Re: Looks like a market opportunity...
Data havens will be the new tax havens.
If they aren't already.
4488 posts • joined 26 Jul 2008
Data havens will be the new tax havens.
If they aren't already.
House of Cards (US version) is a fantasy series about politicians and lobbyists being more dignified and giving more lip-service to democracy than they actually are and actually do. It's not realistic. Their version of cloak and dagger includes the cloaks.
Q. What is the difference between Ajit Pai and Hitler?
A. Hitler had one more ball.
It came with a "Designed for Windows Vista" sticker too.
We put it on the bin in our office.
Well of course you should never trust anyone if you can help it. But logically I'd rather the Russians knew if I did something wrong than my own government. Russian police are unlikely to show up at my door because I committed a crime, joined a political group or said one of the ever-expanding list of things considered hate speech or harassment on Twitter. Putin doesn't get off his bear for less than an international incident!
Why on Earth would the NSA of all people want to help create a more secure OS? That's like expecting bank robbers to want to help create a better safe.
That's not what they do.
So your theory is that the NSA put highly valuable software and its source code on a laptop to see if Kaspersky would upload the files rather than, say, opening up "Settings" and toggling the Participate in Kaspersky Security Network or whatever it's called on or off. Or guessing that Kaspersky, like all the other antivirus vendors might have such a feature as is standard practice today?
>>"Interestingly enough, the NSA analyst isn't formally charged."
Yeah, I'm not really expecting to see a public trial over the NSA's widespread and dubious legality attempts to hack the world's computers. The guy will be lucky if he isn't Seth Rich'd a few miles from his home (or David Kelly'd as we call it in the UK).
>>"Now Kaspersky has a problem: they don't really have a plausible and innocent explanation for how exactly the stuff from that analyst's laptop showed up at the FSB"
I think the story is more than plausible. Idiot takes work home with him, probably because some technical restriction on his work laptop or rules about where things can be stored got in his or her way. Dodging around "stupid" company policies is almost routine for many developers. I once replaced my work computer's entire OS with Ubuntu because I didn't want to use Windows Vista. Smart idiots are the most dangerous of all idiots.
>>so the vehicle looses the wheel complete with hub and brake assembly.
I want to correct your spelling, but technically it still works.
>>What more can I say?
Only that it costs fifteen billion pounds and we don't need it.
More like auto-play video ads are despised. I'm actually sympathetic to your post - I recognize that websites need to make money and I have resisted using an Adblocker for a very long time. But when I open a tab and it immediately starts emitting sound from my speakers or playing distracting animations alongside the article I'm trying to read, it's an automatic tab close most of the time. So I'm at the point where yes, even though I am fine with ads in general, I'm setting up an ad blocker.
NO AUTO-PLAY ADS!
>>I'm not sure even what that means? Can he be hated too much?
Oh, not at all. In fact, we recommend that you get together with like-minded people for a short period, perhaps two minutes, to get your hate done in one nice go.
What *I* do to erase an SSD is delete the encryption keys. Does others do differently?
It's certainly a cover-up. But probably just by local people covering their arses. It doesn't need "Russian agents" to have hacked it. By the sounds of it any person in the vicinity could have hacked with it a pringle's can (as in the case of the voting "machine" that was hacked in Brazil). Interfering with the election would be a federal crime of a pretty high order - years in prison. By far the most likely scenario to me is that it was a crappy, insecure system. It might have been hacked, it might not. Somebody in the chain of responsibility for this panicked and wiped the whole thing. I mean if Hillary can "accidentally" delete 30,000 emails and claim they were about yoga, I don't see why somebody in lower government wouldn't try the same approach.
Electronic voting is a bad idea. Electronic voting without a paper trail, is a terrible one.
That's what most computer security - "simple steps". But you have to complete a hundred of them and the attacker only has to find the single one you missed. With hindsight you can almost always point back at something and say "this wasn't done". Yes, but how many people were doing how many things?
>>Actually I don't think they're that desperate for money.
I know that you're trolling (the troll icon gives it away!), but seriously - Microsoft have been fighting an expensive and ongoing legal action against the US government to prevent them being able to access Azure data in their Ireland data centres. They've been doing so because they know allowing this would be a big blow to their sales in Europe. As I said, if there's money involved, they'll even stoop to doing the right thing if they have to.
In the last US election, Hillary won the popular vote but Trump became president. In the UK more people voted against Blair's last government than for it, and yet he secured a sizeable majority. In Russia, where they have proportional representation, neither of these would be the case.
Tell me again how the USA is a democracy but Russia is not. Oh wait, it's because of the unbiased media in the USA? Right? Right?
Yes. If in the routine course of investigating new malware, Joe Programmer realises what they're looking at is a bundle of NSA property, that's going to go right up the chain to the top. Where the CEO will make a decision. It's not a standard occurrence.
>>It's a conspiracy versus cock-up moment. Was he really that stupid or was this a sting operation with some chickenfeed to justify blacklisting Kaspersky?
