Posts by Bob Dole (tm) 455 publicly visible posts • joined 17 Dec 2014
>Those systems that are being attacked ... and those whose sysadmins haven't noticed yet.
Absolutely this. We added intrusion detection to our systems around 20 years ago. During the first month of operation we identified an average of 3 new attacks starting every single minute. It's only gotten worse. Fortunately we've been on top of everything during all this time so we haven't ( knock on wood ) lost any customer data. However it was a real wake up call.
If you don't think you are under attack then you aren't paying attention.
>You'd have thought that with a near-trillion dollar market cap and 131,000 employees across the world, that one person, even an intern or trainee, could have been tasked with trying out new Store client updates on an actual Windows phone? Just one?"
Um, I hate to break it to you but the update was coded by that one intern....
> I'm certain that PCI would have something to say about that. That's about as market as you can get.
Given the number of PCI compliant companies that have lost all their customers data it’s pretty obvious that “security” in that standard exists in name only.
I've been telling people two things about self-driving cars.
First - they are coming far faster than people realize.
Second - the entire automotive industry is going to be disrupted by it. Specifically vehicle ownership. The only way this works is if the manufacturer takes over financial responsibility in case of an accident. For that to happen - they are going to retain ownership of the vehicle and just rent them out. You'll order a car up on your phone for those ad hoc trips or have it scheduled like the daily drive to / from work.
Anyone thinking otherwise isn't paying attention.
The TRUTH about Mrs. Clinton's crimes is that she's been the target of investigations by some of the fiercest and most motivated prosecutors on earth for a quarter of a century, now, and they still haven't managed to pin a single indictment, let alone conviction, on her.
You do understand that the people that were previously "investigating" her are now currently under investigation for the cover ups, right? One of which was already fired. If not, you might want to google Strzok, Page, McCabe, etc....
I truly don't understand why people bring up Cambridge Analytica as an example of how Facebook failed to protect their user info. Or even saying that CA was doing something naughty.
Facebook essentially told all of those companies "Look at this data you can get from our users!" Come on in and pay us for it!
This wasn't a failure, it was absolutely intentional and the only reason that it became a "big" deal is because some people didn't like which political party was dipping their toes in the water this time.
So, please stop equating that data mining with a security failure. It's not a security failure if it's by design.
As a senior IT bod at a major bank who publish research articles about cloud vs on prem that sometimes get quoted on theregister told me.
I've done work for many banks. I can tell you that the majority of them haven't had their own IT infrastructure for 20 years. Everything that can be outsourced, is outsourced. Only the very big guys do stuff on their own anymore.
For a large business, sure, having your own hardware makes sense. You are already going to be employing your own IT staff regardless of where the hardware sits, so you may as well put the machines in your own building.
However, far more businesses are of the smaller variety and it hasn't made sense to keep that stuff in house for a long time - even if you are a tech company. High availability for mission critical stuff is expensive, far more expensive than those Amazon bills. And, yes, I'm saying this as the owner of a tech business who hasn't had to deal with a server room for years.
That fully autonomous vehicles are coming far faster than most people think.
I give it 10 years before cars driven by meat bags are banned in major cities in the USA. Sooner if auto manufacturers continue the evolution of car renting such that fewer and fewer people even lease a vehicle, much less actually buy one outright.
'Drive anywhere by itself' does not exist and won't for a very, very long time.
I'm guessing by "very, very long time" you didn't mean on the roads in 2019. I am constantly surprised by the number of people that have their heads in the sand about what's coming and when. Cars with meat bag drivers are going away - very, very soon.
http://triblive.com/business/headlines/13173487-74/gm-mass-producing-cars-without-steering-wheels-pedals
"I’ve seen too many qualified white males passed over for promotions or advancement in favor of a woman and/or minority. Qualifications don’t matter these days, rather your gender and race matter."
That, my dear friend, is the entire point.
Just give it another few years, maybe a decade, and things will swing around to something resembling fairness... wait, lol, who am I kidding?
