12 posts • joined 23 Nov 2010
They were my first choice because of their good Linux support.
Simple fix, but...
> The good news is that users need only change the password to make the poorly-coded default codes irrelevant.
Well, yes, but it doesn't inspire confidence that they've not made other similar blunders that affect users' security.
For my last two machines, I've taken a full image of the hard drive before I boot it for the first time.
The only way to be sure.
Qualys browser check...
...says my version of Java (18.104.22.168) is an "Insecure version" (in red text) and I should upgrade to 22.214.171.124.
I check the 6u27 release notes to find "Java SE 6u27 does not add any fixes for security vulnerabilities beyond those in Java SE 6u26".
I usually run Firefox on Linux with root owning the files and chowning them temporarily when I upgrade. I can't see this method working too well in the future.
If I were Apple...
If I were Apple, I'd keep any new anti-jailbreaking plans under wraps until the public iOS 5 release, not add them to a beta and give the jailbreakers a several-month heads-up.
RE: @colinm: Feistel
Alas my obscure xkcd comic references (http://xkcd.com/153/) appear to be too obscure...
RE: Dear India
Maybe in the Feistel cipher's s-boxes, simply take the bitstring down, flip it and reverse it?
Could The Reg get a watt meter (e.g. N67HH from Maplin) and quote the typical power usage in their reviews of always-on equipment?
RE: Office 2000
Office 2000 isn't getting security patches any more, so that's one good reason to change.
That sounds rather like Debian unstable (Sid)...
- Fee fie Firefox: Mozilla's lawyers probe Dell over browser install charge
- Did Apple's iOS make you physically SICK? Try swallowing version 7.1
- Pics Indestructible Death Stars blow up planets using glowing KILL RAY
- Review Distro diaspora: Four flavours of Ubuntu unpacked
- Neil Young touts MP3 player that's no Piece of Crap