BREAKING NEWS:
Register journalist arrested for aiding copyright theft for publishing the domains for the pirate site.
2756 publicly visible posts • joined 21 Jan 2010
If you are a citizen of country "A" and you "electronically sign" a contract hosted on a web server in country "B" while physically located in country "C" using an SSL connection secured by a certificate authority in country "D", who's laws are applicable?
Based on current laws around the world it could easily be all of them, and the permutations are immense.
Fetch the popcorn...
So nuclear contamination, radiation and chemical poisoning have no effect on the greater population in general. We should all be thankful
Unless you're one of the unlucky individuals affected in which case your fucked. But don't be sad, everyone else is alright.
Good to see we live in a caring society that values the individual.
<icon being ironic>
This is why cyberspace needs its own government and laws (perhaps owned by the UN).
Data does not exist physically. It is an abstract item. Information is a concept.
To maintain and share data we need physical infrastructure which unfortunately lives in the physical world. And it makes sense to spread that physical infrastructure around the globe to provide maximum resilience. But international boundaries get in the way.
However, if the data in a data centre was protected against ANY countries individual laws then it could be maintained to international standards. I'm not suggesting anarchy, a free for all, or immunity, but a worldwide agreed standard and laws to protect each individual.
OK, so it's not going to happen, but it's a sound concept.
" Though I find it unlikely that the capability is present in un hacked phones, this would require far too great a level of compliance (and secrecy) from all phone manufacturers."
If your phone is open source then it's highly likely the spooks with almost unlimited access to good programmers are aware of the holes and vulnerabilities which have not been made public. Easy to then exploit without the assistance of the manufacturer.
Don't believe me? OpenSSL had a massive hole for four years until someone noticed it. Quite likely there are others to be exploited.
Closed source shouldn't get smug either. Don't for one minute think the spooks haven't stolen a copy of the source code, it's just that it isn't subject to possible peer review, so holes are less likely to be spotted.
Tinfoil hats on...
"The majority of iOS devices are already upgraded to 9."
Well, not quite. Apple may have claimed >50% uptake, however that is only for iOS9 capable devices. There are hundreds of millions of devices out there for which Apple have not released a version of iOS9. (<=iPhone4, iPod Touch4, iPad1)
I'm going to claim blueyonder is still a problem.
I'm not receiving mails I'm expecting and they aren't in the spam mailbox either (which I had to turn on). I estimate my total email volume has halved since the switch away from gmail, so where is the missing stuff going as it should either be in my inbox or my spam mailbox.
I'm considering getting a gmail address and going back to that.
Nice of Mohammed to publish it straight to the wild instead of giving the authors a chance to remedy any vulnerability prior to release (90 days notice?). (the article doesn't mention any notice being given)
Aiding and abetting criminal behaviour by showing open doors to criminals. Don't get me wrong, vulnerabilities need exposed, but it should be done in a controlled manner that minimise the risk of widespread exploitation to further compromise the Internet
I'm not going to trawl through previous articles but it's been covered here many times.
The Sale of Goods Act very much covers this. A technical specification was published and the goods have been proven not to meet the specification, so there is a clear case. However since in the vast majority of cases the vehicle has not been returned as faulty "within a short time*", you have accepted the goods and are therefore likely only to be eligible for repair or replacement, not a refund.
(* generally considered 3-4 weeks)
"lovingly crafted by Apple's chief designer Sir Jony Ive"
While I'm not trying to suggest Jony hasn't directed the creation of some magnificent products, I think you'll find its hundreds of unnamed minions who've "lovingly crafted" the Apple products.
The image of some old school British inventor with the rolled up sleeves, peaked eye-shade and magnifying lamp sitting in a dingy basement with just some tiny tools and a steaming cup of tea - nah!
Just another step down the road to the scenes in Minority Report where people are bombarded by adverts based on their retina scan. So long distance reading of the eye is a long way off, but tracking by RFID is here.
