Pork Chop Express Public Service Announcement
Warning! Warning! Danger Will Robinson! Thanks to the Swedes, we are now all aware of the dangers of the CD-ROM drives in our new computers.
You see, its all big businesses' fault. They haven't warned us that they are planting ticking time bombs, waiting to eject their payload, turning our home computers into a real-life version of Unreal Tournament's Ripper Weapon. More thanks to the Aussies for telling us about this threat. This should be headlines all across the country. How many of you have the new 48x Speed or higher CD-R or CD-RW drives? Not only are they spinning at lethal speeds, we probably need to be warned about the dangerous laser radiation that could leak out after a damaged disk bursts through the outer door of our CD drives and does horrific damage!
"You'll shoot your eye out, kid."
So, what do we do? As the article states: ""Shatter protection should be built into the drives, especially to protect the front door (of the disk drive)," he says. "What happens now is that the door just breaks and comes flying, along with parts of the disk.""
Hmmm....Duct tape? Naw. The discs of death would slice through that like a hot knife through butta.
I know, an aluminum computer case. We mount the CD drives behind the protective plating, and that will stop the shards from penetrating our soft flesh. After all, some countries make light tanks with aluminum armor, and if its good enough for a tank, its good enough for my computer. Opening and closing the drive might turn out to be a problem. Hmph.
Obviously, we all need to work together to solve this problem. In the meantime, I have found this software that will slow down your CD-Drives to a safe speed. in fact, if you read the page this software is on, it even quotes the Aussie article! Yes! Success! Notice the software interface is in all red to show you just how dangerous this is!
Someone call the government, we need regulations to keep CD-Speeds at 1x. If it saves even one life, or one finger cut, we need to enact this legislation now! Let's march on Washington! The Million Person Slow-CD March! Demand that manufacturers slow stuff down! Soon CPUs will be so fast and run so hot that you will have the next Chernobyl on your desktop! BEWARE!
I certainly hope this was a typo in the original article:
"Fortunately, most fast drives can sustain speeds required to fracture the discs, often because reading errors cause them to slow.
That doesn't make much sense, I'm certain they meant to say: "Fortunately, most drives can't sustain...." We might be safe for a bit.
Spread the word, warn the bunnies too!
Monday, December 30, 2002
Saturday, December 28, 2002
Federal Bureau of Information Technology
I came across an interesting article at FCW.com talking about the FBI's Information Technology Endeavors.
Believe it or not, the FBI was/is one of the most technology "backwards" of the larger well-funded bureaus in the federal government. One of the related articles calls the FBI IT infrastructure like this:
"Trilogy would move the FBI "an enormous step forward," Schumer said. "We need it today, not tomorrow. We needed it yesterday." Schumer described FBI technology as "dinosaur-era" and "fossil technology.""
I'm not a big fan of Charles Schumer, but with what I've been told about the FBI's technology I think he's being pretty accurate.
I know we all have visions from TV (X-Files in particular) and the movies of these large expansive complex all-reaching technologically advanced systems in the law-enforcement, intelligence, and military sections of the government. However, that is far from the actual reality. Most government systems are very 'hodge-podge' with multiple uncoordinated databases and overworked and/or incompetent administrators.
So why do these projects often fail, or take many more years to complete than they should?
One can only theorize, but I have my guesses:
1. The people working in the FBI's IT department are probably underpaid. Even with recent programs that are going to allow the pay scales to step outside the normal federal classifications in order to attract better people, you aren't getting the 'cream of the crop'. Filling out a Federal Application for Employment requires a degree in 'Bureaucracy'. I understand the need for thorough background checks, but have you looked at what you need to fill out? I've also heard that if you aren't an agent, you aren't treated very well at the FBI.
2. Most desirable IT people probably can't meet the stringent security requirements of the FBI. This is a Catch-22 for the bureau. You need people with pristine backgrounds working in an agency that has access to the type of information that is stored at the bureau. Unfortunately, many of the socially mal-adjusted in the IT industry (not ALL of you, just some) have done some pretty heavy experimentation with illegal substances, or tried their hand at 'Cracking' (malicious hacking), or other things that would probably get them on the black-list.
3. Over administration. I have not found one case of a governmental organization that wasn't filled with upper-level management that weren't either incompetent, micro-managers, over-analyzers, simply concerned with their own agendas and self-promotion, or a combination of any of those. Sure there are diamonds in the rough that will do the right thing, but they are usually surrounded by so much crap they can't help their people no matter how much they would like to. With a lack of stability in management as people try to move around to get promoted, it makes a cohesive strategy difficult to implement. Management tends to 'over-meeting' and 'over-committee' IT people to death as well. They spend more time in meetings than you do getting things done, and often the outcomes of the meetings are very confusing with no clarity on the direction that is to be taken. Also IT personnel probably get conflicting orders on what priorities to set and what to do next. Things shift daily depending on the office political environment and who is on the 'hot-seat' at the time.
4. Purchasing. If you've ever worked in the government sector, you know what a pain it is to try to purchase something. It gets worse the bigger the government. Local is bad enough, state is worse, and federal is almost incomprehensible. There's a reason we used to have $700 hammers, and not all of it was greed on the part of the contractors. Often you request to purchase equipment, and by the time it is delivered its obsolete. Or if you do get it quickly enough, you get it all at once and since you are already understaffed, you can't possibly get it configured and deployed in a decent amount of time.
5. "Management By Magazine". Some upper-level manager reads something cool in a tech-rag, and suddenly that becomes the mega-project of the day, or they have no idea how hard it would be to integrate the product into the current environment. Some slimy salespeople (again, some - not all) in the private sector pushing their vapor- or brokenware doesn't help either.
6. Resistance To Change. "We've always done it this way", or "We can't do that, it doesn't follow guidelines." or "We have to get these forms exactly as they are onto the system". All these are huge hurdles that IT personnel have to overcome to try to implement technology to help people do their own jobs more efficiently. Of course, many of the incompetent are making a good living in the government, and those persons can't have someone making their jobs easier - then they won't have anything to complain about or blame for not getting their work done, all while they take bathroom or smoke breaks every 15-minutes.
Of course, not all of this is unique to government. It occurs in the private sector as well no matter the size of the organization. However, it is so entrenched in the government sector that is would be a Herculean task to get it changed. The person doing the changes would probably also be vilified and blamed for every small problem that happened along the way. Problems will crop-up. They occur in all endeavors worth completing.
The problem is that everyone's looking to their next promotion or election and doesn't want to make anyone unhappy, so they have the impossible task of trying to make everyone happy. Therefore the cycle continues, and I don't know where or how it's going to be broken.
I came across an interesting article at FCW.com talking about the FBI's Information Technology Endeavors.
Believe it or not, the FBI was/is one of the most technology "backwards" of the larger well-funded bureaus in the federal government. One of the related articles calls the FBI IT infrastructure like this:
"Trilogy would move the FBI "an enormous step forward," Schumer said. "We need it today, not tomorrow. We needed it yesterday." Schumer described FBI technology as "dinosaur-era" and "fossil technology.""
I'm not a big fan of Charles Schumer, but with what I've been told about the FBI's technology I think he's being pretty accurate.