Given that this took place some time ago and that exploits have real value, I'm going to go with it being an error that they are opportunistically capitalising on. When life gives you lemons, sort-of-thing.
NSA/USA don't really need real events to attack foreign powers over. With a compliant media and the inability of people to question your version (because it's all cloak-and-dagger take our word for it subject matter). I doubt they'd sacrifice real value for planning ahead a mud-slinging exercise two years in advance. When they can get as much effect just with the CIA saying "Russia hacked our election. We have evidence" on demand.
Not all malware is compiled software. There are plenty of scripts that constitute malware. I could write you a trojan in Bash right now if I wanted. Also, it said it uploaded infected zip files. So for example, I have project folders that contain both source code and compiled executables which, if I were transferring, I would zip up to export.
Microsoft are old school. There's none of this Google / Facebook / Twitter desire to control opinions or the media or pretend to the The Good Guy... They just want money. All of it. Everywhere. They will do anything to get it. Even on occasion, if it's necessary, protecting your privacy. In an age of Google, there's something endearing about Microsoft's more Old School brand of evil.
Personally I find it deeply shocking that a media outlet such as Russia Today should be purchasing ads for itself in the run up to the USA's largest media event. What were they up to?
Of course they did. The $100,000 that these Russian companies spent on Twitter ads was very influential. It certainly carries more weight than the $141 million Hillary spent on ads or the $58 million Trump did. Don't you know that Russian ads are many times more effective than US ones. Especially online ones where people never ignore them routinely.
Facebook has refused numerous requests to actually show examples of these adverts. Twitter will likely do the same. Probably because of the supreme effectiveness of these ads makes them too dangerous to reveal to the public.
>>A few days before the election, he made a post about how to discourage Clinton supporters from voting.
That would be this Clinton? The one who received $250,000 from long-term Democrat supporter and Whitehouse visitor Harvey Weinsten? Who has spent the last week trying to avoid denouncing her friend just in case he pulls through this somehow and retains his influence? Just checking.
And if the post you're referring to is the one I think it is, the one about how to un-hypnotise a rabid anti-Trump supporter, then I don't see what's wrong with providing a list of supported facts that many were glossing over. HIllary has been for every war America has engaged in in the last couple of decades. Trump came out as against the Iraq War when Hillary was championing it. And things of that nature. People attacking Scott for a blog post like that... are frankly the people the blog post was talking about.
>>Truly I wonder, what could they have done about the doxing without, um, doxing?
They can provide an error message to the user more specific than "You're blocked because of reasons".
I had a Twitter account for all of a month and then I got blocked by them. No real explanation, just a vague reference to "automated behaviour". I *think* it's because my partner who uses Twitter a bit more than me had his account open in a different browser on the same computer and thus two accounts from the same IP. But it's only a wild guess. Twitter's messages are very unhelpful.
>>Scott Adams frequently has to post disclaimers that you shouldn't take moral or professional advice from cartoonists.
No, he frequently chooses to. And in my experience, the people who are most hesitant to give advice are usually a lot more qualified to do so than those who love giving it out.
(And hopefully that's it for the homily channel, tonight!)
Scott Adams is pretty smart. Also, writes a lot more than just Dilbert. He wrote a piece on why Trump would win fairly early on and proved spot on with his analysis in hindsight. Is there any particular reason for your incredulity?
It absolutely will be tried in "the Free World" and is. But I hope nobody is foolish enough to think it will be called the same thing. It will be called countering propaganda and blocking extremism and resisting foreign meddling. And there will be vocal proponents championing it. That happens now in the EU for political purposes and I can give examples.
The key elements are as follows:
1) Is somebody restricting the sources of information you can access?
2) Do you consider yourself unfit to choose your own sources of information?
If the first is true and the second is not, then this is happening to you and what it's called is immaterial.
>>Because Puppets are normally silent, voiced by someone allegedly with talent. When the Puppet can talk for itself it shoots its mouth off and gets everyone in trouble.
So... basically when it's not a puppet, then?
>>"There was never supposed to be a career political class creating laws that don't affect them."
Actually, the Founding Fathers planned for this eventuality as well. It's called The Second Amendment.
This is the true consequence of electing Trump. It has shown that if Trump can be elected, anyone has a chance!
- with people like this, they find it easier to destroy than to create.
So whilst you are right that it would allow retroactive decryption of any emails that are signed with it, that's only for the past week assuming it was even deployed the same day it was created. It could well be that posting the public key is part of their deployment protocol meaning it was only actually in use for a few hours. Maybe.
Don't get me wrong, it's a howler. But the practical effect is less than you suggest.
I've always considered Uber a case of Right Time, Right Place, Wrong Company.
We have constant mobile communications and the ability to manage complex systems systems like thousands of car journeys across a city. The rise of a system like this is inevitable and also desirable (because it's more efficient). I've just always felt it was a shame that Uber were the ones to do so.
>>Their aggressive chuggers then.