We classify data as "Personally Identifiable Information" when you can take two or three non-unique items and link them to identify a unique person. Surnames are generally common. But add a date of birth and a postcode and chances are you can have single individual. And while RFID tags can be globally unique tracking them individually isn't when it gets powerful. But regularly wear that blazer that goes with those jeans and shirt when you go out and about with mates wearing similar combinations and you start to get some serious data linking of known associates and patterns
And MI5 wants more rights to track people???
Not sure if it's Apple's direct words or a poor journalistic interpretation. The (default) face at the moment is a watch face. The new option lets you set other things as the default (like a picture).
I'm guessing this is aimed at the younger generation who've grown up with mobile phones showing the time and therefore never owned a watch. Those of us slightly older (who had an original Mickey Mouse watch) now have the new Mickey face showing the time.
Wow! Half of iPhones are not in a latest up to date fully patched state.
I'm going to stick my neck out and suggested 99.9% of all devices connected to all the corporate networks in the world are in this state.
Yes, it represents a potential attack vector. As does every other unmatched device. You've removed Adobe from your systems now, haven't you?
I like your thinking. There are small countries Microsoft could buy and then set their own tax rates, data rules, etc.
Invalidate the US government licenses - depends if they were sold or leased. Probably couldn't revoke them, but they'd soon run out in the natural product lifecycle.
Now, trolling, why doesn't the government just go open source? Two problems. The conversion is NOT cheap. Despite what small scale Linux geeks will tell you, it would cost Many billions to move desktops to Linux and Open Office, and 90% of all your other applications would need re-written. Second, you can't hide your own monitoring in the open source - by definition, the world has the source code, so any back doors in the closed source are gone in the open world.
Pass the Toffee Butterkist...
"I suppose it's a bit like a newspaper, whilst you pay for it, everyone in the distribution chain gets a cut of the sale, currently ISP's don't (in the main) get paid to serve content."
ISPs get paid for how much data the consumer uses. They don't really care how you use up that allowance you've paid for, they profit by you using more of it.
The fact you called it "whiskey" shows you know nothing about the manufacturing process of whisky.
The vast majority of Scotch Whisky is matured in former bourbon casks (which is also a whiskey, but not whisky) as the bourbon casks by law can only be used once, hence there is a ready market of once used casks.
A decent DR plan will include several geographically separated pubs. It would also account for transportation and overnight accommodation (since you're not going to drive back, are you?)
It's the Business Continuity plan that's lacking in useable resources close to hand. Carry out cool bag stocked with beers kept in the little fridge under the desk. If the principle BC site is unavailable to provide refreshment the beer garden can still be leveraged.
Collusion between entities stifles competition and the free market economy. It's falsely held down the wages of the little guy.
And why shouldn't some of the little guys get to stick their snout in the trough too. Just because you work in a growing industry and live in the heartland of employers shouldn't mean you shouldn't profit more than the next man. The gulf between the poorest and the richest is growing which is wrong for everyone but I still want more.
Back in the real world, I in no way condone the collusion. But if you want to see what a "free market economy" does for wages in a localised community just look at the evil bankers. Be careful what you wish for...
Theft != Copyright Infringement. At least in the letter of the law as it stands today.
In much the same way that drink driving != possession of an offensive weapon (to the letter of the law), but both could potentially result in many years in prison if someone dies through your actions. And "big media" call that manslaughter.
So stop with the pedantry and stop trying to justify copyright infringement "as it isn't theft"
Avid Media was originally formulated as a concept by a secret group of religious crusaders who had an idea to gather the details of cheaters so they could later release the damming material on the world and thus promote the fidelity of their religion while otherwise demonising the hedonistic heathens and exposing them to suicide, murder and social breakdown.
OK, I know it pays for everything and I'm the customer being sold, but can we just turn off advertising.
Realistically advertisers PLEASE stop auto-playing adverts. If I'm browsing the web and everyone in the office turns to look at me because of your blaring advert then you've just lost a potential customer irrespective of what you're punting.