571 karma · joined January 1, 2012
And your analogy is apt. Imagine walking into a computer store today and they're selling PCs with Windows 98 preinstalled with the promise you can upgrade to Vista as "soon" as the manufacturer allows it (currently delayed until they rewrite some incompatible adware). That's what the US smartphone market feels like (or did then), especially with Android.
I bought my Windows Phone as an alternative to Android and iOS. The fact that it was a well-made Nokia was a certainly a bonus and an influencing factor, but I had no brand loyalty at the time. I always call it my "Windows Phone" in conversation and never mention Nokia or Microsoft, so it's possible the hardware rebranding will go unnoticed by the average consumer, as well.
I support Android, iOS and WP8 phones in my household and the Nokia/Windows Phone 8 is by far the most problem-free, which is ironic because I won't let anyone in the house near a Windows computer without supervision; I normally use Linux and switched the rest of my family to Macs.
This dawned on me when I intended to switch over to FIOS due to problems with my cable internet connection. I moved all of my media and gaming devices first, then abruptly stopped, wondering why I would want to share a network with a bunch of devices I had no reason to trust. I know I can isolate them on my home network, and may eventually get around to it, but in the meantime, I'm using separate connections to different ISPs (which provides other benefits, as well).
Certificates bind a public key and an identity (commonly a DNS name) together.
...when issuing certificates a CA validates ownership of a domain by sending an email, or looking for a specially formed page on the site.
So, if "DNSSEC secures DNS," as you say, why do we need certificates at all? Considering that the CA already depends on DNS to issue (many) certificates, why not cut out the middle man and simply publish the domain's public key in a DNS record? What actual value does a certificate offer other than that? I'm genuinely asking, because I'm curious if DNSSEC provides a way for a domain owner to establish trust in the domain's DNS records, that cannot be tampered with by the domain's registrar.
LANG=C tr -dc "[:print:]" < /dev/urandom | fold -w 32 | head -n 1[1] http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/resources/dnssec-re...
Does anyone know what this refers to? It sounds like a winning combination to me.
Many years ago, I originally assigned descriptive names to machines as I deployed them, but this didn't scale well as we wanted to move services (and their related hostames) to other machines. So I started assigning unique names to machines, using famous figures born on the day of configuration (as in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_12#Births). That was 'cute' for a while, but now I just generate random 4-letter words and pick the ones I like. The namespace is large enough for my purposes, the names are short enough for easy typing (ssh fang), and everything aligns nicely in text (zone files, inventory, etc.). In some cases, I've even replaced descriptive names with TXT records in DNS associated with the unique name.
http://www.music-rules.com/pdf/MusicRulesElemActivities.pdf
Part 2 is particularly egregious: "Now find out if songlifting is a real problem in your community. Use this chart to interview family members and friends about where they get their music. Bring your findings back to class and combine them with those of your classmates."
Really?!! You want our children to compile a list of family and friends (identified by age only, but still...) that you believe are breaking the law and hand it in as signed homework? I complained immediately about this not-so-subtle indoctrination and provided the teacher with a link to the EFF's more balanced and accurate Teaching Copyright site at http://www.teachingcopyright.org/.
Songlifting. Give me a break...
Can someone explain? What DNS server requires a reboot (or even restart) instead of a simple reload?
While I agree with the rest of your comment, isn't it possible that analytics is just snake oil for webmasters? The third party services like GA collect a staggering amount of real-time aggregate data in return for sharing a sliver of it with webmasters in the form of pretty graphs. I'm not saying this information isn't useful, but can webmasters reconcile the results against their own logs? Can they submit sanitized logs for analysis instead of including code in web pages, so they can proactively protect user privacy while sharing only the minimum data necessary for their needs? In any case, analytics services aren't motivated purely by altruism and their business model plausibly extends beyond purely providing a service to webmasters.
The most dramatic example I have is that I manage a very heavy database-driven web application from an outside vendor that must be public to the entire world. Even a simple request of the home page results in dozens of queries, and users that are logged in put an additional load on resources. I've addressed performance with other optimizations, but since we have no need to generate additional traffic, I have iptables rules to detect unwanted crawlers or pen-testers and block them (based on probes to unused ports/IP addresses, user-agent strings, etc.). When we originally deployed the application, crashes were routine during peak cycles. Now, the server barely breaks a sweat. The ability to implement simple logic in a robust, time-tested software firewall plays an important role.
Other examples include mitigating SSH brute force attacks, port knocking, forensic logging and honeypots. My honeypots protect me from many undisclosed vulnerabilities, simply because attackers are poking around in places they shouldn't be and are automatically blocked. It's much nicer to review a simple report of blocked attacks than it is to troubleshoot a compromised server.
The common problem is that sshd was started before creating the final image, so it has keys that are duplicated by provisioning. Always delete the keys before committing the final image, so that sshd will create new keys the first time it runs.
- A big piggybank.
- A safe, stable living environment for your family.
- A way to get a quality education for your children at a bargain price.
- Tweakable in a way no rental can ever be.
Home ownership isn't necessarily a burden. It can be a liberating experience in many ways.