|
pretty sure the asterisks are the same count for all addresses to prevent disclosing length so presssec or presssecretary would both work
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 10:35 |
|
|
lol twitter is junk.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
Powaqoatse posted:eegh a4 is trash for idiots. letter is better
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2017 00:20
|
|
|
Its a lovely too tall ratio and also its some hosed up poo poo like 8.3 x 11.7 instead of the much superior letter 8.5 x 11
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
redleader posted:the aspect ratio is a fair but personal judgement. i can't say i've ever been triggered by the physical dimensions of a piece of paper if you ever see A4 you will be
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:it may be happening I doubt goog has the balls to revoke Symantec CAs from chome. they'd be shutting off part of the internet for their users and they care more about those ad dollars than security.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2017 01:48
|
|
|
on the other hand if they could get Microsoft and failfox on board it would be a hell of a thing. so much poo poo would break.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2017 01:49
|
|
|
Bonfire Lit posted:turns off UAC and "UAC remote restrictions". if you connect to a computer via smb with a local account with admin privs (as opposed to a domain account with local admin privs) windows usually disables the admin group in your token. the second setting turns that off, I don't know where the point is when UAC is already disabled but maybe it's in order to keep access if someone turns UAC back on via the control panel the uac remote restrictions can be disabled w/out disabling uac entirely.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
I bet the software or hardware they use has a way to sign packages to prevent tampering but nobody has ever used it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2017 19:17
|
|
|
Cybernetic Vermin posted:encountering systems now and then where rm has been aliased to rm -i, end up just doing -f every time rather than bothering to discover that. meaning to delete a non-writeable file is far more common than being actually warded away from deleting one. not that clear what *not* having -f ever gives you, for example in this case i imagine they could have deleted the database just fine without it yeah their goal here was to delete some files and they would have ignored any warnings presented from not having -f. same as throwing sudo in front of things. they're doing it because they want the command to run and they know sudo will guarantee it and that if they forget to use sudo they'll get an error and then they'll have to use sudo anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 15:46
|
|
|
Shinku ABOOKEN posted:the unix philosophy ladies and gentlemen a big ol' trash fire piled on top of smoldering wreckage
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
lol
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 16:47
|
|
|
idk they could probably just intercept the printing call in their browser, format it for a receipt printer, and then pass it back to the normal printing api.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 17:12
|
|
|
I don't see that on the browser page but idk it still sounds like they're just formatting existing content. the fact that they do that with javascript vs objc/java doesn't really change much. they probably do it in js specifically so they don't have to rewrite it per platform.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 17:17
|
|
|
like I'm guessing its all dom and css modifications to format it for their printers. they could probably do it with a browser extension tho. that would be better.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 17:19
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:no, that would be worse. their lovely code shouldn't be resident unless I'm interacting with their system it wouldn't have to be always on and would just format a page for a printer. I mean I know failfox and chome are really bad at javascript but it wouldn't have any effect until you clicked the extension to format for their printer.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
if you aren't using the printer then you probably don't need to worry about it and if you are using the printer you're going to want it to be available so you can print stuff from whatever page you're on. makes sense to me.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
alternately you can do the same thing in a separate executable that is a browser w/ the extension that's been branded by them.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
you could write a web app where the user puts in a url and then your server does the printing, but that wouldn't work for anything involving cookies.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 21:51
|
|
|
OSI bean dip posted:my suggestion is ssh tunnelling really "I don't trust this software cause it has had vulnerabilities. Please use this software that has had vulnerabilities instead!" it would be great if windows remote assistance actually worked cause it would eliminate all this 3rd party stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 16:17
|
|
|
openssh has had plenty of vulnerabilities in the past and the idea you're presenting that because its linux its immune to attacks is absolutely retarded. You should use as much caution approaching access via openssh as you should access via teamviewer. same with rdp. I would never leave it open to the internet even if it is more secure than openssh. also lol @ the idea that you're gonna have a remote user setup an ssh tunnel to you so you can access their machine.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 16:24
|
|
|
