"PS, reg staff, WTF have you done to the site????? For the love of god, revert back..."
101 posts • joined 12 Apr 2010
"PS, reg staff, WTF have you done to the site????? For the love of god, revert back..."
As far as I can see, until "Shellshock", it was pretty normal for AV vendors to do their think, issue detection file updates and provide a bit of protection for end users.
The much maligned McAfee appears to have a detection in place for Regin since 2011 - which predates the trend for high profile DAT file releases - so I suspect a lot of the secrecy around this is simply people dont bother looking through the tedious information pushed out with each detection database release.
"Oh wait you said quarterly, and across the product range then, so not that many then. How many did Microsoft release in the last 3 months for all their products."
I could be wrong, but a quick check on Technet shows MS issued 9 patches in May, 7 in June and 6 in July so that is 22 in the last three months. The numbering system implies MS has issued 42 in the seven months of this year.
But this overlooks two main issues:
1) issuing lots of patches doesnt necessarily mean your software is dodgy (it could mean you are just much better at finding and patching holes than anyone else).
2) Using MS as the example really is setting the bar low.
"Vague thoughts about if I had anything worth hiding, I'd like a system with 2 passwords where the alpha password lets you in normally, but the beta password 'obliterates' the incriminating stuff whilst allowing access to the innocent but private stuff..."
One of the great parts of truecrypt was the hidden container which allowed you to reveal one password granting access to the outer container but the inner container remained invisible.
AFAIK this technique was able to keep the hidden container from detection using pretty much all current forensic tooling. The final audit findings may reveal more.
Tails has been trying to get rid of Truecrypt for a while now:
https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/5373 and https://tails.boum.org/blueprint/replace_truecrypt.
Looking at the changelog, zuluCrypt was added as an option on 19 May but the bit about "recent concerns" was added 29 May.
Also, there is a SANS forensics presentation from 2010 which (on slide 23) covers Truecrypt and states "removed at the request of US government" - http://digital-forensics.sans.org/summit-archives/2010/18-lord-cryptanalysis.pdf
" It only has 25% of the functionality"
Agreed - Whole Disk Encryption was not the main reason I used truecrypt, and isnt the main reason almost everyone I know used truecrypt.
If if if that was the whole reason, Bitlocker is even a poor alternative for truecrypts WDE.
TrueCrypt was more than just whole disk encryption.
TrueCrypt provided a tool which allowed users to create portable storage and deniable containers - all in one cross platform bundle.
It will be missed but even if it does return, will anyone ever be able to trust it again?
@Martin an gof
Not since the 1990s.
"However it wouldn't be difficult to implement two factor authentication, requiring, for example, a pin, birth date, last random digits of the Tesco club-card number etc. to prevent this occurring in the first place."
Not difficult but potentially a nightmare to manage. Distribution, revocation and verification of the second factor is hard enough when companies deal with their employees - Tescos has an elastic user base so there would be a reliance on an externally provided source of the second factor. Apart from anything else, there has to be a decision on how many new customers will go elsewhere when they are told to get the dongle / app / whatever rather than just click and buy.
Then you hit the problem about users needing a second factor for every different site they manage. Or do we have a federated second factor service which instantly throws up issues around being a single point of failure etc.
All tescos needed to do here was have better security controls around how it allowed access. 2FA may have helped but is far from the only answer.
Doesn't this imply that a lot of middlemen (who should have known better from the Q) have made money brokering trades as the stock prices went up and down again?
Did I misread something?
The subtitle reads
However, note that we didn't say British billionaires there
and while headline does indeed avoid saying British, the first paragraph undoes this with:
A rundown of the richest people in China has revealed that the very wealthiest British billionaires collectively boast more cash than their counterparts in the People's Republic.
So, are the "British" billionaires cohort more cash-rich than the Chinese ones or just the UK billionaire cohort?
I wouldn't be too convinced by numbers from CWJobs, jobserve or whatever.
Companies looking to hire seem to push the job out to seven or eight agencies who then all pimp the same job (with slightly different rates) this makes it look like there are a lot more roles than really exist.