I know we all have visions from TV (X-Files in particular) and the movies of these large expansive complex all-reaching technologically advanced systems in the law-enforcement, intelligence, and military sections of the government. However, that is far from the actual reality. Most government systems are very 'hodge-podge' with multiple uncoordinated databases and overworked and/or incompetent administrators.
So why do these projects often fail, or take many more years to complete than they should?
One can only theorize, but I have my guesses:
1. The people working in the FBI's IT department are probably underpaid. Even with recent programs that are going to allow the pay scales to step outside the normal federal classifications in order to attract better people, you aren't getting the 'cream of the crop'. Filling out a Federal Application for Employment requires a degree in 'Bureaucracy'. I understand the need for thorough background checks, but have you looked at what you need to fill out? I've also heard that if you aren't an agent, you aren't treated very well at the FBI.
2. Most desirable IT people probably can't meet the stringent security requirements of the FBI. This is a Catch-22 for the bureau. You need people with pristine backgrounds working in an agency that has access to the type of information that is stored at the bureau. Unfortunately, many of the socially mal-adjusted in the IT industry (not ALL of you, just some) have done some pretty heavy experimentation with illegal substances, or tried their hand at 'Cracking' (malicious hacking), or other things that would probably get them on the black-list.
3. Over administration. I have not found one case of a governmental organization that wasn't filled with upper-level management that weren't either incompetent, micro-managers, over-analyzers, simply concerned with their own agendas and self-promotion, or a combination of any of those. Sure there are diamonds in the rough that will do the right thing, but they are usually surrounded by so much crap they can't help their people no matter how much they would like to. With a lack of stability in management as people try to move around to get promoted, it makes a cohesive strategy difficult to implement. Management tends to 'over-meeting' and 'over-committee' IT people to death as well. They spend more time in meetings than you do getting things done, and often the outcomes of the meetings are very confusing with no clarity on the direction that is to be taken. Also IT personnel probably get conflicting orders on what priorities to set and what to do next. Things shift daily depending on the office political environment and who is on the 'hot-seat' at the time.
4. Purchasing. If you've ever worked in the government sector, you know what a pain it is to try to purchase something. It gets worse the bigger the government. Local is bad enough, state is worse, and federal is almost incomprehensible. There's a reason we used to have $700 hammers, and not all of it was greed on the part of the contractors. Often you request to purchase equipment, and by the time it is delivered its obsolete. Or if you do get it quickly enough, you get it all at once and since you are already understaffed, you can't possibly get it configured and deployed in a decent amount of time.
5. "Management By Magazine". Some upper-level manager reads something cool in a tech-rag, and suddenly that becomes the mega-project of the day, or they have no idea how hard it would be to integrate the product into the current environment. Some slimy salespeople (again, some - not all) in the private sector pushing their vapor- or brokenware doesn't help either.
6. Resistance To Change. "We've always done it this way", or "We can't do that, it doesn't follow guidelines." or "We have to get these forms exactly as they are onto the system". All these are huge hurdles that IT personnel have to overcome to try to implement technology to help people do their own jobs more efficiently. Of course, many of the incompetent are making a good living in the government, and those persons can't have someone making their jobs easier - then they won't have anything to complain about or blame for not getting their work done, all while they take bathroom or smoke breaks every 15-minutes.
Of course, not all of this is unique to government. It occurs in the private sector as well no matter the size of the organization. However, it is so entrenched in the government sector that is would be a Herculean task to get it changed. The person doing the changes would probably also be vilified and blamed for every small problem that happened along the way. Problems will crop-up. They occur in all endeavors worth completing.
The problem is that everyone's looking to their next promotion or election and doesn't want to make anyone unhappy, so they have the impossible task of trying to make everyone happy. Therefore the cycle continues, and I don't know where or how it's going to be broken.
Monday, December 16, 2002
Social Engineering
I have had three opportunities to speak to different audiences on the topic of Social Engineering. The first was at a cybercrime conference here in Central Ohio that included several Law Enforcement personnel from Federal, State, and Local agencies. The next was for the Ohio State Bar Association on December 6th in Cleveland. I'll be repeating the OSBA seminar on the 18th here in Columbus. Social Engineering is the most effective method for intrusion into 'protected' networks. In fact, Security Professionals often make it easier for Social Engineers to succeed.
An article about Authentication Systems for computer networks points out the evolution of methods for assuring that the person requesting certain computer systems are who they say they are. The article mentions Smart Cards, Tokens, Biometrics, and Passwords, and says that the market is still immature. It is interesting that the last sentence of the article reads:
"When administrators do have a choice over which kinds of authentication to use, Rolfe suggests using a risk management approach, balancing the strength of the authentication solution against the costs and other drawbacks involved."
Yes that is the whole secret behind successful Information Technology Security implementation: Risk Management.
Social Engineers attempt to fool people into divulging information that will give them access to whatever systems happens to be the target du jour. You would think that with all these different forms of protection (Smart Cards, Biometrics, etc) it would be very difficult.
It in fact makes it much easier.
Often, IT Professionals institute draconian security measures once they are unleashed and given the power to do so. Forcing password changes every 30 days, along with password complexity requirements so strict that one cannot hope to memorize them, cause people to write them down on big yellow post-it notes attached to their monitors. Hardly secure eh? Easy enough for a Social Engineer who gets himself hired at an organizations cleaning company for a short stint.
Now any IT Security people reading this are now ready to strangle me. Am I saying that users should be allowed to have one of the three most common passwords: "password", "secret", or "sex"?
No, of course not. There should be some password complexity, but not so terrible that it defeats its purpose in the first place. Sure, the mega-passwords aren't easily cracked with 'l0phtcrack' or 'John The Ripper', but they cause other more undesirable behavior on the part of the user. If you want to make users have passwords like: "O7-21IagtS,Afmv." at least train them to come up with a mnemonic like "On 7-21 I am going to Sydney, Australia for my vacation." And don't make them change them every 30 days. There, I said it.
Yes, yes, people who keep the same passwords for long periods of time are more likely to have given them to someone else, and/or have them used by hackers if they have been 'cracked'. But then again, if they were cracked and they are that complex, you've got bigger problems. Teach them to change them only whenever they think someone has guessed it, or maybe once per year. This way they might actually throw that post-it note away after a few months, and will try to comply with your requests that they will see as more reasonable. Remember, if your users don't think your requests are reasonable for what they perceive the situation, they won't comply or will try to get around your requirements.
How many password systems check to see if an entire departments' users all have the same password? I've seen that at sites with overly complex password requirements. Think about it before you institute your policies.
This relates directly to Social Engineering in that where such draconian (I'm going to try to use that term 10 more times) security measure exist, most users have had login problems at some point. Those problems have probably been very frustrating, and most IT departments I know of treat 'forgotten password' callers like scum, often deriding or speaking to them very condescendingly. Therefore it is not unusual for a "fellow employee" [nudge, nudge, wink, wink] to call another for help, maybe even asking them for their password so that they can get a quick memo typed up, or to leave a help-desk request e-mail. Tokens, Smart Cards, and the like only add to potential confusion. However, if implemented with proper training and forethought these added measures can be effective. Just try not to layer security too deep for the normal user, for you'll end up doing more damage to your security than good.
Sometimes even the IT departments are victims of these draconian methods (9 to go...just kidding, I'll stop now).