I forget how bad the web looks these days for people who don't use ad blockers:-/
I turned off my ad blocker for a few minutes last week. After doing so I went to google news and clicked on an article (while using Chrome). Immediately I got a notice that Defender had stopped a trojan from installing. That's going to be the last time I ever turn that off again.
I am sorry, citizen, but this post is currently placed at Security Clearance VIOLET. Reading any of the words contained within this page without appropriate security clearance is considered treason.
Please proceed directly to your nearest available Termination booth.
Thank you for your cooperation. Have a nice daycycle.
And Pai will find himself served up cold by the politicians.
You have far more faith in said politicians than I do.
It's actually been proven that the more a given politician receives in political contributions, the deafer (s)he becomes. The only ones that pay more than lip service to what the people want are whose "foundation" is still in the early growth phase.
Seeing as how it falsely flags legitimate Windows programs as malicious...
Funny thing, I don't recall a single story of Kaspersky ever bricking computers. Yet I've witnessed Norton, McAfee and a few others doing that on mass scales.
Personally, I'll keep using K. It actually seems to work.
Regardless of how many people you throw at this, combating fake news is hard. Especially fake news that might have some pretty good funding behind it.
When FB first announced their attempt, I was actually surprised. Fake News has been around at least since the early 1900s - pre WW I when the Brit government started giving fake news stories to various newspapers decrying the Germans. TBH, it's probably been around for as long as people have been able to talk to each other.
So, I just try to live be a few simple rules when reading the news:
- If it's in the news then someone likely paid for it to be there. Unless it's a major event happening right now.
- Is the piece itself obviously slanted or is it "in print" to generate certain emotions in order to support other related articles?
- Does the piece have verifiable facts?
- Does it even sound true based on the other things I know?
As much as I don't like FB I give them Kuddos for trying where far older institutions have failed miserably.
where if the female staff member legally obtained and enforced a restraining order against the attacker then it was her who would have to move and not the attacker!
You do understand that it's trivial to get a restraining order against someone in the US, right?
If I were MS in that deal, the more important question to me would have been: Has the female employee spoken with the police?
Apparently she did file a report with the police and the police didn't file charges. That seriously smells. Either the police are incompetent OR it's entirely possible that after they looked at the evidence they found that she had not actually been raped. Considering she went to the hospital pretty quickly after waking up they would have used a rape kit on her which, if she had actually been raped, would have been pretty conclusive.
I wasn't there, I don't know.
All I know is that a company can't be held responsible for what happens off their property. I also know that if the police didn't think something happened after all that then, as the company, I can't for the life of me see a reason to punish the guy she accused.
Wasn't FB wanting people in Australia to upload nude photos of themselves in order to prevent said photos from being made public?
TBH, I don't find this that scary. Rather, I'd like to be notified if FB detects someone has uploaded a photo of me somewhere. Also, quite frankly, I've long given up on the idea of any privacy when out and about anyway. There are cameras absolutely everywhere.
Which is it? Are the Norks backward barbarians living in the past, or are they a sophisticated enemy undermining the great western values?
I think it depends on if your country wants to invade them or not. If you do want to invade then the Norks are a sophisticated enemy. If you don't, then they are just backwards barbarians whose people we should pity.
I thought the Russians did it using leaked NSA "security" tools?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2017/04/26/shadow-brokers-leaked-nsa-cyber-tools-become-weapons-of-american-enemies/#1b6ba06b1924
Actually, nevermind. This whole thing stinks of a desire by the powers that be to start yet another war by bombing the North Koreans.
I can’t for the life of me come up with a single reason that Russia or China would engage in a direct war with the U.K. The only way they’d bother is if they somehow managed to completely cripple the US armed forces while still retaining their own operational capabilities.
Sure, the cables are at risk. So what? Those are public wires. Every nation of consequence has communications satellites in orbit. I hardly think that the U.K. is actually using cables as opposed to sat communications with your armies.
