AlexCrowley

Not really, they're politicians. They rely on the public to have short attention spans. It's part of politics. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

That working non-stop over very long periods leaves me little to do but waste time on dz.com during slow moments. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

I'm sending this to my grandmother. I'm hoping she takes the hint. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Yup, sad was definitely closer to how I felt when I read this thread. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

yup, but my personal feeling is that unless you're unreasonably paranoid there's very little gain in encrypting wireless traffic *if* youre paying attention, the performance hit just isnt worth it. I view it this way: most of the network traffic I send is cleartext anyway, the stuff I dont want people sniffing is encrypted at the application level. My feeling is that if you're doing anything you want secure you shouldnt be firing it through the air for anyone to hear. It's also a game of leaf in the forest, just another jumble of bits among many - who cares if someone else is able to see that I'm posting on DZ.com this evening, etc etc. It would be just as simple to simply tunnel everything via SSH/stunnel if portability is important, I guess. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

too late GTA, trying to point out that someone else picked up the ball and actually made it funny doesnt shield you from the fact that this thread started out so weakly TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Yeah, the whole problem with WEP is that you dont need to brute force it. Happy reading: Tom's hardware guide to cracking WEP TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Damn....I do a not insignificant amount of those already... TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

interesting. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

sorry pBASE, my mistake. You're right that netstumbler is crippled to not see those frametypes. My bad - mixed up my toolsets. There are plenty of passive scanners out there that will display non-broadcasting networks for windows and linux. Just look around for wardriving tools that'll do frame inspection. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

i dont know why you cant see it. Wireless sniffers dont just look for SSID broadcast packets, they look for other frametypes that are related to wireless traffic. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Dont know. Maybe you have a crippled wireless card (many wireless chipsets do not have full functionality, or do not conform to the spec), I guess it could lead to incomplete results (?) TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Ah, a recent convert to the eye opening experience of "Microsoft call this shit security!?!?!" If you're into crypto, or interested in crypto stuff let me know, I can suggest a few books/sites to check into. I just spent the last couple of years working for Ron Rivest, that guy is amazing when he gets going. For example, we were trying to make a certain subset of transactions extremely lightweight and all of a sudden he's scribbling furiously on the whiteboard doing MD5 and SHA transforms longhand to work out if they would be suitable. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

I concur. Mac filtering is your best bet to lock people out. encrypting the traffic? Hmm depends what you're doing I guess. Most websites provide browser to server security already. Unless you're paranoid about people snooping your posts on dz.com or watching your IM sessions there's not much to gain by encrypting all session traffic. The internet is a known hostile environment, it really doesnt get any worse or better than that. As CBS said, the security standards for wireless are pretty crap and dont provide any true security from anyone who roughly knows what to do. Wireless security talk reminds of the time this arrogant lead developer (one of those 'I have an MIT degree so I know everything' guys) challenged me to hack his network after overhearing me talk with another dev about cracking WEP. His super secret security tip? "You'll never hack my router because you will never find it. It is hidden in my closet". After I picked myself up off the floor I admitted that he was far too clever for me and submitted to his fearsome intellect. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

it's usually possible to recover anything with patience and/or the funds, unless your harddrive does a great deal of deletes and writes. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

usability over security. Who wants to switch to an authorized user for every time you plug in your printer, or change a network setting, or want to install something? TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Toms hardware might be a little heavy for someone just thinking about a Dell. How about building your own using Ars Technica's system guide? 3 basic models, as simple as buying all the parts listed and then plugging them into each other (it's amazingly simple, like a little jigsaw puzzle). here Otherwise I'd say stick with one of the larger vendors, they're all equally crap/good depending on what you're looking for. If you're a complete novice and computers terrify you then i'd go with a large friendly dealer as you're not going to really notice many differences between a standard machine and something you build out of good parts. Gateway do suck tho. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Wow for a girl that was a very insightful thing to say! Thanks for your input honey, I know we all appreciate it, but dont feel that you need to worry your pretty little head about it, sweetie. You go girl! TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

If she objected, she should have taken a stand. If she did object and was unable to lead, then she was too weak for the job. Most of the stuff that I read, she was very for it. However, that is from this side of the pond. I don't think there was ever any doubt that the UK would defend sovereign territory against an invader. Again, it was not a war Maggie started and I doubt she was itching for a war with the Argies until they invaded. Like Bush1 and Kuwait, and unlike Bush2 and Iraq. The Falklands were necessary for strategic sheep purposes. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

They're different formats. Unfortunately the burners originally really have a standard. It's why you'll hear talk at your DZ about tandem DVD refunds occasionally. A burner should burn any format DVD media, dont get one that won't. Most newer players will handle both formats fine, but in general I have had more luck with DVD - to play on my older DVD player. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