I don't think they're chuggers if it's not a charity (chugger = charity mugger). Or is that what's happening here? Is TalkTalk a charity outreach program for incompetent CEOs who would die in the real world? Now that I could believe.
Have they forgotten their core business plan?
2. Forget all deadlines.
3. Outsource all actual work to India to the cheapest possible bid.
4. Use ensuing disaster as example of their greater industry experience than anyone else to secure next contact.
How much more simple could it be?
>>This is eating into the time I was planning to spend watching the Richard Donner cut of Superman II with my 9 year old. We've just watched the Theatrical cut and I wanted to go through it frame by frame with him until he is bored rigid :)
Then I suggest you re-prioritise your life if arguing with strangers on the Internet is taking precedence over time with your child. You'll enjoy Superman, I imagine. He stands for Truth, Justice and the American Way. Albeit that last one being somewhat at odds with the first.
By the way, the latest National Defense Authorization Act just passed in the USA and it contains a clause in there that will allow Russian news sources (e.g. Russia Today) to be dropped from US channel providers. So you'll get what you want in closing off one more avenue where Americans can see another point of view.
>>"I seem to remember being told that someones 2 year old child could explain economics to me on another story."
<groucho>Then somebody run outside and find me a two-year old. I can't make head nor tail of it! </groucho>
>>"As Brexit hasn't happened yet, you must be posting from the future"
Or alternately, the market is capable of responding to things it knows are going to happen. I'd love to see how you walk down the street. "Hmmm, there's a wall in front of me. Well, I'll just keep walking and only change direction when I bang my nose."
>>He won. That's better than losing.
>>Now can I be in charge of the nuclear arsenal? Pretty please.
I am reliably informed that when it comes to Thermonuclear War, the only winning move is not to play. So, still no I'm afraid. As a general principle, those who want power most, should be the last people to have it.
I mistyped. Thank you for picking up on that. It's too late for me to edit the post but I meant that we DO have living memory of the horrors of WWII and that this is a factor in making another world war less likely. Apologies.
>>"Which makes me the ideal person to put in charge of a nuclear arsenal."
Well, I said it relied on having someone perceived as being willing to launch nuclear missiles, not that we wanted to put in charge someone who actually would. ;)
>>"The mathematicians would be right, if confining their opinions to specific cases. Two plus two does equal four. [...] So I'm not sure about those mathematicians you're going to show me."
Aaaaaand that would be my point. I can find you mathematicians who believe there can be no error in their systems because mathematics can be absolute. You're entire post reads as if you've inverted my point and somehow concluded I'm saying there can be no errors. Especially when you start arguing that politicians are the most likely to think a system can be made foolproof. Please re-read, that is the very point I was making.
>>Non-rational is maybe not the best description. You have to be perceived as being ultra-belligerent and very easily provoked.
Sorry, I'm going to respectfully maintain my position. Being highly belligerent can be rational. Europeans didn't take over America by being pacifists. (Note, I'm solely discussing rationality, not ethics). Easily provoked can also be a rational attitude. People will tread more softly around me because I'm known for having a truly awful temper (there's a downside of course, which is that I'm known for having a truly awful temper). Neither is irrational. The irrationality comes from being willing to carry out actions that are harmful to oneself.
>>I understand that scanning was used to tally the counts, but that's hardly electronic voting.
It is. The moment you introduce a link in the chain that is electronic and subject to someone changing a 1 to a 0, that's electronic voting. You can't say "well, only the counting was electronic". As Stalin remarked, that's the part that counts. ;)
I've always found Jacob Rees-Mogg very open and honest about his beliefs and policies.
Fun Fact: We don't actually know if Boris Johnson was elected as Mayor of London. They used electronic voting and the ORG (Open Rights Group) managed to get itself brought on board to monitor the integrity of the elections. I suppose saying "no" would have looked pretty bad. ;)
Their conclusion? Multiple cases in which the votes could have been tampered with and a lack of measures that would prevent it.
Lies, as Boris Johnson is fond of, are self-advantageous in the short term. They get YOU personally ahead. But they're bad for the system as a whole. Boris Johnson would looooove to be Prime Minister and much as I don't hold Theresa May in high regard, Boris Johnson would find a way to stab a Jellyfish in the back.
As Ian Hislop responded when asked if Boris Johnson was a smart person pretending to be a buffoon, or a buffoon pretending to be a smart person: "yes."
On a related note, I am today for the first time turning on Ad Blocking for El. Reg. I regret it - I want to support sites I value and have held off for a long time. But my breaking point is animated ads. You can show as many static ones as you like but if when I am trying to read, an animated bobble head from Hewlett Packard keeps flying up the side of the screen and wobbling at me, I have to block that.
I'm sorry. Just 'No' to auto-play animated and audible ads. It's an instant tab-closer.
>>"Our successes are secret, you only ever hear about our failures"
Counter-terrorism officers have much in common with Sysadmins.
>>I'd rather help the sites I visit earn money directly
So altruistic! How about you actually pay for the content you want from the people who actually make it?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017