I guess cutting the cable would me GCHQ and the NSA couldn’t see what pr0n video you are watching but that’s about it.
What this illustrates with blinding clarity is the total lack of even basic knowledge of matters digital
I disagree.
What this illustrates is a complete lack of desire in actually solving the problem. It usually requires the ones making the decisions to acknowledge there is a problem that needs to be solved. If your government actually gave a crap about it then it would be solved.
But what about during the years before the Obama administration? Online services expanded significantly
The real problem shows up when the people who own the lines going into your house have control over the content you want to access. If you have little or no choice in who that line provider is, then Freedom of Choice doesn't exist.
The real solution here would be to bar the actual line providers from also being content providers. Which, interestingly enough, by classifying them as Common Carriers pretty much did.
Imagine if in the plain old telephone days that AT&T owned a share of Pizza Hut. They easily could have blocked all phone calls going to Dominos or even rerouted them to Pizza Hut. The public would have gone berserk and likely burned AT&T to the ground. This is the type of thing that Pai's decision today will allow with regards to the Internet.
why do people assume that Netflix and Google are going to pay ComCast and AT&T?
In the case of Netflix, Comcast owns stock in Hulu. It is in Comcast's interest to throttle, or even flat out ban, Netflix from their pipes.
In the case of Google, imagine if AT&T teamed up with Microsoft and decided to force everyone to use Bing (yeah, it's still around). Or if AT&T decided to buy Yahoo.
For those that bring up the idea that consumers will change providers - often there are service contracts signed which make it prohibitively expensive to change ISPs. I think I had to pay something like $700 to cancel Fios when I sold my house and moved - absolutely nuts. When those fees don't exist, often there simply isn't another option as a lot of areas are only serviced by one provider.
What's more likely to happen is that the providers will come up a set of packages allowing access to particular content. For example, the Google Package might give you access to google.com, youtube.com, and a few other sites. The Netflix Package might give you 20 hours of Netflix a week...
Essentially you can bet that they will try and monetize content providers in a way that will make google news and apple itunes look saintly.
Net Neutrality made that illegal. Pai's actions, however, have made it a sure thing.
Companies tend to prioritise user experience at the expense of cybersecurity.
Um, no.
Companies prioritise cost over user experience, security and even just producing decent code. There are very few businesses (especially financial ones) that give a damn about user experience.
I used to work with various banks hooking up systems. The first time I worked with one I was absolutely surprised by the complete lack of technical know how at the bank itself. Most banks outsource their core systems to just a couple companies (Perot Systems being one). Those companies slap a couple logos, change a color scheme and *presto* you have Generic Bank A's customer facing system. There absolutely isn't much concern for the end user experience.
Instead, the priority is on making the system as cheaply as possible so the systems provider/integrator can make as much money as possible. The bank itself, unless it's willing to deal with writing their own, is at the integrators mercy.
That said, Developers are absolutely the problem. It's essentially the wild west out there. Existing certifications are useless in letting a non-tech person know if a tech person actually knows how to write efficient, secure code. Universities/colleges still don't seem to have a handle on how to teach people to program, so having that degree isn't a decent guide either. Until education and certification are solved the problem isn't going away.
I truly believe we are at the point where programmers should be licensed. The testing should be akin to the testing Engineers and Lawyers go through. Even if we differentiate between various types like financial, health, etc. I'd even be ok with the web weenies not being licensed - unless they deal with PII.
Just wow.
We are not going to have driverless cars in 2-3 years time. The car industry just doesn't move that fast.
I think someone hasn't been paying attention.
One of them will finish it fairly soon. There's already driverless cars on some streets in the USA.
All a manufacturer has to do is finish, show that it works pretty well, then pretty much every government will fast track their use. Why? Because what politician wants to stand up to say Mothers Against Drunk Driving (or a similar group) and tell them not now?
The politicians know this is coming regardless and they will jump over each other in order to be the party that herald's in a new Era of Safe Travel(tm). It's coming, far quicker than you think.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