Unfortunately on the flip side, many don't have any sort of security at all other than a Firewall at the border. I (and others) call that the "Castle-Wall" mentality of security. No protection for the soft interior, or spies who might be invited in. "Security through obscurity" doesn't work either. This is the mentality of "No one knows we are here" security, or "we're too small" to be bothered with. With identity theft being epidemic, even computers at home can be a treasure trove for identity theft criminals.
So be wary, and be careful. Be just this side of paranoid.
Remember, its "Risk Management".
Author's Note: When I first wrote this article and tried to post it, I received a "Microsoft OLE DB Provider for ODBC Drivers error '80004005' [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]Could not allocate space for object 'Items' in database 'blogger' because the 'PRIMARY' filegroup is full. /blog_form-action.pyra, line 54" error. Maybe I need to shorten my articles a bit.
I have had three opportunities to speak to different audiences on the topic of Social Engineering. The first was at a cybercrime conference here in Central Ohio that included several Law Enforcement personnel from Federal, State, and Local agencies. The next was for the Ohio State Bar Association on December 6th in Cleveland. I'll be repeating the OSBA seminar on the 18th here in Columbus. Social Engineering is the most effective method for intrusion into 'protected' networks. In fact, Security Professionals often make it easier for Social Engineers to succeed.
An article about Authentication Systems for computer networks points out the evolution of methods for assuring that the person requesting certain computer systems are who they say they are. The article mentions Smart Cards, Tokens, Biometrics, and Passwords, and says that the market is still immature. It is interesting that the last sentence of the article reads:
"When administrators do have a choice over which kinds of authentication to use, Rolfe suggests using a risk management approach, balancing the strength of the authentication solution against the costs and other drawbacks involved."
Yes that is the whole secret behind successful Information Technology Security implementation: Risk Management.
Social Engineers attempt to fool people into divulging information that will give them access to whatever systems happens to be the target du jour. You would think that with all these different forms of protection (Smart Cards, Biometrics, etc) it would be very difficult.
It in fact makes it much easier.
Often, IT Professionals institute draconian security measures once they are unleashed and given the power to do so. Forcing password changes every 30 days, along with password complexity requirements so strict that one cannot hope to memorize them, cause people to write them down on big yellow post-it notes attached to their monitors. Hardly secure eh? Easy enough for a Social Engineer who gets himself hired at an organizations cleaning company for a short stint.
Now any IT Security people reading this are now ready to strangle me. Am I saying that users should be allowed to have one of the three most common passwords: "password", "secret", or "sex"?
No, of course not. There should be some password complexity, but not so terrible that it defeats its purpose in the first place. Sure, the mega-passwords aren't easily cracked with 'l0phtcrack' or 'John The Ripper', but they cause other more undesirable behavior on the part of the user. If you want to make users have passwords like: "O7-21IagtS,Afmv." at least train them to come up with a mnemonic like "On 7-21 I am going to Sydney, Australia for my vacation." And don't make them change them every 30 days. There, I said it.
Yes, yes, people who keep the same passwords for long periods of time are more likely to have given them to someone else, and/or have them used by hackers if they have been 'cracked'. But then again, if they were cracked and they are that complex, you've got bigger problems. Teach them to change them only whenever they think someone has guessed it, or maybe once per year. This way they might actually throw that post-it note away after a few months, and will try to comply with your requests that they will see as more reasonable. Remember, if your users don't think your requests are reasonable for what they perceive the situation, they won't comply or will try to get around your requirements.
How many password systems check to see if an entire departments' users all have the same password? I've seen that at sites with overly complex password requirements. Think about it before you institute your policies.
This relates directly to Social Engineering in that where such draconian (I'm going to try to use that term 10 more times) security measure exist, most users have had login problems at some point. Those problems have probably been very frustrating, and most IT departments I know of treat 'forgotten password' callers like scum, often deriding or speaking to them very condescendingly. Therefore it is not unusual for a "fellow employee" [nudge, nudge, wink, wink] to call another for help, maybe even asking them for their password so that they can get a quick memo typed up, or to leave a help-desk request e-mail. Tokens, Smart Cards, and the like only add to potential confusion. However, if implemented with proper training and forethought these added measures can be effective. Just try not to layer security too deep for the normal user, for you'll end up doing more damage to your security than good.
Sometimes even the IT departments are victims of these draconian methods (9 to go...just kidding, I'll stop now).
Unfortunately on the flip side, many don't have any sort of security at all other than a Firewall at the border. I (and others) call that the "Castle-Wall" mentality of security. No protection for the soft interior, or spies who might be invited in. "Security through obscurity" doesn't work either. This is the mentality of "No one knows we are here" security, or "we're too small" to be bothered with. With identity theft being epidemic, even computers at home can be a treasure trove for identity theft criminals.
So be wary, and be careful. Be just this side of paranoid.
Remember, its "Risk Management".
Author's Note: When I first wrote this article and tried to post it, I received a "Microsoft OLE DB Provider for ODBC Drivers error '80004005' [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]Could not allocate space for object 'Items' in database 'blogger' because the 'PRIMARY' filegroup is full. /blog_form-action.pyra, line 54" error. Maybe I need to shorten my articles a bit.
Sunday, December 15, 2002
Nemesis of Itself
If you are looking for the non spoiler review, see the post below this one.
I found a review of Nemesis that pretty much describes how I feel about the movie (other than the author hates Brent Spiner/Data - which I don't).
You can find it at Filmjerk. Be forewarned, it pretty much reveals the details of the whole movie.
If you are looking for the non spoiler review, see the post below this one.
I found a review of Nemesis that pretty much describes how I feel about the movie (other than the author hates Brent Spiner/Data - which I don't).
You can find it at Filmjerk. Be forewarned, it pretty much reveals the details of the whole movie.
Saturday, December 14, 2002
Archenemy of ?
Just got back from seeing Star Trek Nemesis on opening night. No spoiler here. Just overall opinion on the movie.
First off, I'm a big Star Trek fan. I hate the word "Trekkie" or "Trekker", so I refuse to use them. Though the freak show was present at the movie theatre. However, that never detracts from my enjoyment of the movies. I usually go into a movie with extremely low expectations, so I am never disappointed.
I made the mistake of going into this one with higher-than-average expectations.
Big mistake.
How would I describe it?
How can a movie have so much action in some spots yet the whole movie seemed to crawl along?
How could they write a plot with holes so large you could drive an AIRCRAFT CARRIER through them?
How could they write a story that steals so many ideas from prior Star Trek movies? Not an original thought in this one at all.
And how could the Technology seem to go BACKWARDS rather than have advanced in this movie?
Arrrgh.
Wait for the matinee.
Just got back from seeing Star Trek Nemesis on opening night. No spoiler here. Just overall opinion on the movie.
First off, I'm a big Star Trek fan. I hate the word "Trekkie" or "Trekker", so I refuse to use them. Though the freak show was present at the movie theatre. However, that never detracts from my enjoyment of the movies. I usually go into a movie with extremely low expectations, so I am never disappointed.
I made the mistake of going into this one with higher-than-average expectations.
Big mistake.
How would I describe it?
How can a movie have so much action in some spots yet the whole movie seemed to crawl along?
How could they write a plot with holes so large you could drive an AIRCRAFT CARRIER through them?
How could they write a story that steals so many ideas from prior Star Trek movies? Not an original thought in this one at all.
And how could the Technology seem to go BACKWARDS rather than have advanced in this movie?