A good example was a role in Middlesex i got in my job search email today. Identical job description, identical location, seven different adverts with six different rates (£84 per day difference between highest and lowest). Two of the adverts were from the same agency (Hays in this instance).
All in all, I wouldn't trust any report which counts afvertised jobs on online sites as an indicator of anything - good or bad.
"Anyone find Amazon Prime absolutely rubbish?"
In general, 9 out of 10 orders arrive on the guaranteed date - this dips around Christmas but the averages out to about 90%. Every time they have missed this, I have complained and had the membership extended.
"Perhaps because people don't *want* to work all day and all night? Perhaps because the stores can't afford to employ the extra staff and pay for the extra lighting and heating that opening late would involve?"
This is on the assumption that being open outside "normal" working hours means the store has to be open 24/7.
The stores that cant afford to be open the extra hours are still paying to be open at times of the day when no customers visit. This makes no sense.
Obviously it would depend on some sound market research but there would be nothing stopping a shop targeting working people opening at 1600 and closing at 2330hrs each day. No extra staff needed and if that is the time the customers visit, it makes much more sense than being open 0900 - 1700hrs.
My closest high street is virtually a ghost town during the day. There are some old people walking around and there are a lot of unemployed people walking around. The overwhelming majority of shops have silent tills and bored staff gossiping with each other. However from about 1530 onwards things change and the last hour the shops are open (generally 1700 - 1800), they are busy with lots of customers and queues at the till as people try to shop before closing time..
Most of the shops could close until 1400hrs without any noticeable loss of revenue and staying open to 2000hrs or later would likely bring in extra customers.
Its not about hiring extra staff, it certainly is not about making people work all day and night (who suggested that or is it just a strawman to scare people off the idea?), it is about being open at a time that suits your customer base.
Nightclubs and restaurants are a good example. Why open when you customers dont need you?
Or did you mean their Bada system? (If so, not new, not secret, reported openly)
You do know that Samsung already has its own App Store type thing, don't you? But it is android apps in there.
Are you suggesting (leaking?) the idea that Samsung has invented a new os on the quiet but has enough debs and apps to take on google / apple?
No wonder you are AC.
Trademarks have to be used or you lose them.
It seems it was used and within the window required by the law. What is the problem here?
Do you mean most people want android but not google play or did I misread?
Good points but:
Previously, Nokia was very big in many languages most Americans cannot even spell, and which constitute substantial markets.
Not substantial enough to save Nokia.
The non-English language market is almost certainly bigger than the English language market, but for some reason people the world over still want access to the AppStore and Google Play (and as far as I can tell, both support non-English languages..)
If you talk to average non technical people, you'll find you're mistaken. The article is correct, most people don't really know what "Android" is, they are buying a Samsung phone, not Android.
I think this is only partly correct.
I agree that most people (probably even most technical minded people) arent looking for an Android device first, they are looking for a device they like the look of, they like using and is at a price they are willing to pay. This sort of explains why Samsung is (currently) demolishing the competition from other Android manufacturers.
However, people are going for the Galaxy brand rather than (for example) Wave, which means the OS must have some impact over and above the Samsung brand.
This could be how the OS works, it could be how the OS looks, or more likely it is about what the OS provides in the way of apps and stuff. There is no reason to assume that this would transfer equally to a different OS - and given that one of the remaining arguments for iOS is the sheer volume of its AppStore, going to an OS with a much more niche app selection would be a very bizarre move for Samsung (minimal gain potential, massive loss potential).
Realistically, there is no strong motivation for Samsung to move to cut google out. Samsung is not a software development brand, its strength lies very much elsewhere and the costs of developing and maintaining their own ecosystem appear to monumentally outweigh any potential increase in profit share they would drive. Even if Samsung did create its own system, it would still be paying Google for some things (maps etc).
The PAYG Nokias are quite cheap indeed (at least if you use 3's prices as a guide) compared to comparable phones from Samsung or Apple. It seems a good way of checking if people buy the brand or the price.
It should be interesting to see where this goes and I am a big fan of there being more competition in the mobile phone space.
Ah - you beat me to it :-).
It is funny to have seen things revert back to purchasing time on a University mainframe again in one lifetime. Pretty fast circle going on there....
