|
anthonypants posted:oh my god i love that it happens so much they had to make a whole page about it in the help documentation e: it's a great page too quote:"Keeping" a site requires you to spend a lot of time and effort reviewing it. You may decide, depending on the nature of the site, that it is perfectly acceptable to throw it away or rebuild it. Perhaps the needs of the site have shifted and you were planning to rebuild it already. Perhaps it was for an event that has come and gone and you can make a static copy or just delete it all. have you considered just deleting your drupal website and never looking back? maybe you should! sincerely, drupal
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 02:58 |
|
|
# ? Jun 9, 2024 06:27 |
|
ate all the Oreos posted:i love that it happens so much they had to make a whole page about it in the help documentation You do research, right? Just let the hackers have their way with your server, and write an academic whitepaper. Its like setting a petri dish out in the open.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 03:13 |
|
what the hell it worked for pasteur didn't it?
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 03:16 |
Wiggly Wayne DDS posted:us redaction has never improved despite all of these examples, it's great realistically how would you fix the "this text fits" matching tissue in redaction? fixed width fonts would allow you to more easily match number of characters and adding random spacing or requiring redacted text to occupy its own line would require that you edit the original document to apply redactions which might not be possible. maybe redact only entire lines or blocks of so many characters?
|
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 04:29 |
|
replace all redacted text with REDACTED, reflow the entire document
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 04:46 |
|
pseudorandom name posted:replace all redacted text with REDACTED, reflow the entire document you'll get complaints from people asking you to define exactly what "reflow" means, and you'll get complaints that it doesn't look nearly as cool as a redacted document should, although the latter will be hidden by every imaginable pretext
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 05:09 |
|
Deep Dish Fuckfest posted:you'll get complaints from people asking you to define exactly what "reflow" means, and you'll get complaints that it doesn't look nearly as cool as a redacted document should, although the latter will be hidden by every imaginable pretext replace the redacted text with a random selection of different words, then redact that
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 06:57 |
|
redleader posted:replace the redacted text with a random selection of different words, then redact that i'm sure i remember an objection coming up to that on kinda weird legal/philosophical grounds, that by editing the document the document is not, legally, the document that is supposed to be released, which is why this still happens with electronic documents, but i can't remember if that was an official reason or someone just being Smart On The Internet.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 07:16 |
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:i'm sure i remember an objection coming up to that on kinda weird legal/philosophical grounds, that by editing the document the document is not, legally, the document that is supposed to be released, which is why this still happens with electronic documents, but i can't remember if that was an official reason or someone just being Smart On The Internet. yeah idk it seems like the point of FOIA is to get the actual documents, or as close to them as you can, and just snipping out the information and re-typing it seems a bit less, idk, accountable? at the very least it adds another step where things can be intentionally or unintentionally omitted or changed
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 10:18 |
|
am i to understand that drupals 1-6 did not have a database abstraction API
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 11:00 |
redleader posted:i hope telegram hops over to azure next rkn did already block like 130k azure ips on thursday or friday
|
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 13:08 |
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:i'm sure i remember an objection coming up to that on kinda weird legal/philosophical grounds, that by editing the document the document is not, legally, the document that is supposed to be released, which is why this still happens with electronic documents, but i can't remember if that was an official reason or someone just being Smart On The Internet. it also changes page references and so forth
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 13:27 |
|
Deep Dish Fuckfest posted:you'll get complaints from people asking you to define exactly what "reflow" means, and you'll get complaints that it doesn't look nearly as cool as a redacted document should, although the latter will be hidden by every imaginable pretext gently caress em. ate all the Oreos posted:yeah idk it seems like the point of FOIA is to get the actual documents, or as close to them as you can, and just snipping out the information and re-typing it seems a bit less, idk, accountable? at the very least it adds another step where things can be intentionally or unintentionally omitted or changed You're getting the document for it's textual information, not its layout. You're already changing it by placing black squares in place of words so that readers cannot see what those words are, changing the shape of those black boxes is a totally reasonable additional step. This is a Gold Fringe On The Flag kind of argument. Either you refuse redaction at all, or you accept that the document has changed from the source in at least some minimal way no matter what. Subjunctive posted:it also changes page references and so forth Modern word processors can update all of the page references with the press of a button. If you're comparing redacted to unredacted reports (when? why?) reference the section information and paragraph number. Volmarias fucked around with this message at 14:13 on Apr 21, 2018 |
# ? Apr 21, 2018 14:10 |
|
Volmarias posted:You're getting the document for it's textual information, not its layout. You're already changing it by placing black squares in place of words so that readers cannot see what those words are, changing the shape of those black boxes is a totally reasonable additional step. This is a Gold Fringe On The Flag kind of argument. Either you refuse redaction at all, or you accept that the document has changed from the source in at least some minimal way no matter what. Do you not think it conveys something to know that 10 consecutive pages were completely redacted, vs a paragraph or a sentence? You're right about word processors, to the extent that those features are used properly in all such documents. I wouldn't bet much on that.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 14:25 |
|
One Word Per Page
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 14:41 |
|
anyone consider that the people redacting aren't necessarily the ones who wrote the dang document? doubt they have the original source file to load up in office and start mucking up things just because some nerds on the internet says it's totally fine and legal.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 15:10 |
allowing them to edit the original also increases the likelihood of bad redaction that can be undone via copy/paste or stored but not displayed parts of the file. anyway this all reminds me of my favorite Onion article: CIA Realizes It's Been Using Black Highlighters All These Years quote:CIA Director Porter Goss has ordered further internal investigation.
