janvidar

Broken, not shattered.

The definition of broken that matches what I was intending to say would be:

From The Jargon File (version 4.4.7, 29 Dec 2003) [jargon]:

  broken
   adj.
  
          1. Not working according to design (of programs). This is the
          mainstream sense.

I think the whole Web PKI needs a do-over, and it can't happen soon enough.

I work in software security and design security solutions for and with competent customers. In the past couple of years (post Snowden), every design for every one of these customers have been with the assumption that the CA model is broken and can't be trusted - this is a big step.

Personally I find the Wildcard SSL certificate a particularily ugly hack for the broken state of the web PKI.

Ideally, I should be able to get my own site certificate and use that to sign the server certificates for all my services in my domain. The beauty of this is that my site's private key does not need to be on any on my exposed servers, and I can revoke and re-issue certs for servers individually. This does ofcourse not work, since the certificates aren't limited to domains as such, which correctly is pointed out is a glaring flaw of the entire system.

I'm not going to rant about ASN.1 - let's do that another time.

These days "air pollution" means a lot of different things. This article is talking about air quality and particles, such as soot.

This impacts mostly the local air quality and environment, whereas CO2 is a global problem and impacts the climate in ways not necessarily detectable in the local environment.

Well, religion tells you the answer, so there is no point in looking.

So what about having the dinosaurs sort out and coordinate release dates initially, then giving a few days heads up to LibreSSL (and others).

At least it would minimize the risk of zero-daying LibreSSL users.

... but I guess, this isn't where the problem is?

Well everything. Barnevernet cannot comment due to privacy laws.

So you get the stories about the "unfortunate parents" that do not understand why their child(ren) were taken away. The reality is that you never hear about the abuse or neglect in these cases... and that is the truly horrifying part.

> Problem is that in Norway parents have ZERO rights.

This is obviously not true. Norway has laws that safeguard both parents and children, and is in the process of ratifying the relevant Hague convention.

Bear in mind that when you read or hear about these seemingly horrifying stories, you only hear one side of the story. This is due to very strict privacy laws protecting all parties.

> But, no joke, an engine with just one moving part, and no transmission, has one heck of an advantage in maintenance and reliability.

I guess you could say the same thing about the Wankel engine as well.

The problem is that a traditional engine is tuned to work well enough within the life time of a car these days, so it isn't really a problem.

Fuel economy wise though, the traditional piston engine outperforms the Wankel engine.

Yosemite? This doesn't sound feline!

Really?

I have the 2014 edition, mine never gets uncomfortably hot, and I rarely hear the fan running. I routinely compile lots of code on it (C/C++ and some Java).

I've used several ThinkPad x-series laptops in the past.

My current machine is a Dell XPS 13 Developer Edition, which ships with Ubuntu pre-installed.

Good battery life, excellent performance and nice size/weight - comparable to a 13" Macbook Air.

You'll ned a mini-DP to HDMI/DVI converter cable though.

1) Edit some files 2) git commit -a -m "blah blah" 3) git push

So, it adds one extra command to push things to an upstream git repository. But, this is the nature of being decentralized.

> It still amazes me thousands of high profile companies just give all their communications to Google for free.

No, they even pay for it.

No, don't get me wrong. I am all for better sensors, drivers assist systems, or self-driving cars. I'm just pointing out that self-driving cars are probably more complex than air plane auto-pilots.

Although, I have no real knowledge of either.

Yes, but auto-pilots are easier problems to solve, due to predictability. It boils down to maintaining speed and bearing, while considering some other factors such as weather, terrain and collision prevention with other planes (transponder based?). In case of a truly unpredictable event, the pilot takes over.

Cars on the other hand need to do much more than that. The process of automatically determining where the road actually is, is not trivial by itself. Cars also need to handle other unpredictable factors to a much higher degree; other manually driven cars, bicycles, pedestrians to name a few. Not to mention road obstacles, and animals (in my country moose collisions are common, and deadly).

The problem with such opportunistic encryption, is that you could insert a man in the middle which basically intercepts the traffic and modifies the handshake to exclude the STARTTLS extension.

With opportunistic SMTP encryption this will cause things to proceed in plain text. The sinister thing about this is that e-mails still flow, so it still works.

Not quite.

The code is compiled (once) and injected into all pages loaded. The minified code and original code will look exactly the same at this point unless the minify process does something really clever.

I am all for security in depth, but the www-data processes still has the private key in memory. Makes it slightly harder to get at, through other vectors though.