Mmmmm, the downside to this is that you get supplied the cheapest crap possible with which to do your work. It will be slow, so loaded down with "management" services that you can just about run notepad if your lucky, takes an age to boot, is tied to the network with some desperately unreliable synchronization software that means you have to reboot your hideously slow to boot POC just to get undocked.
Frequent complaint about company supplied hardware, however I dont think BYOD is the solution.
If you are wasting an hour a day because the device is slow, then you company needs to be made aware of this (1 hour per day per employee = lots of new hardware) so management can make a decision.
If your time is profitable to the company, then this wasted time is costing them (not you) so they really should cough up and get you a better device to work on. Anything else is losing them money.
It may be that your time isnt as valuable to management as you think, in which case it isnt cheaper for them to improve your hardware - if this is the case, then make the most of the enforced breaks and enjoy the more relaxed pace of work.
If a system has security designed into it from the start then it will be more secure than another system that does not.
You need to stick to Plan 9 from Bell Labs.
Last I checked, you had to join the Google borg to do anything worthwhile with an Android.
Not strictly true.
Meanwhile my iPhone cruises happily along with all my calendars and contacts plugged into it and syncing both ways via CardDAV and CalDAV, to a server I set up for myself and I administer.
If you have the know how to set up and admin a server, you can do this on droid devices as well.
But if officialdom wants reports, then officialdom should send a 'policeman' out to respond.
Excellent point - but before the policeman can respond, people have to start reporting the crimes and show that it is happening enough to make police responses necessary.
Implementing good security is an individual company responsibility. Tracking down and punishing the perpetrators is a police responsibility. At the moment, there is a bit of a disconnect because in lots of (although far from all) situations, the company decides to not mention the breach and deal with it using its own resources.
At the moment, this makes sense for lots of companies - is this what the EU is trying to change?
Don't want the internet to devolve into apps.
Otherwise it seems that AOL & Compuserve were just a bit ahead of their time.
What web browser features can fix the fact that my 46 year old eyes struggle to read text on my phone or that my fingers (not fat fingers either) sometimes hit the wrong link?
This is a really good point - and all too often designers are too heavily focused on their massive displays to remember that accessibility is very important.
However, this isnt a problem solely focussed on web browsers or solved with apps. If they are going to the trouble of developing an android and iOS app to provide better accessibility, they should have just put a bit more effort in to the front end design in the first place.
Do any browsers support orientation detection? Properly, I mean, not just re-flowing the text. A dedicate app will often adopt an entirely different layout in horizontal mode than vertical mode. Putting buttons along the top instead of down the side for instance.
This isnt the browser - it is down to the design.
Good responsive layouts will identify that the screen dimensions have changed and reformat its CSS appropriately. There are lots of pretty good frameworks to make responsive design trivially easy (320andup is one of the better known) and these all allow for a full reformatting at breakpoints.
Perhaps all of that could be done in a browser if HTML supports it but how many web designers actually do bother to think about that kind of thing?
It does, but not enough developers think about it - they are too busy designing a website for browsers then coding an app for phones.
It's second nature for a phone developer but the most you can really expect a web page to do is flow properly so that page items aren't obscuring other page items.
Phone and web interface developers are, or at least should be, the same beasts.
Maybe you can do it in CSS, but it's far easier not to. HTML+CSS is an abomination creaking at the seams.
Yet HTML5 + CSS is what drives most apps.
The latest Sony devices look, feel and work great. The coming tablet looks awesome!
Excellent - see the open market works for everyone's benefits. If Sony do manage to pull off a superb device at an equivalent price point, then well done for them and Samsung's business will suffer.
This is the "good" thing about free market capitalism. Companies try to encourage brand loyalty because that is what allows them to sell rubbish to customers who still keep ranting about it being the greatest thing ever (until the next one comes out and fixes all the previous faults because until the new one does it they arent faults).
Realistically, if Apple could produce a decent enough tablet which did the things I want a tablet to do, at a reasonable price, I would buy it. So far, they haven't and my old iPads are gathering dust now.
If you sell enough you will get some problems / faults.
No one is disputing that.
Friend has a Samsung - it developed a fault and kept rebooting randomly but many times per day.
