Posts by It's just me 79 publicly visible posts • joined 2 Aug 2018
I'm not so worried about criminals breaking another law. As you say, they will always find ways to hide their actions. I was arguing against your point 3 which boiled down to "you have nothing to worry about if you have nothing to hide" I'm more worried about the government using these laws to persecute and/or steal from lawful users of the system. Lowering the "suspicious amount" threshold from $10K to $3K means that a lot more innocent transaction will come under their scrutiny and there are already too many examples of people being relieved of their money by the authorities for the "crime" of carrying too much cash.
You say "Structured transactions are one of the core features of these systems." However, the regulations that mandate currency transaction reports (CTR) on transfers over a certain amount also make structuring transactions to avoid the CTR illegal. So you are giving the authorities a very low threshold to harass anyone they take a dislike to as well as increased opportunity for outright "legal" theft, see the abuse of civil asset forfeiture.
64bit also has greater memory costs. A number of years ago I ran some tests, I configured 2 identical bare bones Ubuntu server VMs running Apache, one 32 bit and one 64 bit. The 32bit system used 170MB RAM while the 64bit system used 270MB.
On the JSOF site they have a video of them exploiting the flaw against a HP printer, a UPS, a smart light, a Digi board and a medical pump. According to the messages displayed during the exploit the devices were behind a NAT and the exploit was delivered in DNS replies from a malicious DNS server. Other methods mentioned in their "Risk Evaluation and Mitigations" include fragmented packets, broadcast & multicast traffic and ICMP.
Microsoft already owns the Lindows trademark.
In 2001 the founder of mp3.com released a Linux distribution names Lindows OS.
Microsoft sued them in 2002 and in a 2004 settlement MS gave them $20 Million, they transferred the Lindows trademark to Microsoft, and changed their name to Linspire.
https://www.operating-system.org/betriebssystem/_english/screen_gallery.php?bsgfx=linux/lindows/shot0-scr-.jpg
Unless you surf to such malicious sites as the BBC, The New York Times Online, The London Stock Exchange, Spotify and The Atlantic. All of which have in the past served up malware in the ads they display to their viewers. Just because it's a reputable company doesn't mean that crooks haven't found a way to inject malware into their site.
As much as I would like that, I doubt it, as a prerequisite of these attacks is for the attacker to already have their code running on the victims computer. In the case of consumer devices it's already game-over at that point. The only place these attacks are really a concern is situations such as cloud computing where you share the hardware with untrusted third parties, or perhaps DRM where the untrusted party is the owner of the hardware.
There are several things that may limit a system to 2TB. MBR formatting has a 2TB limit and certain SCSI commands have a 2TB limit. So if the system doesn't support UEFI booting to a GPT partition with a 64bit OS or it doesn't support LBA64 then it might have this limit. Or they might not want to list all the caveats or deal with the increased support load and its simpler and cheaper to just say they don't support it.
It's known as MITM or MiddleBox TLS interception/inspection. Doing it without raising a warning/error on the client requires that either you get your own certificate installed as a root CA on the client, or you are able to obtain, via theft or coercion, a signing key from one of the several hundred CAs your browser already trusts.
But windows explorer still doesn't know how to properly deal with the folder mounted partitions. If you have a 1GB D: and have a 1TB partition mounted on D:\Data\, using explorer to try to copy a > 1GB file from elsewhere to D:\Data\ fails with a insufficient disk space error.
RE: ghost systems
A few months back we had an AWS instance that experienced some hardware failure, was given the commands to shut down, and then restarted so aws brought it up on different hardware. But the old zombie instance kept running for a couple weeks with us having no way to access it, but it continued to send notices and warnings that took a while to track down as there was no trace of them on the supposed source machine.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