Arrrgh.
Wait for the matinee.
Saturday, December 07, 2002
What Men Will Do For Pr0n
For the uninitiated, 'pr0n' is "leet" for Porn. Yes, I know its obvious, but someone would ask.
These articles are old, but interesting.
First guy breaks into a convenience store to steal some adult magazines. First off, the whole thing is on tape, as the store has cameras. He grabs 5 magazines and then tries to break the glass in the door to get out. Only he can't break the window. So he has to climb out through the roof. Worst thing about it all is that all he had to do was unlock the door. It wasn't a key-lock on the inside, simply a standard switch lock. He must have been staring at the mags the whole time.
The next case is a burglar who breaks into houses to use the computer for porn.
What? His library card expired? Or maybe sitting in your birthday suit amongst the dewey decimal system cards wouldn't work out too well. I can't imagine committing a felony to just surf pr0n. Especially the stuff on the web, which if its any good, you have to pay for. (If you know of some free sites that are good, send links my way - I'll rate them for you.)
This guy rammed his car into granny's house, and then took his clothes off and tried to break in, naked. Granny must have had some real good porn in there. Of course, it was reported that he said he was going to kill someone. Granny probably threw out his complete Hustler magazine collection.
OK - this has nothing to do with pr0n, but could probably be a good story-line for a new adult film. Only instead of the guy stabbing her in the leg with an object hanging from the rearview mirror, he could stab her in the you know with something that was hanging from his...oh nevermind. You don't need a roadmap. Maybe the guys wife did though, one with a low-hanging bridge. (Pun intended)
OK - I used to be a Police Officer. But I don't think that I'd admit chasing a nude man and then losing him. That one would be conveniently forgotten.
Does this make any sense to you at all? You arrest a sicko-creep for having Child Porn on his computer, and you place him under house arrest when he lives across the street from a school? Utterly astounding.
And couldn't these politicians wait until they got back home? Or at least to their own offices? I know politics is boring...but.
Maybe they were just big Bill Clinton fans, and they figured if he can get a hummer while working, they wouldn't get in trouble for a little pr0n surfing.
For the uninitiated, 'pr0n' is "leet" for Porn. Yes, I know its obvious, but someone would ask.
These articles are old, but interesting.
First guy breaks into a convenience store to steal some adult magazines. First off, the whole thing is on tape, as the store has cameras. He grabs 5 magazines and then tries to break the glass in the door to get out. Only he can't break the window. So he has to climb out through the roof. Worst thing about it all is that all he had to do was unlock the door. It wasn't a key-lock on the inside, simply a standard switch lock. He must have been staring at the mags the whole time.
The next case is a burglar who breaks into houses to use the computer for porn.
What? His library card expired? Or maybe sitting in your birthday suit amongst the dewey decimal system cards wouldn't work out too well. I can't imagine committing a felony to just surf pr0n. Especially the stuff on the web, which if its any good, you have to pay for. (If you know of some free sites that are good, send links my way - I'll rate them for you.)
This guy rammed his car into granny's house, and then took his clothes off and tried to break in, naked. Granny must have had some real good porn in there. Of course, it was reported that he said he was going to kill someone. Granny probably threw out his complete Hustler magazine collection.
OK - this has nothing to do with pr0n, but could probably be a good story-line for a new adult film. Only instead of the guy stabbing her in the leg with an object hanging from the rearview mirror, he could stab her in the you know with something that was hanging from his...oh nevermind. You don't need a roadmap. Maybe the guys wife did though, one with a low-hanging bridge. (Pun intended)
OK - I used to be a Police Officer. But I don't think that I'd admit chasing a nude man and then losing him. That one would be conveniently forgotten.
Does this make any sense to you at all? You arrest a sicko-creep for having Child Porn on his computer, and you place him under house arrest when he lives across the street from a school? Utterly astounding.
And couldn't these politicians wait until they got back home? Or at least to their own offices? I know politics is boring...but.
Maybe they were just big Bill Clinton fans, and they figured if he can get a hummer while working, they wouldn't get in trouble for a little pr0n surfing.
Friday, December 06, 2002
Choosing PCs Based On Appearance
Now we're told that we are more apt to buy a computer based on its looks rather than what's inside.
Geeze, now we buy computers for the same reason that "swing" voters choose politicians? Looks?
Actually, I would like a cool looking case for my computer as well.
An LCD Panel Monitor too. I already have some cool mice. I'd need to find some sort of designer keyboard.
What I found interesting about the article was that it said that PDA sales were to "young men" before the sleek-style Palm V came out. This allowed the market to expand to non-young-men. Old Men? Old Women? I think they just meant women in general. How chauvenistic of them to say that women buy stuff only if its pretty.
Now we're told that we are more apt to buy a computer based on its looks rather than what's inside.
Geeze, now we buy computers for the same reason that "swing" voters choose politicians? Looks?
Actually, I would like a cool looking case for my computer as well.
An LCD Panel Monitor too. I already have some cool mice. I'd need to find some sort of designer keyboard.
What I found interesting about the article was that it said that PDA sales were to "young men" before the sleek-style Palm V came out. This allowed the market to expand to non-young-men. Old Men? Old Women? I think they just meant women in general. How chauvenistic of them to say that women buy stuff only if its pretty.
Are There Really People Like This?
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court in San Francisco decided that individuals can't own firearms. They say the 2nd Amendment is for militias only.
Not surprising out of this court.
Let's declare all U.S. Citizens a militia, and be done with it once and for all.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court in San Francisco decided that individuals can't own firearms. They say the 2nd Amendment is for militias only.
Not surprising out of this court.
Let's declare all U.S. Citizens a militia, and be done with it once and for all.
Tuesday, December 03, 2002
Tesla's Legacy
Nikola Tesla was one of the most influential inventor/scientist on modern day life. His genius is not nearly as well known as Alexander Graham Bell and Thomas Edison, however I think that his genius and knowledge far surpassed those two combined.
He viewed a world full of flying machines and electrical devices that were fueled by "broadcast power". Yes, power sent through the air and into whatever device needed it.
Wireless Power is now a reality. Researchers have devised the first devices to use a very limited broadcast method compared to Tesla's World Grid.
I can't wait to see what happens in the next 20 years.
Nikola Tesla was one of the most influential inventor/scientist on modern day life. His genius is not nearly as well known as Alexander Graham Bell and Thomas Edison, however I think that his genius and knowledge far surpassed those two combined.
He viewed a world full of flying machines and electrical devices that were fueled by "broadcast power". Yes, power sent through the air and into whatever device needed it.
Wireless Power is now a reality. Researchers have devised the first devices to use a very limited broadcast method compared to Tesla's World Grid.
I can't wait to see what happens in the next 20 years.
Low-Carb Redux
I frequent a Quake 3 gaming forum, which has evolved from a place to game to a community of people.
We have been having a discussion on low-carb diets when one of the people who had very occasionally posted there, and is a physician. I spent a lot of time crafting a response to his concerns. Rather than repeating them here, I leave it to you to look if you are interested. (The link takes you to page 3 of the thread.)
I frequent a Quake 3 gaming forum, which has evolved from a place to game to a community of people.
We have been having a discussion on low-carb diets when one of the people who had very occasionally posted there, and is a physician. I spent a lot of time crafting a response to his concerns. Rather than repeating them here, I leave it to you to look if you are interested. (The link takes you to page 3 of the thread.)
