Posts by Charles 9 16605 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
I don't want to have to deal with settings that could be reverted behind my back. Especially for stuff like TOR or Freenet where you're already strolling the dark web. I'll stick with Off By One and Links for the time being, but this is something that should seriously be addressed in the name of security: a browser with no capability to leak things because the potential leaks never exist (meaning there's no way to secretly turn them on, either).
"It also returns a 404, meaning it's no longer maintained. As for Lynx, I need a graphical web browser, just a baseline one, so Lynx won't do it."
Updating my own post, which raises a curiosity. It may not be gone but rather so deprecated that modern browsers return a 404. If you browse to the same site using its own browser, it shows up. That said, one of the download mirrors is Gone.
UPDATE:
"True it hasn't been updated since 2006 but it can still be downloaded from the offbyone.com download links (hover your mouse over the middle links in the download links and you'll see, I just downloaded from all three)."
Link #1 returns "As of September 30, 2014, the Verizon Site Builder tool has been decommissioned and all online Personal Web Space pages have been deleted." #2 and #3 work, and I eventually got a working copy off Softpedia.
"Off By One browser has no Javascript or plug-in support, just a bare-bones HTML 3.2 web browser. I only remembered this browser because it was included in Bart PE bootable environments."
It also returns a 404, meaning it's no longer maintained. As for Lynx, I need a graphical web browser, just a baseline one, so Lynx won't do it.
If the content is a video, a Flash video, or an externally-retrieved piece of JavaScript, it's going to be hard to view the source of the thing that'll nail you. Plus with EME endorsed, this is only going to get harder. And all this bloat is spreading like a plague, making the entire Web much harder to accept. My feel is that if you don't trust their dedicated and legally-liable app, you don't trust the company and shouldn't be doing business with them at all. At some point, you have to jump.
"I bet you're a massive hypocrite (anti-javascript types *always* are), and have all sorts of shitware installed on your android or iOS device."
Not really. Most of my stuff comes from F-Droid. Plus with explicit apps, I have more control over them since I can prune.
And someone or something can secretly turn them back on behind my back and then LIE to me. No, the only real way to make sure you can't run JavaScript and so on is to not have the functionality to begin with. Last I checked, a browser isn't able to run JavaScript without a JavaScript engine built into it, and that's what I want. Not to mention it seriously cuts the memory use.
BTW, can anyone point me in the direction of a bare-bones web browser that has absolutely no capacity for interactive stuff like JavaScript that I can download for Windows. It would make both a good test browser for web work as well as a safer browser to use with alternative nets like Tor and Freenet.
But if weren't for the fact the Web as we know it is being controlled by uncaring corporate interests, perhaps it's time to rethink how the WWW is working and take a few steps back to what it once was: a more-passive protocol that wasn't about cramming everything including the kitchen sink into it and more about simply conveying information.
I mean, when you think about it, why is it that we ended up with an interactive WWW protocol rather than delegating this interactivity to other, more-dedicated protocols like VNC?
"Do you really believe crooks are so stupid they fear some light bulbs on? There are several creative and simple techniques they employ to know if someone is really at home or not. CCTV cameras and alarm systems are more effective - if they work correctly and don't become another issue themselves."
Many crooks lack the tools to make effective checks. They're just lightning-raid burglars out for a quick score. You can't rely on the phone because many people screen calls through the answering machine first (so won't answer in any event). Knocking and any other physical test runs the risk of drawing attention of the neighbors.
"In case of emergency, you may *not want* to turn on all the lamps. In some situations, could be better to cut off the main power and activate specific emergency lights, which won't create more issues."
Those are infrequent, and in any event, just about anything that could make the mains dangerous could make the emergency lights dangerous, too (because they're also electric). The main reason you want the lights on is because it may be night or otherwise hard to see, and the main goal in these situations is to just get the heck outta there, which may be difficult in low-light conditions.
A presence switch that works with modern lights? I don't think you'll get it that cheap. The reason being presence switches work like dimmers, and many modern lights don't work well with dimmers (thus the label "non-dimmable"). You either need dimmable bulbs or presence switches designed for use with non-dimmable lights (those tend to be industrial-grade for use with fluorescent office lights--more expensive).
PS. As for being able to get up and flick a switch. there are handicapped people out there who CAN'T.
"We never saw him again. Nor did we see the kit. We got the Police involved - who told us that this guy had not committed theft because we had not made it a condition of lending that he give the kit back when he'd finished with it..."
Last I checked, the dictionary definition of "lend (vt)" includes the word "returned". Why didn't you counter to the police that the word "lend", because of its definition, implies a return condition?
If that's true, why didn't this emerge in the original trial? And where's the reputable news article stating this (like from an actual newspaper)? Also, it wouldn't make sense to film from the house next door. The best procedure would be to start from the front of the house (out on the street--public property), fly OVER the house, then turn around to look at the back.
