I like this quote. Seems most appropriate for a lot of message board communities I monitor, as well as governments.
Sunday, July 18, 2004
Looks as if my analysis is mostly correct. It is indeed just a matter of time, and marketshare. Hackers have already found a way to breech Firefox.
I think I'm going to stay with what is working well for me thus far. I use XP, have a firewall and anti-virus program, use Ad-ware, Spybot and Spyware Blaster and keep everything religiously updated while using safe computing practices.
I think I'm going to stay with what is working well for me thus far. I use XP, have a firewall and anti-virus program, use Ad-ware, Spybot and Spyware Blaster and keep everything religiously updated while using safe computing practices.
Mozilla Flaw Lets Links Run Arbitrary Programs
By Larry Seltzer July 8, 2004
Updated: The Mozilla Foundation has confirmed findings that its Mozilla and Firefox browsers are vulnerable to attacks using the "shell:" scheme, which execute arbitrary code under Windows without the user having to click a link.
Security researchers are reporting another security issue in Web browsing under Windows, but this time Internet Explorer is not the culprit. The Mozilla Foundation's Mozilla and Firefox are reported as vulnerable.
Saturday, July 17, 2004
I wrote an email to each of the companies asking my question of them. Got a response from Microsoft. Am still waiting on one from the Mozilla folks.
My email:
Sorry if this is not in the right category of inquiry. I can't seem to find anything on your site that addresses the question.
Here's MS's response.
My email:
Sorry if this is not in the right category of inquiry. I can't seem to find anything on your site that addresses the question.
So, what's the story behind this Mozilla/Firefox vs. IE controversy? Why is the department of Home Security recommending people convert? For the home user, is it something to be taken seriously or is this more about politics/marketing and stealing thunder from Microsoft. I know IE has a lot of weaknesses that are constantly being plugged. Is Firefox really that much better or is it that with the smaller marketshare, hackers haven't yet exploited its weaknesses yet and it's just a matter of time?
If there already is an established location on your website that addresses this, please direct me to it.
Here's MS's response.
Hello and thank you for contacting us at Microsoft.com. Criminal justice experts say cyber crime is growing faster than conventional crime. We are making considerable investments to increase the security of our products, as well as providing implementation guides and training based on industry best practices for security.
Microsoft is aggressively working to provide a comprehensive fix for all supported versions of Internet Explorer. This will be released once it has been thoroughly tested and found to be effective across the wide variety of supported versions and configurations of IE. In the meantime, we have provided the prescriptive guidance to help mitigate these issues at http://www.microsoft.com/security/incident/settings.mspx and do not feel that switching to an alternative browser and giving up the functionality and compatibility of IE is warranted. If you have any other concerns, please feel free to write back.
Sincerely, Kathy Microsoft.com Customer Support
Friday, July 16, 2004
So, what's the story behind this Mozilla/Firefox vs. IE controversy? For the home user, is it something to be taken seriously or is this more about politics/marketing and stealing thunder from Microsoft.
Dave seems to be strongly recommending people convert. I know IE has a lot of weaknesses that are constantly being plugged. Is Firefox really that much better or is it that with the smaller marketshare, hackers haven't yet exploited its weaknesses yet?
Dave seems to be strongly recommending people convert. I know IE has a lot of weaknesses that are constantly being plugged. Is Firefox really that much better or is it that with the smaller marketshare, hackers haven't yet exploited its weaknesses yet?
Martha Stewart...
Sentenced to 10 months imprisonment; 5 in prison and 5 in her home, plus $30,000 fine for lying to the government.
I have mixed feelings over this. Martha is a very intelligent woman with vast experience in Wall Street. She knew how to better protect herself but her perfectionism and greed got the best of her. What a case study for business students and entrepreneurs to learn from.
That being said, I'm looking forward to the sentencing of Ken Lay. By comparison, he should be sentenced to life in prison.
This does beg an obvious question though. What will George Bush or Dick Cheney get for their "lies to the government"?
Sentenced to 10 months imprisonment; 5 in prison and 5 in her home, plus $30,000 fine for lying to the government.
I have mixed feelings over this. Martha is a very intelligent woman with vast experience in Wall Street. She knew how to better protect herself but her perfectionism and greed got the best of her. What a case study for business students and entrepreneurs to learn from.
That being said, I'm looking forward to the sentencing of Ken Lay. By comparison, he should be sentenced to life in prison.
This does beg an obvious question though. What will George Bush or Dick Cheney get for their "lies to the government"?
Thursday, July 15, 2004
Hooray for Project Billboard!
They're doing battle with Clear Channel over the censorship of a billboard Project Billboard wants to place in Times Square during the Republican convention.
The DailyCal has an interesting take on the politics behind the censorship. Seems to be very similar tactics used in the Tim Robbins/Baseball Hall of Fame debacle of last year.
P.S. Cool! I figured out how to imbed images in my blog using FTP! :::struts:::
They're doing battle with Clear Channel over the censorship of a billboard Project Billboard wants to place in Times Square during the Republican convention.