Wednesday, November 27, 2002
Smugglin' Drugs
My 7-year old daughter takes Claritin for her allergies to grasses, trees, cats, etc. Until today it required a prescription to purchase.
Now that Claritin is an Over-The-Counter (OTC) drug, its price will drop considerably, from the $90 I was paying for a 30-day supply.
Now that I am self-employed, my insurance coverage isn't as good as before. Even though that is of little consequence. You still pay for the whole shooting match, whether in higher taxes, or higher premiums to your employer that don't go into the salary bucket. But I wasn't looking forward to paying that much a month anyway. My old insurance only covered 50% of the $90, so it was still expensive.
A have some very good friends in Canada where Claritin is an OTC drug. I was working a barter with one of them. He needed an iPod that Apple wouldn't ship to him, and I needed Claritin, which was 75% cheaper up there.
We ran into some problems trying to get it shipped. The FDA allows US citizens to order 90-day supplies of medication from outside the country. But there's the OTC vs. Rx thing going on. It's OTC in Canada, and Rx here (before today). So you have to generate this FDA Product Code which goes on the outside of the package. Even if you do all this, it still can be stopped at the border and detained.
I learned a lot doing the research on getting it shipped down here. FedEx ships from Canada to the US, but when my friend gave the package to the courier and told her what it was, she wouldn't touch it. Said that they would stop it at the border, and they were even stopping Tylenol.
The only Tylenol you'd order from Canada to the US would have Codeine in it, which is a controlled substance, and therefore would be stopped for good reason.
I did check around, and found that some shipments of Claritin were being stopped because they were a prescription drug. Others were let through with no problem.
One of the people interviewed for the Fox article starts to whine about how now that people are going to have to buy Claritin with thier own money. Isn't this how things work? When you have a headache, you go to the store to buy aspirin and you don't expect the insurance company to cover it. People expect too much to be handed to them, and think its somehow 'free'. If you think your insurance coverage is free, try running your own business or buying your own coverage. Everytime you use the Emergency Room as a doctor's office for non-emergencies, you raise the price of insurance for everyone else.
So quit it.
My 7-year old daughter takes Claritin for her allergies to grasses, trees, cats, etc. Until today it required a prescription to purchase.
Now that Claritin is an Over-The-Counter (OTC) drug, its price will drop considerably, from the $90 I was paying for a 30-day supply.
Now that I am self-employed, my insurance coverage isn't as good as before. Even though that is of little consequence. You still pay for the whole shooting match, whether in higher taxes, or higher premiums to your employer that don't go into the salary bucket. But I wasn't looking forward to paying that much a month anyway. My old insurance only covered 50% of the $90, so it was still expensive.
A have some very good friends in Canada where Claritin is an OTC drug. I was working a barter with one of them. He needed an iPod that Apple wouldn't ship to him, and I needed Claritin, which was 75% cheaper up there.
We ran into some problems trying to get it shipped. The FDA allows US citizens to order 90-day supplies of medication from outside the country. But there's the OTC vs. Rx thing going on. It's OTC in Canada, and Rx here (before today). So you have to generate this FDA Product Code which goes on the outside of the package. Even if you do all this, it still can be stopped at the border and detained.
I learned a lot doing the research on getting it shipped down here. FedEx ships from Canada to the US, but when my friend gave the package to the courier and told her what it was, she wouldn't touch it. Said that they would stop it at the border, and they were even stopping Tylenol.
The only Tylenol you'd order from Canada to the US would have Codeine in it, which is a controlled substance, and therefore would be stopped for good reason.
I did check around, and found that some shipments of Claritin were being stopped because they were a prescription drug. Others were let through with no problem.
One of the people interviewed for the Fox article starts to whine about how now that people are going to have to buy Claritin with thier own money. Isn't this how things work? When you have a headache, you go to the store to buy aspirin and you don't expect the insurance company to cover it. People expect too much to be handed to them, and think its somehow 'free'. If you think your insurance coverage is free, try running your own business or buying your own coverage. Everytime you use the Emergency Room as a doctor's office for non-emergencies, you raise the price of insurance for everyone else.
So quit it.
Sunday, November 24, 2002
Kid's Nightmare
Imagine you're 11-years old again and you like playing with BB-guns. Your Mom has taken away yours, since you have a habit of shooting neighborhood birds. She wisely decides that you're not responsible enough yet to have one.
So what do you do? You get with your miscreant friends, borrow one of theirs, and resume killing birds.
Only this time you're standing in front of your friends house, you sight in on a bird.......squeeze the trigger........and BLAM! You miss the bird, but hit the passenger's side window of a passing passenger van, shattering it into thousands of pieces as the safety glass does what it is designed to do.
"Oh Shit!" is what goes through your mind.
You stand there, frozen. "You didn't really do that," your mind tells you, "you just imagined it, you were shooting at a bird. Somebody else must have shot that window out."
Now you see a 6' 2" man in a long black duster coat get out of the van and come toward you. You feebly try to hide the pump action BB rifle behind your leg, hoping that it won't be seen. The guy is moving towards you fast, and you're like a deer-in-headlights. Frozen. Unable to move. The man starts yelling at you to drop the gun and stay there. You can't do anything but comply. You're guilty...and you look it too. Standing in the front yard, weapon in hand, shattered glass in the roadway in front of you.
You get hustled home under the watchful eyes of all the neighbors, and you find out that they guy who's window you just shot out is an former 11-year veteran of the largest police department in the area. You start crying uncontrollably, thinking that you're going to be Bubba's cell-mate.
After its all over, you are $211+ poorer - well, that money will come out of your next two Christmas' gifts, and you are grounded for life.
Ahhh.....I remember when I was 11. That kid won't forget this day for a long time.
Just goes to show, you can take the weapons away from criminals, and even if they don't have the power to buy new ones, they manage to get their hands on them and still do something stupid.
Imagine you're 11-years old again and you like playing with BB-guns. Your Mom has taken away yours, since you have a habit of shooting neighborhood birds. She wisely decides that you're not responsible enough yet to have one.
So what do you do? You get with your miscreant friends, borrow one of theirs, and resume killing birds.
Only this time you're standing in front of your friends house, you sight in on a bird.......squeeze the trigger........and BLAM! You miss the bird, but hit the passenger's side window of a passing passenger van, shattering it into thousands of pieces as the safety glass does what it is designed to do.
"Oh Shit!" is what goes through your mind.
You stand there, frozen. "You didn't really do that," your mind tells you, "you just imagined it, you were shooting at a bird. Somebody else must have shot that window out."
Now you see a 6' 2" man in a long black duster coat get out of the van and come toward you. You feebly try to hide the pump action BB rifle behind your leg, hoping that it won't be seen. The guy is moving towards you fast, and you're like a deer-in-headlights. Frozen. Unable to move. The man starts yelling at you to drop the gun and stay there. You can't do anything but comply. You're guilty...and you look it too. Standing in the front yard, weapon in hand, shattered glass in the roadway in front of you.
You get hustled home under the watchful eyes of all the neighbors, and you find out that they guy who's window you just shot out is an former 11-year veteran of the largest police department in the area. You start crying uncontrollably, thinking that you're going to be Bubba's cell-mate.