"The judge will ask the parties if they will settle and I think it is obvious that MS will say yes. MS will not be put in the position of publicly accepting wrong doing."
And if the class refuses to settle because not only do they WANT MS publicly shamed but it can also feed the mill for a criminal case which could turn up the heat on MS. If the government itself gets involved (due to their use of Windows and so on), it may even push into a case where Microsoft could be compelled to turn over source code for national security reasons.
I'm personally tempted to take the gray way out, but as my current system started on 8, I'm concerned it could get dicey, and I know such a gamble will be a one-way trip. And no, I can't use a Linux distro because of all the games I have that are strictly Windows-only (as in not even WINE works on them, and 3D virtualization is iffy, especially on newer games), plus I've had bad experiences with Linux lately: lots of spontaneous reboots and so on.
PS. Has any egghead found a way to create an alternate route to installing security updates such that all the crap has been pruned off so you know you're just getting what you need?
The problem was that ARM systems were not built with modularity in mind. Because they were made for power-sipping, fixed hardware maps on SoCs were the systems in vogue there. But beyond embedded and portable applications, you need modularity because configurations can change. An SSD may crap out and need switching. Same with a DIMM. Or perhaps GPU tech moves up and you want to upgrade. For the REAL PC world, you need to be able to mix and match, and to do that, you need a more general hardware design: something like an enumerated bus, which SBSA is a key step to providing.
The fact Budweiser and especially Bud Light sells considerably should tell you people like F'n close to water (that's what Sex on the Beach is, after all). Also remember, most of America is hotter than most of Europe, so their preference for alcohol content will be different due to the climate (lagers sell a lot better than ales in hotter climates).
The fact the craft beer industry is thriving in America should also tell you it's not the end of the beer world there, either.
Wanna bet HTML6 will move the markup behind the EME to prevent online (malware) editing? Remember, Google's on the W3C, AND they produce the most popular browser in Chrome, and Mozilla is more or less forced to follow or become insignificant. Does the term "captive market" ring any bells?
But as the old skit goes, while ad men may be wasting most of their money, there's no way to know WHERE that "most" is actually being wasted, and that 10% is enough to support all the rest, so ad men keep plugging.
As for the ad-blockers being popular, are they REALLY popular? Popular as in the hoi polloi are using them now, or do they just SEEM popular because the tech-oriented are being squeaky wheels?
Or worse, they use one layer to leapfrog or otherwise bypass the others.
In this case, they can perform a "Cry Wolf" attack. Trip a bunch of false alarms so that eventually keeping the alarm and responding to it isn't worth the time and/or money. Or trip someone else's (maybe multiple) system(s) as a diversion to keep them busy while you go for the real target.
No, changing your IP won't deter the snoops for very long.
Quote: "However, Herrmann writes, someone with access to the infrastructure can easily watch a user's behaviour while they have one IP address, create a classifier for that user, and look for behaviour that matches that classifier when the IP address changes."
"American Chili is exempt as it is weak-sauce."
Don't be so sure about that. Many places like to play dares on spiciness and routinely use Scotch Bonnets, Habaneros, and worse in their foods. Buffalo Wild Wings' spiciest wings use Ghost Peppers after a test showed them to be very popular. And remember the current world record for hottest chili pepper is an American cultivar: the Carolina Reaper.
"For maximum effect a bomb has to go off while the plane is in the air but not only is the hardest to engineer, we've already seen that the chaos and terror which are the terrorist's aims can be achieved far more easily: just blow something up or start shooting in a crowd or getting a wheel or tyre to fail. Or just making a call to say you've planted a bomb."
But eventually the cry wolf thing gets stale and you gotta back it up somehow. I'm surprised they haven't plied their brains into demonstrating a means of blowing up a plane that CANNOT be prevented without blocking all airflight altogether. If you can pull it off for real JUST ONCE, you can put all general airflight on pins and needles because now you can literally down ANY airplane, ANY time, ANY where with no practical recourse. Now THAT would be what I call terror: because it would actually be backed up.
"But show me a single determined, disciplined, smart one with A-level or better knowledge of electronics and chemistry and the ability to figure out export bureaucracy, and if he wants to blow a plane up - he'll do it. And he won't even need a ticket."
Oh really? Explain how without resorting to a ticket, security clearance, OR connections.
But without a guaranteed unique identifier, there's NO WAY to prevent Mallory or Gene posing as you. Which basically means the whole network model (wired AND wireless) is not trustworthy because ANYTHING that runs on top of it can be hijacked from the outset (at First Contact, IOW).
Which puts us back into DTA Mode.
If Android would just include an internal backup mechanism, then my biggest reason to root would disappear. Why doesn't Android come with a utility so basic even Windows comes with one now?
PS. While they HAVE done KitKat, Oreo is a from a different company (Nabisco vs. Hershey) which would mean a different license agreement.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