The DailyCal has an interesting take on the politics behind the censorship. Seems to be very similar tactics used in the Tim Robbins/Baseball Hall of Fame debacle of last year.
P.S. Cool! I figured out how to imbed images in my blog using FTP! :::struts:::
ROFLMAO! Several thoughts came at once, upon reading this story.
1. How long it will take someone to invent "Beano For Outhouses."
2. I don't think I'd want my name or condition available either.
3. How did the hospital admissions people keep a straight face while recording the details of the accident?
4. Will there be worker's compensation for that explosive fart?
5. Where were the camcorders when you need them?
1. How long it will take someone to invent "Beano For Outhouses."
2. I don't think I'd want my name or condition available either.
3. How did the hospital admissions people keep a straight face while recording the details of the accident?
4. Will there be worker's compensation for that explosive fart?
5. Where were the camcorders when you need them?
Smoker Ignites Portable Toilet Explosion
Jul 15, 7:25 AM (ET)
BLACKSVILLE, W.Va. (AP) - Warning: smoking in the toilet can be dangerous. A portable toilet exploded Tuesday after a man who was inside it lit a cigarette.
Emergency workers said the man was not severely injured and drove himself to Clay-Battelle Community Health Center. He was later transferred to Ruby Memorial Hospital. His name and condition were not available Wednesday.
The explosion, which occurred in Blacksville, resulted from a buildup of methane gas inside the portable toilet. The methane did not "take too kindly" to the lit cigarette, said a spokeswoman for Monongalia Emergency Medical Services.
Tuesday, July 13, 2004
Monday, July 12, 2004
Am frustrated with the Squawkbox comment system crashing on a regular basis so am trying to figure out how to imbed the Blogger comment system into my I-frames.
If I'm successful, all prior Squawkbox comments will disappear from previous posts and you will need to either login to Blogger to leave a comment or use the annonymous comment feature and just type your name at the end so I know who said what.
So, let's see if this works. So far it hasn't been nearly as complicated as I expected it to be.
If I'm successful, all prior Squawkbox comments will disappear from previous posts and you will need to either login to Blogger to leave a comment or use the annonymous comment feature and just type your name at the end so I know who said what.
So, let's see if this works. So far it hasn't been nearly as complicated as I expected it to be.
Remember back about a year ago when "nut cases" were kicking around conspiracy theories and predictions? It is frightening how close to reality those predictions were and how desperate the tactics are becoming. Perhaps we need another security alert, one that warns the American people of the levels of desperate lengths the people in power will take to remain in power.
At the very least, Congress should be protecting the Constitution and election process by discussing issues such as what level of defined national crisis is enough to postpone a federal election and who should be the keeper of the authority to evaluate the crisis and issue a postponement. Instead, they decide that protecting marriage with a new constitutional amendment is the priority of the day.
How much of a threat to the election process can these rumors of terrorist plots be if the Congress thinks it more important to ban gay marriage?
Is the media going to let the titillation over gay marriage distract them from asking these questions of Congress and the American people?
I watched All The President's Men again today. Perhaps, I'm seeing conspiracies in the shadows because of this, but to me, something stinks if the beneficiary of election dirty tricks can then appoint a member of a commission he established to investigate the dirty tricks of his campaign, with the authority to postpone national elections during his re-election bid.
After reading the articles about the manipulations of Pakistan efforts to get Bin Laden and the illegal intelligence-gathering activities of members of the Pentagon, I worry about who will be the source of any terrorism events in the US during the national election season. Are we really so sure that it will be from al-Qa'eda and not the desperate fascists in our own government?
Here are a few excerpted articles from this weekend. Click on the headline for links to the full story.
~Lynn
At the very least, Congress should be protecting the Constitution and election process by discussing issues such as what level of defined national crisis is enough to postpone a federal election and who should be the keeper of the authority to evaluate the crisis and issue a postponement. Instead, they decide that protecting marriage with a new constitutional amendment is the priority of the day.
How much of a threat to the election process can these rumors of terrorist plots be if the Congress thinks it more important to ban gay marriage?
Is the media going to let the titillation over gay marriage distract them from asking these questions of Congress and the American people?
I watched All The President's Men again today. Perhaps, I'm seeing conspiracies in the shadows because of this, but to me, something stinks if the beneficiary of election dirty tricks can then appoint a member of a commission he established to investigate the dirty tricks of his campaign, with the authority to postpone national elections during his re-election bid.
After reading the articles about the manipulations of Pakistan efforts to get Bin Laden and the illegal intelligence-gathering activities of members of the Pentagon, I worry about who will be the source of any terrorism events in the US during the national election season. Are we really so sure that it will be from al-Qa'eda and not the desperate fascists in our own government?
Here are a few excerpted articles from this weekend. Click on the headline for links to the full story.
~Lynn
Officials discuss how to delay Election Day
Talks stem from recent fears of terror attack timed to vote
Sunday, July 11, 2004 Posted: 10:42 PM EDT (0242 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. officials have discussed the idea of postponing Election Day in the event of a terrorist attack on or about that day, a Homeland Security Department spokesman said Sunday.