Perplx posted:ssh is still better than teamviewer, teamviewer has vulnerabilities plus is controlled by a 3rd party the benefit of teamviewer is the lack of user knowledge required. SSH requires an autistic to use. teamviewer requires someone who can go to a website, type in a number, and click a button.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
if you're external users are all autistics then ssh is probably an appropriate choice but they also can probably figure out their problems themselves.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
OSI bean dip posted:you're just as loving dumb as the grey poster, shaggar. did you even read what my response was? what are you talking about. we're talking about remote assistance. this is for when the user is outside of the network and needs assistance, meaning they cant get into the network. are you going to walk them through setting up an ssh tunnel to you? seriously?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
I mean I'm not surprised some autistic linux users cant comprehend normal users not being able to configure openssh but god drat you guys must not ever interact with humans ever.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 16:46
|
|
|
Maybe you don't understand the problem scope here so lets walk through it. You have a remote user who is having problems and cant get into your network but they do have internet access. You don't want to just leave ports open on their machine and there are probably firewalls between you that you don't control anyway so you need a way to control their computer from outside of your network. The user doesn't know anything about computers. They're a normal human being. You need to provide them with a way to give you remote access with as little effort on their part as possible. So what are your options. Windows remote assistance is supposed to exactly fulfill this mission, but it never loving works. its also windows specific. what if this person is using a linux like osx? How about something like GoToMeeting? This actually works pretty well, but it means your user needs to be able to operate the presenter controls within GoToMeeting which is a tall ask. This is the void that teamviewer fills. its like GoToMeeting/webex but they don't need to understand how to work the presenter controls. They go to a website and type in a thing and join the "meeting" and you fix their poo poo and then they close the "meeting".
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
rdp has nothing to do with teamviewer and also cant be used for remote assistance as it would override the user's active session. We were discussing your bizarre hated of teamviewer and your inconsistent views on security
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
also I'm litterrally saying that the Microsoft solution (remote assistance) does not work here so idk where you're getting pro-Microsoft stuff from. I wish remote assistance worked cause it would make 3rd party things irrelevant, sure.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
wyoak posted:i dunno saying something as general as "never trust a 3rd party" seems a bit paranoid and the endgame there is actively vetting crypto algos and only using software that you've compiled yourself using those algos (also using a compiler you wrote yourself) yeah its security through brand favoritism Perplx posted:the thread was about persistent remote access, in which case teamviewer is stupid given the thousands of users that had computers hacked through no fault of their own besides installing teamviewer in server mode ive never used teamviewer for persistent remote access but id put it in the same category as opening rdp or ssh to the world.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 17:16
|
|
|
duTrieux. posted:you spe mass port scans are way way easier especially w/ access to botnets.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
OSI bean dip posted:https://www.wired.com/2017/02/russians-engineer-brilliant-slot-machine-cheat-casinos-no-fix/ that's so cool.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
the limitation here is not on software quality but hardware cost. moving it to a central system would make sense cause you could deliver signed RNG messages to all your client slot machines which would prevent tampering and you'd save money on hardware. what probably happened is the gaming commission considered the prng good enough and the casinos agreed so no need to spend the extra $$ on a real rng. it would be really interesting to hear the reasoning behind it and if they even considered going with better rng at all.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 05:54
|
|
|
lol. steam is so bad ever since they moved to slowkit.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:coworker today: "it was giving me some kind of 'self-signed certificate' error but don't worry i took care of it" he generated a new properly named cert and signed it with your internal ca, right?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2017 15:28
|
|
|
cheese-cube posted:yes because you can't revoke a self-signed cert. also other reasons that i'm not immediately remembering. you can put it into your untrusted certs and that will block it. self signed certs can be used safely but the effort involved to do so is way more than just using your internal ca correctly.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2017 15:29
|
|
|
tsa let me thru the other day w/out me taking off belt or other stuff which was nice.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
vodkat posted:proof that shagger is the whitest of the white u have no idea.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
VeriFone is fuckin everywhere that's terrifying.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2017 17:21
|
|
|
stoopidmunkey posted:We had to turn off <INSERT_SECURITY_MECHANISM_HERE> to get it to work for the nice ladies that cut my check.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 10:35 |
|
|
javascript is the absolute worst thing
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2017 18:54
|
|