud-victim-compensation-data-theft-responsibility
If it turns out to be as bad as it seems, it is frankly time the ICO got serious with rogue companies like Talk Talk who either cannot or will not take the security of their customers' data seriously. And the CEO of this shambolic enterprise should surely be fired immediately: To lose one's data once is unfortunate; to lose it twice is careless.
It is really ping for TLS. If you have ever run an ssh terminal session and had it drop after 5 minutes of idleness, when you have forgotten to run a "ping localhost" or "watch date" you will know why.
The reason for variable sized packets (and such large packets) is allegedly to enable an application to use this protocol extension to find the maximum size of packets it can send along the connection without fragmentation.
The real hassle is that with lawyer costs of $200k - $1m facing you to get a summary dismissal (in Deleware at least) even if you *don't* infringe a patent (via the hideously expensive "discovery" process), it is very often in your interest to settle for several hundred thousand dollars as soon as you are served. So it is little more than a legal shakedown really.