After its all over, you are $211+ poorer - well, that money will come out of your next two Christmas' gifts, and you are grounded for life.
Ahhh.....I remember when I was 11. That kid won't forget this day for a long time.
Just goes to show, you can take the weapons away from criminals, and even if they don't have the power to buy new ones, they manage to get their hands on them and still do something stupid.
Saturday, November 23, 2002
Uhhh.....(AHEM)....Ummmm
Can't take credit for this find. Have to give credit to my cohorts over at Chaos Theory.
But....well, not but.
Suuuuuure he was wearing trousers and underpants.
Can't take credit for this find. Have to give credit to my cohorts over at Chaos Theory.
But....well, not but.
Suuuuuure he was wearing trousers and underpants.
Wednesday, November 20, 2002
Your E-mail Will Tattle-tale On You
Zdnet has an interesting article about business e-mail. In court cases, discovery requests are made for all documentation pertinent to a court case. This includes all electronic documents and e-mail.
"So what?" You say.
Well, I'll tell you what. Having run a very large network myself, I grew tired of unjamming e-mailboxes full of jokes, attachments, and other nonsense that filled up my logs and my server space. Even though I asked nicely - several times - people would think that the messages I sent asking them to curtail non-business use of the e-mail system was not applicable to them. I didn't ask for it to stop completely, just to slow to a more reasonable level, and to not trade the same stupid 'fart-pager' commercial 2000 times which took 10GB of storage on the e-mail servers at a time when 10GB used to be a lot of space. So, I imagine if I had gotten a discovery for certain e-mails that pertained to a court case from our attorneys I would have done the same thing as the Network Managers do in the article.
I would have sent them the whole damn message store.
Less work for me to go through the millions of messages looking for specific items. Easier to send it off to the lawyers to look at.
So what if it embarrasses someone, I had asked nicely many times for them to "knock it off" and they ignored me.
So now all those potentially career-threatening messages are out in the open. Remember that e-mail you sent about that jerk of a boss you hate? Or the new "meal" you had at the expense of your boyfriend getting out to everyone? (Yes, this was a hoax, but it could be real.)
Think about it people. If you want to send junk mail around, keep it at home, or use servers outside of your network. And don't sign e-mails with your work credentials. Sheesh. Use your brain.
Or write a letter. But if you are like me, you've forgotten how.
Zdnet has an interesting article about business e-mail. In court cases, discovery requests are made for all documentation pertinent to a court case. This includes all electronic documents and e-mail.
"So what?" You say.
Well, I'll tell you what. Having run a very large network myself, I grew tired of unjamming e-mailboxes full of jokes, attachments, and other nonsense that filled up my logs and my server space. Even though I asked nicely - several times - people would think that the messages I sent asking them to curtail non-business use of the e-mail system was not applicable to them. I didn't ask for it to stop completely, just to slow to a more reasonable level, and to not trade the same stupid 'fart-pager' commercial 2000 times which took 10GB of storage on the e-mail servers at a time when 10GB used to be a lot of space. So, I imagine if I had gotten a discovery for certain e-mails that pertained to a court case from our attorneys I would have done the same thing as the Network Managers do in the article.
I would have sent them the whole damn message store.
Less work for me to go through the millions of messages looking for specific items. Easier to send it off to the lawyers to look at.
So what if it embarrasses someone, I had asked nicely many times for them to "knock it off" and they ignored me.
So now all those potentially career-threatening messages are out in the open. Remember that e-mail you sent about that jerk of a boss you hate? Or the new "meal" you had at the expense of your boyfriend getting out to everyone? (Yes, this was a hoax, but it could be real.)
Think about it people. If you want to send junk mail around, keep it at home, or use servers outside of your network. And don't sign e-mails with your work credentials. Sheesh. Use your brain.
Or write a letter. But if you are like me, you've forgotten how.
Tuesday, November 19, 2002
Low Carb For Life
A new article at Foxnews talks about surprising benefits of the Atkins diet. It is not all that suprising to me.
I have been on the Atkins Diet since July 1, 2001.
Now, if you are about to go on a hysterical rant about how dangerous the diet it, please either get a little more informed (read the article, and others) or move along. I've heard quite enough of the "baloney" about a low-carb diet. Those of you who say low-carb dieting can kill you, in reference to the liquid protein diet that was around in the 60's and 70's can read this article on what really caused the deaths. That diet, while low-carb, was nothing like the Atkins diet.
In the time I have been on the diet, I have lost 125 pounds, went from a 54" to 40" waist, lowered my cholesterol from the high 190's to the low 140's, and my triglycerides are down to 35 from over 200. I'm still losing weight now.
People I haven't seen in a while don't recognize me. I look at old pictures and can't believe what I see. I had gotten very, very fat. I'm not going to sugar-coat it with words like 'obese' or 'overweight'. Some people need a slap in the face to get moving, and I was one of those people.
It is a life choice though to go low-carb. You can't ever go back to a high-carb diet. Your body is too good at remembering, and will store all the carbs once you start the intake again. Ladies, my wife is on the diet as well and went from a Size 16-18 to a Size 8-10. She used to be tired all the time, and was showing signs of hypoglycemia. She has none of those symptoms now, and neither of us has had heartburn since we've been on the diet, even though we eat spicy foods.
Try it for 6 weeks. It can be hard, but nothing worth it is easy. A typical day includes eggs and bacon for breakfast, triple decker hamburgers without the bun or ketchup (but with all the other toppings) for lunch, and steak and salad or stir-fried asparagus with bernaise sauce for dinner. Hard, eh? Giving up white flour, sugar, and caffiene can be daunting for some, but once you get over the initial period, its not nearly as hard.
If you need advice on going low-carb, drop me a line.
A new article at Foxnews talks about surprising benefits of the Atkins diet. It is not all that suprising to me.
I have been on the Atkins Diet since July 1, 2001.
Now, if you are about to go on a hysterical rant about how dangerous the diet it, please either get a little more informed (read the article, and others) or move along. I've heard quite enough of the "baloney" about a low-carb diet. Those of you who say low-carb dieting can kill you, in reference to the liquid protein diet that was around in the 60's and 70's can read this article on what really caused the deaths. That diet, while low-carb, was nothing like the Atkins diet.
In the time I have been on the diet, I have lost 125 pounds, went from a 54" to 40" waist, lowered my cholesterol from the high 190's to the low 140's, and my triglycerides are down to 35 from over 200. I'm still losing weight now.
People I haven't seen in a while don't recognize me. I look at old pictures and can't believe what I see. I had gotten very, very fat. I'm not going to sugar-coat it with words like 'obese' or 'overweight'. Some people need a slap in the face to get moving, and I was one of those people.
It is a life choice though to go low-carb. You can't ever go back to a high-carb diet. Your body is too good at remembering, and will store all the carbs once you start the intake again. Ladies, my wife is on the diet as well and went from a Size 16-18 to a Size 8-10. She used to be tired all the time, and was showing signs of hypoglycemia. She has none of those symptoms now, and neither of us has had heartburn since we've been on the diet, even though we eat spicy foods.
Try it for 6 weeks. It can be hard, but nothing worth it is easy. A typical day includes eggs and bacon for breakfast, triple decker hamburgers without the bun or ketchup (but with all the other toppings) for lunch, and steak and salad or stir-fried asparagus with bernaise sauce for dinner. Hard, eh? Giving up white flour, sugar, and caffiene can be daunting for some, but once you get over the initial period, its not nearly as hard.
