I have Soviet and East German friends. In every much we had totally valid lessons from Nazism about the Trump administration, so we have totally valid lessons from the Soviet era and the current administration. Not so much Biden himself, but the movement he's the head of.
No, we weren't headed toward Nazism under Trump, nor are we headed toward Marxist-Leninism today. But at the same time, we are adopting the evils.
I assume the above was subtweeting the recent UK proposal, which attempts to regulate what good speech is vs. harmful speech.
This UK law is similar to the "Section 230" fights in the US, where each side is trying to get big tech platforms like Facebook and Google to simultaneously defend their side's speech and crack down on the opposing side's speech.
It's weird that both Democrats and Republicans want "Section 230" reform, without even understanding what precisely Section 230 does, only that it "plays to their base" to complain about it.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
What's the difference between a "routable" and "non-routable" protocol?
Correct answers only.
I mention this because googling the question gives handwaving by people who don't understand the answer.
Routers forward packets based on the address PREFIX (average around 20-bits of a 32-bit IPv4 address).
Ethernet bridges forward packets based on the entire 48-bit MAC address.
Thus, routing tables can handle 4-billion IPv4 devices with 1-million routing table entries.
As far as Ethernet switches/bridges are concerned, a MAC address is a random 47-bit number. Sure, it has a prefix assigned to the vendor, but it doesn't correspond to the location on the network, so is random as far as they are concerned.
If you believe credentials like "CISSP" are "impressive" then you aren't qualified to write op-eds about cybersecurity.
There's no such thing as "best practices". Pick any 10 "credentialed" cybersecurity expert for their list of Top 10 Best Practices, and you'll get 13 lists with very little overlap.
If it works for the medical industry with doctors (I'm sure they are fired when their patients die, right?) then it ought to work for cybersecurity.
1/n It's a bludgeon instead of a scalpel. It drives up the cost of "compliance" with generalities. It assumes people aren't "taking security seriously" so bullies or bribes them into doing so. whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/…
2/n Thus, it appears that instead of "addressing threats", the federal government is going to spend the next two years "addressing compliance".
3/ For all the vendors saying "buy my EDR" or "buy my ZeroTrust", your lobbying of the government has successful -- expect big orders soon.
One of the problems with "indicators of compromise" is that the list of clearly "bad" things also includes a list of "good" things that hackers happened to also use.
It's like that time they claimed the Vermont power grid was hacked because the government listed Yahoo.com servers, because the hackers sent things via Yahoo. When a worker opened Yahoo mail in the mornin, alarms went off.
It's not invalid listing "good" things that hackers used, when reviewing logs it'll help show context of what happened. It's just that they need a separate label, that it's not actually an indication you've been compromised.
CEOs: your main exposure to ransomware comes from the ease of spreading within an organization, getting "domain admin". Just hire a pentester, give them an account on a typical employee desktop, and ask them to get domain admin.
"DarkSide" is simply a bunch of standard pentesters. They are doing the same sorts of things like running mimikatz. They'll find simple errors. Hire pentesters, give them a standard employee desktop, watch how they spread and get admin credentials.
I hate simple proscriptions like "just use multifactor authentication". Your problems might be different. For example, maybe your problem is that you've got the same local admin credentials in the image for all your desktop builds.
This kind of nonsense is why we have NFTs. Stupid old reporters steeped in decades of DeBeers advertising falsely believe "natural" diamonds are better. They aren't -- they are worse than high quality manufactured diamonds in every way.
If people had any brains they'd pay more for manufactured diamonds, the quality is much better. And I'm not even talking about the environmental degradation, slave labor, and 'conflict' that comes from mining 'natural' diamonds.
I mean, I appreciate the certificate that comes with my "natural" diamond documenting the tons of earth that was strip mined (average 250 tonnes per carat), the lives lost, the limbs amputated, and so on. This certainly evokes emotions in me -- though maybe not the right ones.