Posts by Moldskred 14 posts • joined 6 Nov 2019
That would depend on how logs are kept and what's covered by the system restore or not.
(While I'm not _surprised_ that it doesn't, considering how muddled IT security is at all levels of the industry, there's really no excuse for computer systems like these to not have some kind of tamper-resistant logging in place.)
"For over an hour, from the computer sitting at his desk at CIA, Schulte was in that system secretly restoring his super access, giving himself back all the control he had before it was taken away. Restoring his access to the backups that stored copies of the entire system. [...] After stealing the backup, Schulte tried to cover his tracks. During that hour on April 20, when he took the system back in time, Schulte started carefully deleting every log file that kept track of what he had done while he was in the system. After destroying that evidence, he unwound the reversion. Schulte restored the system to how it had been just before he hacked in, [...]"
So that's gaining access through an undetected backdoor, running a system restore, accessing and copying the material, deleting or editing all relevant log files and finally run a second system restore? All that in little over an hour? That seems a bit tight, time-wise.
Also, if he restored the system to the original state, surely that'd reintroduce whatever backdoor he'd used to gain access so that it could be found?
Wouldn't it be more effective to attack this issue at the back-end where the information is being sold and made use of? Wouldn't calling for regulation and transparency on the _sale and purchase_ be a better starting point than trying to control and regulate what data companies collect? If Facebook, Google and other actors had to divulge what personal information the sold to whom and for what purpose I think we would start to see companies be a lot less interested in participating in this marketplace.
> "Using the new memory in phones and PCs could allow them to be low-cost dumb terminals with minimal local energy consumption,"
How does that in any way follow? For neither phones nor PCs is memory the most significant power sink, so how is reducing the power consumption of just memory going to be a game changer?
This is stupid. Open source projects tend to have two different types of people who work on them -- the people who _run_ the project and who invest a significant amount of time and work to further the project vision and people who are _users_ of the project and submit the occasional bug fix or quality of life improvement. Yes, most of the work is going to be done by the former group and yes, the latter group is probably going to be the larger of the two. That's not an interesting observation and it doesn't say anything useful about project management or developer productivity.
"The Company believes that the report contains numerous errors, unsubstantiated statements, and misleading conclusions and interpretations regarding the business of and events relating to the Company."
So I take it they haven't actually _found_ any? Seriously, as rebuttals go that one is as soft and non-committal as they come. They might as well have said "yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, their opinion, man."
Five years ago, convenience. Sonos was a sound system for people who didn't really care about sound systems in the same way that a Mac is a computer for people who don't really care about computers.
Sonos was expensive, but the design and build quality was good. The sound quality isn't anything remarkable, but Sonos isn't really a hi-fi system, but the software and networking parts of the system was, certainly compared to what else was available at the time, rock solid. Everything just worked. You bought a Sonos speaker, took it home, plugged it in, did a ten second set-up and that was it.
Of course, five years ago you could buy Sonos in the belief that you were buying a system that you could expand piece-meal over the next ten, fifteen years, which made the price-point easier to swallow. These days, that's no longer the case.
The assumption behind the idea of no-code development as a general purpose tool is that software development is primarily _about_ the low-level technical details. That's as mistaken as believing that writing a novel is primarily about typing and punctuation. Surprisingly, getting a voice recorder and a speech recognition package is probably not going to turn you into a best-selling novelist.
"Despite being warned not to look at nor gather information on people not in their team or related to their job, however, the four individuals continued to harvest information about their targets, Google claimed."
I thought harvesting information about people who don't want to be spied on was part of Google's culture and mission statement?
The Register - Independent news and views for the tech community. Part of Situation Publishing
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021