A friend of mine had an S3 which developed camera problems - it was refusing to take pictures. He had a short call with Samsung tech support and picked up a new phone the next day. All docs, data and apps were sync'd over seamlessly.
Can you genuinely and accurately claim Android is safer than iOS? Nope.
Nope. Where did I claim that?
I said being locked in wasnt the same as having access to the largest and safer app store.
Being locked in is being tied to an ecosystem which means should you become dissatisfied with either the direction the OS is going in, or the quality of the devices manufactured, you find it very hard to migrate to another platform. Pretty much every app you have purchased is lost and depending on how you have stored your data it becomes a pain in the arse to move it over to your new ecosystem.
So, given this, it is understandable that for people looking to take their first footsteps in the new world order, that the open environment of Android is more appealing.
Yes, there is more malware hiding in the android space, but the number of compromises of android devices is not scaling up in line with the doom and gloom predictions.
Maybe it is because 99% of apps in either iOS or Android repositories wont see the light of day so it doesnt matter if they have malware on them or not.
When I go to clients I would take my 15" Macbook Retina - it has Thunderbolt / Displayport out which can pretty much go to anything and HDMI. I can also take an Apple TV and setup wirelessly with little fuss if I needed to.
Good for you. I am sure you dont mind spending that additional outlay and having multiple devices in your car and your bag.
On the other hand, I am looking for a single device that allows me to do all the things I need there and then and ideally remains cost effective.
Spending £500 for something which does the job makes (to me) an awful lot more sense than spending £2000 for three things which, together, deliver the goods.
Don't think anyone is suggesting an iPad (or Android Pad) could do everything for everyone?
Which is the point - and the reason why knee jerk criticism of Android / Samsung / Whoever is pretty pointless.
anything negative or untrue about Android / Samsung and get upvoted
If negative and untrue comments about Android / Samsung got upvoted, you would have millions of upvotes by now.
Did you mean to say something else?
Well family member got a new 64gb iPad (nearly full) - the old one was backed up - restored the new one - took less than an hour to restore the lot.
Over what type of connection?
64 gigabytes in under 60 minutes means weren't far off Gigabit Ethernet speeds. Normally you would expect 802.11n to take about 6.5 hours to do this without any other issues on the network and by being able to treat it all as a single chunk.
Did you get this over 3g or Wifi? What time of day did you do this?
Was it really under an hour? Unless I have borked the maths (which is always possible) it seems to me that 64gigabytes in an hour is over the maximum theoretical transfer rates for anything other than wired connections and I didnt realise the iPad had an RJ45 port.
Or did you mean over USB?
Ask an android user if they would buy android again - the answer from the survey was about 60% would (or 40% would not).
You keep trotting this out, even though it is older than most Android models.
Now of those that would they then have to make the second decision of will it be a Samsung - would anyone really say today their next phone will definitely be a Samsung when who knows what Sony, Motorola, some as of now unknown to us Chinese company comes up with??
Which is still a good thing as it will keep companies pushing hard to produce good stuff.
Are you actually saying that Apple can bring out a shite phone, worse than any other manufacturer, and you would still buy it?
If you think that can never happen, then it is just as reasonable to assume Samsung wont do it.
Yeah that's representative - a survey done by a single person who has a S3 themselves of 16 people all composed of people at the same company (Samsung PR perhaps) or in the same family.
That was my point and clearly stated at the time.
The fact you missed the underling point is probably due to the frothing rage you have against Samsung and Android. Its a shame you need to validate your like of Apple products by attacking everything else.
And no, no one I know works at, or for, Samsung. Most dont work in IT related spheres but about half the S3 users I know do. In my IT-related office, there are more android users than iOS users by about 3:1.
Three years ago this was obviously not the case and it was almost entirely iOS with a smattering of Nokia and Blackberry devices.
However, corporate issued devices are still predominately iOS / Blackberry - it is only people who have to pay out of their own pockets that have gone for Androids.
Samsung have to try and push their BRAND as ultimately that's all they have that is unique.
Well , ultimately that is what most companies have that is unique. Its why branding (and brand loyalty) is important to companies.