If you need advice on going low-carb, drop me a line.
Sunday, November 17, 2002
Prepare For Ludicrous Speed!
Computing power has increased at such a rate as to be almost incomprehensible. A new supercomputer, that can perform 35.86 trillion calculations per second was announced recently.The first computer invented in 1948 that had all of the functionality we would consider of a basic computer, performed 1 instruction ever 1.2 milliseconds, or approximately 833.33 operations per second.
So the new system is around 43 billion times faster than its ancestor. If the rate of speed increase were linear instead of geometrical, that would be an increase in computing speed of almost 91 thousand times, every hour. If this is true, in the next 50 years, computing speed will increase by a factor of at least 1,190,684,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. Of course progression has indeed been geometrical, so we'll probably exceed that. One wonders when the limit will be reached. With the advances in medical science, we might be around to find out what it is like.
Computing power has increased at such a rate as to be almost incomprehensible. A new supercomputer, that can perform 35.86 trillion calculations per second was announced recently.The first computer invented in 1948 that had all of the functionality we would consider of a basic computer, performed 1 instruction ever 1.2 milliseconds, or approximately 833.33 operations per second.
So the new system is around 43 billion times faster than its ancestor. If the rate of speed increase were linear instead of geometrical, that would be an increase in computing speed of almost 91 thousand times, every hour. If this is true, in the next 50 years, computing speed will increase by a factor of at least 1,190,684,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. Of course progression has indeed been geometrical, so we'll probably exceed that. One wonders when the limit will be reached. With the advances in medical science, we might be around to find out what it is like.
Friday, November 15, 2002
But He Was Just Looking for Mulder and Scully (Or Doggett and Reyes)
Gary McKinnon was arrested in the UK for taking control of over 90 US Military computer systems for over a year. I have heard from some that the 'cyber-threat' from terrorist organizations is overblown. How and why did this Super-Hacker do what he did?
He was looking for UFOs.
More precisely, he was looking for hidden information (X-Files) and evidence from US Government computers that Extraterrestrial Aliens really exist. He did this all from the computer in his home. He even dressed up for the occasion - as the article states - wearing clothes like David Bowie did during his Ziggy Stardust phase.
My favorite section of the article reads thus:
"...Gary should have known that the US is extremely protective about keeping secure its Top Secret UFO files... even the Drunken Hamster knows that from watching the X-Files TV show. No wonder the US is in such a rush to extradite him to US soil... a chip implant and an alien anal probe await at the hands of the smoking man...
..One cyber break-in, just 12 days after the September 11 terrorist attacks, caused a week-long shutdown of 300 computers at a naval weapons station in New Jersey."
Now, here's one crackpot who spends a lot of his time fanatically looking for information on aliens. How unrealistic is it to believe that some terrorist organizations haven't sent many of their agents to computer security schools, maybe even getting some their CISSP Certification.
These agents don't have to even work in the US to do damage. Not that they'd have a lot to worry about from the INS if they were here.
And that is the crux of the problem.
The incompetence that exists in the INS that is being exposed in the media is just a small slice of the overall incompetence of many government workers. In my own personal experience, there are about 5-10% of government employees that are excellent at what they do. However, they are severly overloaded and suffer burnout quickly. The other 90-95% are sitting there, taking up space and taking as many bathroom and smoke breaks as they can get away with.
And with the sad state of management in government, its not hard for them to get away with a lot.
Many of these 90-95% are in charge of securing, administrating, and managing government security systems. There is just too much for the 5-10% to do.
That's why we are so vulnerable to attacks. And with Linux gaining popularity it is under the scrutinizing eyes of hackers all over the world who are finding a plethora of vulnerabilities in the supposed 'secure' operating system. With a wholesale movement of systems from Windows to Linux, many systems are being left even more wide-open, because even the most incompetent can run Windows Update once in a while and get lucky. There isn't the same obvious tool in Linux, though the latest versions of Red Hat Linux are getting better at it. These admins can barely administer a point-and-click OS like Windows. They aren't going to have a clue about *nix based systems. So now we'll have even more vulnerable systems that can launch even more powerful attacks against other computers on the Internet or government Intranet sites.
Its really frightening if you think about the scale of it all and the number of systems that these networks touch.
BTW - If you do use Windows Update after reading this article and realizing that you've never done it before. DO NOT do the "drivers" updates unless you are ABSOLUTELY SURE that the new drivers are correct for your hardware. More often than not, they just muck things up so bad that your system won't boot. I've never used the drivers update, and I've been fine.
Gary McKinnon was arrested in the UK for taking control of over 90 US Military computer systems for over a year. I have heard from some that the 'cyber-threat' from terrorist organizations is overblown. How and why did this Super-Hacker do what he did?
He was looking for UFOs.
More precisely, he was looking for hidden information (X-Files) and evidence from US Government computers that Extraterrestrial Aliens really exist. He did this all from the computer in his home. He even dressed up for the occasion - as the article states - wearing clothes like David Bowie did during his Ziggy Stardust phase.
My favorite section of the article reads thus:
"...Gary should have known that the US is extremely protective about keeping secure its Top Secret UFO files... even the Drunken Hamster knows that from watching the X-Files TV show. No wonder the US is in such a rush to extradite him to US soil... a chip implant and an alien anal probe await at the hands of the smoking man...
..One cyber break-in, just 12 days after the September 11 terrorist attacks, caused a week-long shutdown of 300 computers at a naval weapons station in New Jersey."
Now, here's one crackpot who spends a lot of his time fanatically looking for information on aliens. How unrealistic is it to believe that some terrorist organizations haven't sent many of their agents to computer security schools, maybe even getting some their CISSP Certification.
These agents don't have to even work in the US to do damage. Not that they'd have a lot to worry about from the INS if they were here.
And that is the crux of the problem.
The incompetence that exists in the INS that is being exposed in the media is just a small slice of the overall incompetence of many government workers. In my own personal experience, there are about 5-10% of government employees that are excellent at what they do. However, they are severly overloaded and suffer burnout quickly. The other 90-95% are sitting there, taking up space and taking as many bathroom and smoke breaks as they can get away with.
And with the sad state of management in government, its not hard for them to get away with a lot.
Many of these 90-95% are in charge of securing, administrating, and managing government security systems. There is just too much for the 5-10% to do.
That's why we are so vulnerable to attacks. And with Linux gaining popularity it is under the scrutinizing eyes of hackers all over the world who are finding a plethora of vulnerabilities in the supposed 'secure' operating system. With a wholesale movement of systems from Windows to Linux, many systems are being left even more wide-open, because even the most incompetent can run Windows Update once in a while and get lucky. There isn't the same obvious tool in Linux, though the latest versions of Red Hat Linux are getting better at it. These admins can barely administer a point-and-click OS like Windows. They aren't going to have a clue about *nix based systems. So now we'll have even more vulnerable systems that can launch even more powerful attacks against other computers on the Internet or government Intranet sites.
Its really frightening if you think about the scale of it all and the number of systems that these networks touch.
BTW - If you do use Windows Update after reading this article and realizing that you've never done it before. DO NOT do the "drivers" updates unless you are ABSOLUTELY SURE that the new drivers are correct for your hardware. More often than not, they just muck things up so bad that your system won't boot. I've never used the drivers update, and I've been fine.