Kelp, I totally disagree. What you're claiming does not map to the reality of the situation. Personally motivated attacks make up a tiny percentage of attempted intrusions. Leave any system on an open network and watch your logs for a few days to understand that concept. The vast majority of attack traffic is junk, compromised machines scanning subnets and running scripted attacks in the hope that it'll find something unpatched. You really haven't lived until you've watched a "l33t" skript kiddie irc channel discuss how they just r00t3d a b0xen but can't get their l33t batch scripts to run.....and wtf is lunix anyway? "real" hackers target companies they want to exploit. FULL STOP. Yes, the activists and griefers will hack some poor bastards www server so they can shout out to their friends and talk about the human rights violations of some regime somewhere, but any perusal of any pwn3d archive shows that its mostly for shits and giggles. "Real" hackers target companies that have something cool to play with. Lexis Nexus was hacked because it had information of interest. T-Mobile was hacked because it had information of interest AND it's security was a complete fucking mess - something their admins didnt work out for at least 8 months (even with some people calling their staff and dropping very large hints...morons). Security itself is a process, not an OS or a piece of software. Lexis Nexus wasnt a technical hack, it was basic social engineering. T-Mobile left the door wide open. The toughest part of my job when starting any new role is explaining to the bosses that a perfectly secure system does not exist. People think that the right OS, the right firewall, virus scanner, IDS system will be these mystic totems that will forever protect them from the scary guys. At the last job I got through that little speech and started checking out the network only to find that their dev box was compromised - how? A new hire didnt realize that the box was internet accessible (he thought that was a stupid security risk) so he used an insecure passwd on his account (which WAS a stupid security risk), some automated script did a dictionary attack and they gained access to the system. Hmm I need sleep. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

What nonbelievers fail to see many times, is that there is a spiritual realm out there they cannot see nor sense. Failing to recognize that a human spirit exists, apart from the body, shows that all we see and know is the "reality" in which we can only experience with our senses. What many Western Christians fail to grasp is that they dont have the monopoly on spiritual experiences, miracles, good works, and even similar myths and spiritual leaders. Writing off the others as satanically inspired, while understandable to an extent, is part of the indoctrinated arrogance of the Church. Yes, God did wire humans for an experience--not religious, but having a relationship with Him. You ever wonder why people want to live forever or go to heaven? Because God wired our brains for that; we shouldn't have to die----because an eternity does exist. Sorry no. Humans are wired for religious experience. Please read 'Zen and the Brain', or read this for a quick overview. Basically research found that the experience was universal, the religion itself was not the key factor, the devotion and mental state of the worshiper was. This ties in with your own scripture. The average 'mumbling at your feet...amen' style christian will never touch god because they dont get it. Your average monk, nun, buddhist priest, swami, witch are all more likely to achieve that experience through mental discipline. I've always felt that western religions screwed themselves over by downplaying the miracles and spirituality of their heritige. This neglect of the mental aspects as it relates to spirituality is one of the reasons the church descended into mundane dogma. Without the miraculous it's difficult to generate passionate free thinking followers, instead the reliance switched to doctrine and the same sort of theological pedentry that Jesus railed against during his ministry. In the new testament there are many examples of people "freeflying" their spirituality without regard for the traditional approach. The church itself was always intended to evolve with the times. Toss out the rest of the bible and pay attention to what Jesus was talking about and you see that he didnt give a damn about what people felt was proper, it was all about a direct connection between God and each person individually. (No, I'm not interested in debating the minutia of that). This one to one relationship concept is given lip service in the majority of churches but then is shattered by dogma and peer pressure. How many times have I heard Christians tell me that "God no longer speaks directly to us, but he left us the Good News and he speaks to us down through the ages through that" WTF!? doesnt this strike any one as a little fucking weird? A loving God who cares about every human being on the planet yet has decided to step back from things for a while. It's like meeting God in an airport and having him sell you a flower and giving you a book to explain more about how to follow him. Can anyone one who's is a strong believer and has been quoting the Bible here to answer questions really say with any certainty that they'd recognize Jesus if he came back? Lets make it easier and avoid the 'oh yes, but he said he would come back blahblahblahblah. Step back 2000 years, lets assume that your beliefs are the beliefs of the time. Can any of you honestly say that you would follow a guy who told you to burn your bibles and instead look directly to God for direction? It seems to me that many who claim to follow the book haven't really paid attention to it very much, or understood exactly how revolutionary Jesus teachings and behavior were. If they did perhaps they wouldnt be so eager to quote scripture as the FINAL WORD on the subject. Didnt you guys learn anything from the Pharisees? TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

we have that in the 'I'm a christian and proud of it' post, but it doesnt do the deletion. You'll have to forgive me repeating myself today, it's been a very long 30 hours. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

I think thats because the church created so much dogmatic BS around some very basic principles that it offends many peoples sense of morals and insults their intellects. Taking an intellectual step backwards to fit into a claustrophobic and provably internally inconsistent belief system doesnt appeal to many people. Not because it is too difficult to follow those basic teachings that I mentioned earlier, but because the Church (those established businesses - catholic, baptist, protestant etc) no longer accurately represents those values. The majority of humans, regardless of religion, naturally gravitate towards the 10 commandmants (which are similar to other religions rules for community) - I dont really have time to expand on this concept, but to me this says that humanity on the whole is more than able to accept a moral structure, be it spiritual or mundane, that makes sense. Christianity, as it is preached by the traditional churches, does not and cannot make sense while in it's current incarnation. There will always be those that will explain their reality in concrete terms with science and rationality. But there will always be a large number of people, perhaps even the majority, who will look outside of themselves for a system that makes sense to their spirituality. Afterall, as humans we are wired for religious experience, whether it is a chemical inside our brain that generate the illusion of religious experience, or that God, evolution or gods put that mechanism in there as a way to enable communication with higher powers - the end result is the same: as individuals we are able to enter a state that inspires us to strive to be better humans. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.