Anyone else could come up with an equally good, better and / or cheaper Android phone.
ACs (you?) have said this a few times. Yes it is true and it is what is good about the market and forces Samsung to keep trying hard. Go back an re-read the previous replies if you have forgotten what people said last time.
Anyone else could come up with an equally good or better handset but so far they havent. There are cheaper ones but at the moment Samsung seems to have hit the sweet spot of setting the price at a point at which people are willing to pay for the goodies.
Does sound like steaming BS to me.
Any reason why this didnt go into the first post? They are only a couple of minutes apart and a lot of that will have been typing time, so its not as if you did hours of research here.
One survey says 84% of Apple users would buy Apple again
One old survey remember.
Sounds like Samsung PR
Android, not Samsung.
Of course if you ask someone who just wasted £400 on a Samsung would you change to iPhone they would say no - it's like admitting you were wrong.
Yet you also claimed hordes of people were returning their Android devices - which is exactly like admitting you were wrong. Getting a freebie swap to the more expensive device is a certain win if you really dont like the droid.
Apple support is great
What did you have to ring them for if the device is reliable and just works?
How many Samsung phone / tablet owners reading this could genuinely say YES I would definitely buy another Samsung next time?
It is a misleading question based on your flitting between Android and Samsung in an effort to spread confusion.
Every Samsung phone user I knows likes it and will give Samsung first shot at a future upgrade. If something amazing happens and Samsung brings out a dog, they will either skip the upgrade or change brands.
Do you think Apple owners are so sheep like they will upgrade to a crap device just to stay with Apple or do you think they will do the same?
The S2 was a better phone than the iPhone 3GS (the last iOS phone I had) by an order of magnitude and the Asus eeepad is a better tablet than the iPad 1 or 2.
Dear AC @ 1602
3GS to 5 - what do you expect.
Something to justify the change.
What you are basically saying here is the same as I have said - the iPhone 3GS was a good enough device for anyone wanting to use an iOS phone and there is no point them ever upgrading again.
I bet that is exactly what Apple want to hear and it is a great way to justify spending a few hundred quid every 12 / 24 months.
That's a bit like saying that the sun would not rise tomorrow.
So why do you assume Samsung will drop the ball and alienate customers more than Apple will? Apple can pick and choose the best components, but Samsung make most of the best ones anyway.
You are trying to argue two opposing points here - which is a bit strange.
Samsung & Android users in general are a bit more honest in saying that when they change devices, they will go with the one that best suits them at the time.
Apple users (you in a zillion AC guises) seem to say "we are brand loyal" but that this means you will still go with the best device, just that you assume it will automatically be an iShiny.
The fact is when it comes to upgrade time, people will almost always look to the newer version of the thing they have - Nokia relied on this for decades - and only if that is below par will they look elsewhere. Samsung or Apple, iOS or Android.
Brand loyalty is a problem when the customer ignores the mediocre latest release (iPhone 5) and still buys it because its the BRAND they want. However you seem to think that is a good thing.
Look at the malware stats for Android - it's absolutely shocking - that alone would put me off Android.
I thought you were trying to make this about Samsung, not Android in general? Try to be at least a bit consistent.
Dear AC @ 1553
Except Apple are the ones that moved to remove DRM on music,
After being the ones to use it in the most oppressive manner imaginable first. If it wasnt for the early incarnation of iTunes forcing a DRM'd format on everything I got, I would have had much more access to my OWN music six years ago.
they let you 'Match' your music in the cloud (whereever you got it from!!)
Great if you dont have much music or a magically faster internet connection than most people on the planet. I store all my MP3s on my NAS which streams to any device in the house and allows me to tunnel in when I am on the move.
Much easier than using an iCloud.
Kindles are far more locked in than Apple
I dont get the point here.
If being locked in is having access to the largest and safer app store
@ AC 1430
I know plenty of people with iPhone 3GS and original iPads,
Doesnt bode well for Apple's sales does it? There is a finite market of newcomers which was the thrust of the big rant about Android users supposedly not sticking with Samsung.
Not buying a new release is the same as not sticking with the brand.
I have an iPad and went to an iPad 2 - that was (for me) the end of the line there as nothing else was an improvement, so when new models came out, I migrated to Android.