Newsweek said the discussions about whether the November 2 election could be postponed started with a recent letter to Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge from DeForest Soaries Jr., chairman of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
The commission was set up after the disputed 2000 presidential vote to help states deal with logistical problems in their elections.
Soaries, who was appointed by President Bush, is a former New Jersey secretary of state and senior pastor of the 7,000-member First Baptist Church of Lincoln Gardens in Somerset.
Newsweek reported that Soaries expressed concern that no federal agency had the authority to postpone an election and asked Ridge to ask Congress to give his commission such power.
"I don't think there's an argument that can be made, for the first time in our history, to delay an election," said Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, a member of the Intelligence Committee.
"We hold elections in the middle of war, in the middle of earthquakes, in the middle of whatever it takes. The election is a statutory election. It should go ahead, on schedule, and we should not change it."
But the Republican chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Christopher Cox of California, said on "Late Edition" that he sees Ridge's request as part of a prudent effort to plan for "doomsday scenarios."
"We don't have any intelligence to suggest that it is going to happen, but we're preparing for all of these contingencies now," Cox said.
Noting that New York election officials were able to postpone their September 11, 2001, primary election after terrorists slammed hijacked planes into the World Trade Center, Cox said "there isn't any body that has that authority to do that for federal elections."
PAKISTAN FOR BUSH.
July Surprise?
by John B. Judis, Spencer Ackerman & Massoud Ansari
The New Republic Online
Post date: 07.07.04
Issue date: 07.19.04
This spring, the administration significantly increased its pressure on Pakistan to kill or capture Osama bin Laden, his deputy, Ayman Al Zawahiri, or the Taliban's Mullah Mohammed Omar, all of whom are believed to be hiding in the lawless tribal areas of Pakistan. A succession of high-level American officials--from outgoing CIA Director George Tenet to Secretary of State Colin Powell to Assistant Secretary of State Christina Rocca to State Department counterterrorism chief Cofer Black to a top CIA South Asia official--have visited Pakistan in recent months to urge General Pervez Musharraf's government to do more in the war on terrorism. In April, Zalmay Khalilzad, the American ambassador to Afghanistan, publicly chided the Pakistanis for providing a "sanctuary" for Al Qaeda and Taliban forces crossing the Afghan border. "The problem has not been solved and needs to be solved, the sooner the better," he said.
This public pressure would be appropriate, even laudable, had it not been accompanied by an unseemly private insistence that the Pakistanis deliver these high-value targets (HVTs) before Americans go to the polls in November. The Bush administration denies it has geared the war on terrorism to the electoral calendar. "Our attitude and actions have been the same since September 11 in terms of getting high-value targets off the street, and that doesn't change because of an election," says National Security Council spokesman Sean McCormack. But The New Republic has learned that Pakistani security officials have been told they must produce HVTs by the election. According to one source in Pakistan's powerful Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), "The Pakistani government is really desperate and wants to flush out bin Laden and his associates after the latest pressures from the U.S. administration to deliver before the [upcoming] U.S. elections." Introducing target dates for Al Qaeda captures is a new twist in U.S.-Pakistani counterterrorism relations--according to a recently departed intelligence official, "no timetable[s]" were discussed in 2002 or 2003--but the November election is apparently bringing a new deadline pressure to the hunt. Another official, this one from the Pakistani Interior Ministry, which is responsible for internal security, explains, "The Musharraf government has a history of rescuing the Bush administration. They now want Musharraf to bail them out when they are facing hard times in the coming elections." (These sources insisted on remaining anonymous. Under Pakistan's Official Secrets Act, an official leaking information to the press can be imprisoned for up to ten years.)
Fury over Pentagon cell that briefed White House on Iraq's 'imaginary' al-Qaeda links
By Julian Coman in Washington
(Filed: 11/07/2004)
A Senior Pentagon policy maker created an unofficial "Iraqi intelligence cell" in the summer of 2002 to circumvent the CIA and secretly brief the White House on links between Saddam Hussein and al-Qa'eda, according to the Senate intelligence committee.
The allegations about Douglas Feith, the number three at the Department of Defence, are made in a supplementary annexe of the committee's review of the intelligence leading to war in Iraq, released on Friday.
According to dramatic testimony contained in the annexe, Mr Feith's cell undermined the credibility of CIA judgments on Iraq's alleged al-Qa'eda links within the highest levels of the Bush administration.
The cell appears to have been set up by Mr Feith as an adjunct to the Office of Special Plans, a Pentagon intelligence-gathering operation established in the wake of 9/11 with the authority of Paul Wolfowitz. Its focus quickly became the al-Qa'eda-Saddam link.
On occasion, without informing the then head of the CIA, George Tenet, the group gave counter-briefings in the White House. Sen Jay Rockefeller, the most senior Democrat on the committee, said that Mr Feith's cell may even have undertaken "unlawful" intelligence-gathering initiatives.