Thursday, November 14, 2002
More Dangerous Than Murder
An article at Cnet speaks about new legislation that could possibly jail a 'malicious' hacker for life. If you read the actual bill the hacking would have to be such that is causes a risk to someone's life or health. Script kiddies cracking home computers with DSL and Cable Modems can breathe easy. The Feds won't be putting you in jail for life. However, they could put you in for 10 to 20 years. Longer than some scum of the earth get for "accidentally" killing their own children.
I never understood how it could be anything other than purposeful to cause a child's death through some sort of abuse.
I'm all for stiff penalties, but this is a little excessive I think.
An article at Cnet speaks about new legislation that could possibly jail a 'malicious' hacker for life. If you read the actual bill the hacking would have to be such that is causes a risk to someone's life or health. Script kiddies cracking home computers with DSL and Cable Modems can breathe easy. The Feds won't be putting you in jail for life. However, they could put you in for 10 to 20 years. Longer than some scum of the earth get for "accidentally" killing their own children.
I never understood how it could be anything other than purposeful to cause a child's death through some sort of abuse.
I'm all for stiff penalties, but this is a little excessive I think.
Tuesday, November 12, 2002
Two Tin Cans But No Wire
If you've had high-speed Internet access (I refuse to call it by the misnomer broadband) for a while, you've probably all but blocked out the sound of two modems handshaking to complete a 56Kbps connection over your phone line to your ISP that hangs up on you from time-to-time. However, most of the US and the world still uses POTS lines (Plain Old Telephone System) for their main access to the global public network.
It is just too expensive and labor intensive for everyone to get high-speed access quickly. With the recent Telecom 'crash', it's going to be even longer.
Some ISPs (many of whom have gone out of business) tried to offer high-speed wireless Internet access. They figured it was cheaper to 'beam' the information through the air instead of digging up the ground and laying fiber optic cable. However, many problems doomed it to fail. Limited frequencies were available for use, geographic obtacles blocked the ability to cover wide areas, and additional antennas had to be deployed. It required a lot of money to build these towers, and using existing cell-phone towers proved to be a challenge.
Recently, many people have created wireless "freenets" to share Cable and DSL connections using the now popular 802.11b Wireless 'Wi-Fi' hardware. 802.11b suffers the same problems that the big providers found, and its range is quite limited (just a few hundred feet under the best of conditions).
Recently, someone was able to send an 802.11b signal over 72 miles. They used 2-foot parabolic antennas. Startup cost around $3,000 - a little pricey for Farmer Joe out in the boonies.
Even at this range, the throughput is only 1Mb/s - two-thirds of a T1 - not too bad for some commercial startups to supply high-speed access to those people who might otherwise never have it.
As you may have heard, wireless hackers have figured out how to make long-range wireless antennas for their laptops and home computers out of pringles cans. They have even had better results using tin coffee cans!
The ingenuity of people never ceases to amaze me. It won't be long before they find the right 'object' to get these signals 72 miles or futher using common household items. I'm even thinking of building one of the coffee can antennas myself and maybe do a little Wardriving.
But that could be illegal, and I would never do such a thing.
If you've had high-speed Internet access (I refuse to call it by the misnomer broadband) for a while, you've probably all but blocked out the sound of two modems handshaking to complete a 56Kbps connection over your phone line to your ISP that hangs up on you from time-to-time. However, most of the US and the world still uses POTS lines (Plain Old Telephone System) for their main access to the global public network.
It is just too expensive and labor intensive for everyone to get high-speed access quickly. With the recent Telecom 'crash', it's going to be even longer.
Some ISPs (many of whom have gone out of business) tried to offer high-speed wireless Internet access. They figured it was cheaper to 'beam' the information through the air instead of digging up the ground and laying fiber optic cable. However, many problems doomed it to fail. Limited frequencies were available for use, geographic obtacles blocked the ability to cover wide areas, and additional antennas had to be deployed. It required a lot of money to build these towers, and using existing cell-phone towers proved to be a challenge.
Recently, many people have created wireless "freenets" to share Cable and DSL connections using the now popular 802.11b Wireless 'Wi-Fi' hardware. 802.11b suffers the same problems that the big providers found, and its range is quite limited (just a few hundred feet under the best of conditions).
Recently, someone was able to send an 802.11b signal over 72 miles. They used 2-foot parabolic antennas. Startup cost around $3,000 - a little pricey for Farmer Joe out in the boonies.
Even at this range, the throughput is only 1Mb/s - two-thirds of a T1 - not too bad for some commercial startups to supply high-speed access to those people who might otherwise never have it.
As you may have heard, wireless hackers have figured out how to make long-range wireless antennas for their laptops and home computers out of pringles cans. They have even had better results using tin coffee cans!
The ingenuity of people never ceases to amaze me. It won't be long before they find the right 'object' to get these signals 72 miles or futher using common household items. I'm even thinking of building one of the coffee can antennas myself and maybe do a little Wardriving.
But that could be illegal, and I would never do such a thing.
Monday, November 11, 2002
Two Steps forward, One Step Back
Or maybe "Totally Tubular" would have been more appropriate.
I'm not going to link to everything, since its common knowledge amongst any of you that aren't still in diapers or listening to boy-band music, but it used to be that electronics were full of vacuum tubes. Televisions, radios, etc. All used vacuum tubes before the transistor was invented.
Now we're going back.
There has been a movement among audiophiles (those people that think they can hear a difference in sound quality on their 2 gazillion dollar stereo systems) to go back to systems with vacuum tubes as it produces a sound that is more "rich".
These are the same people that miss the turntable and 'record albums' because of the hiss and pops. No thanks, I'll stick with my strictly digital sound.
For you audiophiles who want to listen to music on your computer (if you can get your nose down out of the air long enough to actually consider doing such a thing), AOpen just just released a new motherboard with an integrated sound card that uses....yes....vacuum tubes.
So if you buy one, and H.G. Wells happens to visit from the past in his Time Machine, you can make them feel right at home when you crack open the case on your new computer. Or you can get a clear computer case so you don't have to open it up.
I might just have to get one of those cases if I win the lottery. I wonder how well it protects you from the radiation.
Or maybe "Totally Tubular" would have been more appropriate.
I'm not going to link to everything, since its common knowledge amongst any of you that aren't still in diapers or listening to boy-band music, but it used to be that electronics were full of vacuum tubes. Televisions, radios, etc. All used vacuum tubes before the transistor was invented.
Now we're going back.
There has been a movement among audiophiles (those people that think they can hear a difference in sound quality on their 2 gazillion dollar stereo systems) to go back to systems with vacuum tubes as it produces a sound that is more "rich".
These are the same people that miss the turntable and 'record albums' because of the hiss and pops. No thanks, I'll stick with my strictly digital sound.
For you audiophiles who want to listen to music on your computer (if you can get your nose down out of the air long enough to actually consider doing such a thing), AOpen just just released a new motherboard with an integrated sound card that uses....yes....vacuum tubes.
So if you buy one, and H.G. Wells happens to visit from the past in his Time Machine, you can make them feel right at home when you crack open the case on your new computer. Or you can get a clear computer case so you don't have to open it up.
I might just have to get one of those cases if I win the lottery. I wonder how well it protects you from the radiation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)