Dear AC @ 1549
Are you deliberately missing the point?
Yes SD slot is SO important many non-Apple tablets don't have them either - Nexus 7 perhaps?
The SD card slot is indeed important for many other people who buy tablets that have them, or end up spending extra on ways to get round the missing bit.
My Asus eeepad is still going strong even though it is years old because it has the ability to do the things I need to do.
There is nothing worse than facing a client and realising you cant get files off him or her, or that you cant show your presentation on their screen cos your device doesnt have a suitable monitor output.
The whole point of having different types of devices is that people have different needs. For me a lack of a USB port and SD card renders a portable device useless for anything other than home browsing. Obviously you think differently and thankfully there is a big enough market for manufactures of devices to cater for both our needs. Its a shame you think this is a bad thing.
The reality is most peoples media libraries are far larger than their phone / tablet memory and even carrying an extra SD card is not going to change that. I have a pretty large library - what I should carry perhaps 20 SD cards - impractical.
This is still completely missing the point.
When I buy device X, I might think that 16GB is great and more than I will ever need. However, a while later, I realise I need to load 18GB worth of "sfuff" (apps, maps, documents, photos, music, videos etc) onto it.
With a device that has an SD card slot, I spend a fiver and get a 32gb card to expand it.
With a device that doesnt have a card slot, I spend £400 to replace it.
Yeah, sure you can upload it all to the cloud and access it that way but mobile bandwidth is nowhere near fast enough to compete with the speed of an SD card and if you travel, roaming fees make this impossible.
You may be pleased that you are locked into one set way of using your device, but not everone else is.
Isnt this the whole point of most of the objections about Apple's ecosystem?
I agree that Samsung have to work bloody hard to keep sales, but the alternative is a bad thing for everyone (including Samsung in the long term).
All Apple releases have been pretty minor for years now (iPad 2 and iPhone 3GS were the biggies IMHO, others may well think differently) and this is largely because they have a loyal customer base which removes their drive to really innovate.
You may think this is good for the company but it isn't. It opens up the possibility that a new player can appear and suddenly shift lots of products in a way Apple havent anticipated (and I am not necessarily saying Samsung - or anyone - has done this yet) and if Apple is unable to innovate quickly enough it suffers (again, say Hi to Nokia).
Over the last three years, Apple has gone from being an uncontested leader in the smartphone and tablet space to actually following the direction taken by other companies (iPad mini for example). This does not spell doom and gloom for Apple but it shows what happens when a company relies on customer loyalty.
It is much better for the market, for the industry, for customers, for everything even, if manufacturers are forced to keep producing good stuff if they want to retain customers.
At a fundamental level, there is as much unique and special about the S3 as there is an iPhone 5. There are apps to do the same things (frequently the same apps) on both Android and iOS - gmail and google docs works on both... - for the average user Android is secure enough for their activities (even the US Government has a hardened version of android for the ultra paranoid).
This more or less leaves the "Beauty" of the design and the price. There is no point me arguing over which is nicer looking between the S3 and iPhone5 as it is very much a personal choice, but the lawsuits seem to imply they are similar now.
So its down to price. Apple would be actually insane to try and compete on price because it's main selling point is the "prestige" value where is allows the owner to show the world how rich s/he is. This is a bit diluted by the fact it seems like world + dog at the benefit office seems to have an iPhone, but it is still the strongest aspect to the Apple brand.
You mean 'when' Samsung drop the ball you will buy another Android handset - that's fine - but it does make Samsungs position more precarious.
As is should be.
Blind fanboi loyalty to crap products is counterproductive for everyone.
If Apple fans were more able to move around, then maybe we would see a return to the groundbreaking improvements of the early iPhones. The difference between a 3GS and a 5 is pretty pitiful.
So bottom line is for every S3 sold today how many would definitely buy a new Sx in 2 years time whereas for every iPhone 4/5 user far more would buy an iPhone x in 2 years time.
Because they are locked into the iOS ecosystem and changing will be painful.
That is a really good way to do business. Its not like it isnt going to eventually start to reduce the number of new entrants to the ecosystem or anything, is it?