Re: ...they were generated by a switching module in a node ... for reasons still yet unknown...
Obviously a Huawei box must have been involved. No good ole American kit would ever do such a thing.
40432 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
It sounds as if the difference between that and TFA is that in your case there was someone, you, who understood what was happening. In the TFA it cost the school money that could have been better spent elsewhere calling in someone to fix things that were perceived to have been broken.
I suppose it's a bit like why armed robbers hit banks rather than, say, second-hand bookshops. It's where they keep the money. If city administrations are poorly defended and provide essential services it's going to be more lucrative than going after Joe Soap's holiday snaps.
shutdown -h now for a second time: Mag editor fires parting shot at proprietary software
There's an element of the previous Prime Minister in your argument with your "you(plural)". We didn't all vote the same way and it's unreasonable to base an argument or, indeed a policy, on that. Even a lot of former Remain MPs seem to have adopted that over-simplification. The fact is that the country was split down the middle. The Remain half is not going to let BoJo have an easy life when reality becomes unavoidable and no doubt that Remain half is somehow going to be rather more than half when "but we never voted for this" becomes a factor.
There's also the little matter of getting fibre the last few yards let alone the last mile. In my own case the house is unusual in that it's the only one where the phone cable is underground, the neighbours all have overhead distribution. However, in my daughter's street and the surrounding streets all the houses were built with underground feeds and I suspect it would require planning permission to put in an overhead distribution system. Failing that all the roads and drives would have to be dug up and relaid. Would the householders be willing to pay for that? I doubt it, given that FTTC gives sufficient bandwidth to support her working from home.
The bigger problem would be in getting better bandwidth to the more remote houses. The FTTC network has been extended past our house so that the next hamlet now has a cabinet. However there are a few fairly remote farms. FTTP might be as economical as FTTC for these.
"putting a cookie on a browser doesn't constitute a monetary damage to the owner or user of the iphone."
They're trespassing on the phone. If someone were to trespass on your land by parking their car on your drive you'd probably feel you had cause to sue them for trespass. At the very least you're suffering damage in that if they'd asked for your agreement you could have charged rent and that amount has been lost to you. In this case they're occupying storage, processing on the phone and traffic on airtime. That's even before we get to the value of the data gathered. And that's only monetary damage which seems to be the only form you recognise. Maybe you don't consider the loss of privacy as a damage; why not?
There's a difference between a fine, a punishment arising out of criminal law, and compensation, which these settlements are supposed to be.
If somebody crashes into your car they may be fined for careless driving - a criminal offence. That's quite separate from your claiming on their insurance - a civil claim.
"however I'd still like to be allowed to choose a username instead of being forced to use the email address as my username"
The extreme worst case is a site-issued username generated from other data such as a concatenation of real name and DoB (yes, I have a site that uses that).
Keepass will generate passwords that look like line noise. Perhaps a useful addon would be an option to generate usernames, preferably pronounceable ones.
"And before some of you attack me about having to access your passwords from multiple locations, not all of Internet users are such power users."
Restricting where and by how many devices you access stuff that you think deserves good security should be a part of your security strategy. Otherwise you're trading security for convenience and we know where that's likely to lead.
"I wonder, if we shouldn't be using unique usernames and passwords for each site."
He's an expert and he's only wondering? What will it take to make him sure?
Of course we should. We all used to until sites decided to use email addresses as user IDs. And it's even worse when some sites - looking at you PayPal - hand out the email address to other parties and can't even see what's wrong with that when it's draw to their attention. Given that most folk only have one email address anyway the password is the only meaningful credential. No wonder people wiitter on about 2FA. With any reasonable policy about user IDs it would be 3FA.
"organisations where IT is an enabler for their core functions, and is often being pushed to reduce costs"
Where IT is so deeply embedded in those core functions they are IT businesses whether they like it or not and whether they care or not and attempting to reduce costs is not a good idea. They are businesses whose entire business model depends on having customers trust them to hold their data. That's not a trust they can weasel out of by pushing it onto a third party, nor can either of them get out of it by finger pointing.