|
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 15:35 |
|
Volmarias posted:You're getting the document for it's textual information, not its layout. You're already changing it by placing black squares in place of words so that readers cannot see what those words are, changing the shape of those black boxes is a totally reasonable additional step. This is a Gold Fringe On The Flag kind of argument. Either you refuse redaction at all, or you accept that the document has changed from the source in at least some minimal way no matter what. you're getting the document to get the document. not just the text, the whole thing, because context and hell even formatting can be very important. redaction needs to be the minimum required to adequately hide whatever needs to be hidden without affecting anything else, not just the text
|
# ? Apr 21, 2018 21:30 |
|
ate all the Oreos posted:you're getting the document to get the document. not just the text, the whole thing, because context and hell even formatting can be very important. redaction needs to be the minimum required to adequately hide whatever needs to be hidden without affecting anything else, not just the text
|
# ? Apr 22, 2018 03:45 |
|
not to put a downer on this erudite discussion about the merits of redaction but... https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/988163330681556992?s=21
|
# ? Apr 22, 2018 22:46 |
|
three periods, but what about an ellipsis??? word has been know to auto insert and that is yet another kerning edit: woop that was my typography nitpicking kicking in Agile Vector fucked around with this message at 23:56 on Apr 22, 2018 |
# ? Apr 22, 2018 22:57 |
|
3 spaces, not periods.
|
# ? Apr 22, 2018 22:59 |
|
What if the answer was a black rectangle, would that fit?
|
# ? Apr 22, 2018 23:11 |
|
i still think that the yes fits that little pixel at the bottom the best
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 00:42 |
|
welp, it finally happened to me. any point in signing up for whatever IDnotify is?quote:Dear UR GETTING FATTER,
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 02:33 |
|
i mentioned this in another thread but i've done work with suntrust in the past and i can't believe it took this long for something like this to happen
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 02:47 |
|
Ur Getting Fatter posted:welp, it finally happened to me. any point in signing up for whatever IDnotify is? whew, lucky it was only quote:name, address, phone number and certain account balances and not quote:personally identifying information
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 07:30 |
|
oh boy it has ~dark web monitoring~
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 07:43 |
|
just got my first email about a website not being accessible from russia
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 13:10 |
|
Ur Getting Fatter posted:welp, it finally happened to me. any point in signing up for whatever IDnotify is? according to this guy, it's worthless https://blog.jaraco.com/why-idnotify-identity-theft-monitoring-is-garbage/ just a lovely version of haveibeenpwned
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 13:45 |
|
Truga posted:just got my first email about a website not being accessible from russia Ticket Closed: revolt against your masters
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 13:59 |
|
Be Someone Else's Bank Account https://news.sky.com/story/tsb-data-breach-sees-customer-credited-with-13k-11343578 quote:TSB has apologised, again, as customers complain of problems with their mobile and online accounts, including claims some had "access" to other people's bank details. my money's on some coked up exec trying to fast track this project though before GDPR goes into force without petty things like 'change control' or 'back out plans' in place
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 15:22 |
|
https://twitter.com/SeamusHughes/status/988487142363025409 i admire their chutzpah
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 20:00 |
|
Gobbeldygook posted:https://twitter.com/SeamusHughes/status/988487142363025409 well if the ransomware worked correctly thats the only way to do it
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 20:09 |
|
Gobbeldygook posted:https://twitter.com/SeamusHughes/status/988487142363025409 How is that a circle? Ransomware'd Company ->IT Firm ->Payment to ransomware ->FBI
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 20:17 |
|
yeah it would only be a circle if the fbi found the it company had installed the ransomware in the first place
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 20:18 |
|
Bunni-kat posted:How is that a circle? Ransomware'd Company ->IT Firm ->Payment to ransomware ->FBI haveblue posted:yeah it would only be a circle if the fbi found the it company had installed the ransomware in the first place Maybe you should turn in a circle and walk out of here?
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 20:20 |
|
https://osmocom.org/projects/osmo-fl2k/wiki/Osmo-fl2k Looks like a poop-touchers paradise, for $5-$15
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 20:27 |
|
Schadenboner posted:Maybe you should turn in a circle and walk out of here? I walked in to a wall
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 20:33 |
|
|
# ? Jun 9, 2024 06:27 |
|
Gobbeldygook posted:https://twitter.com/SeamusHughes/status/988487142363025409
|
# ? Apr 23, 2018 20:36 |