Re: WannaCry [OT]

Agreed. I didn't mean to imply that because exploitable code is difficult to sus out, we shouldn't do due diligence in designing things with that in mind in the first place. I don't think Novell has ever been hacked into from the outside. It was written ground up with security, especially

Re: WannaCry [OT]

On 2017-05-19 18:02, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote: I don't think it's a matter of programming standards. The methods used to exploit systems are almost always something you could never have guessed. Flaws in code can be extremeny difficult to see, as was the case in the SSL Heartbleed bug.

Re: WannaCry [OT]

I don't think it's a matter of programming standards. The methods used to exploit systems are almost always something you could never have guessed. Flaws in code can be extremeny difficult to see, as was the case in the SSL Heartbleed bug. None of the devs saw the bug when it was approved for

Re: WannaCry [OT]

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 6:46 PM, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote: > > I'd at least hope that 'smart cars' software is engineered to a much > higher standard than other places: > Well it may not even be 'smart' cars, even just modern cars may have problems

Re: WannaCry [OT]

It is not trivial that the main character in *The Matrix *is a coder. On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > We won't all be absorbed. Some will need to work as slaves in the real > world. > -- Stephen Barncard - Sebastopol Ca.

Re: WannaCry [OT]

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 10:46 PM, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > Ditto. But I do want a smart home and I've had one for years. We still use > the older X10/Insteon protocol, wasn't that the one that had the add with the girl in the flesh-colored tshirt

Re: WannaCry [OT]

We won't all be absorbed. Some will need to work as slaves in the real world. Bob S > On May 16, 2017, at 07:54 , Jonathan Lynch via use-livecode > wrote: > > Right before it absorbs us into the machine overlord. > > Sent from my iPhone

Re: WannaCry [OT]

Agreed. Bob S > On May 15, 2017, at 17:23 , Richard Gaskin via use-livecode > wrote: > > Good thoughts, Kay. > > The DDoS last October only reinforced my inherent distrust of IoT devices. > > Until we see some enforced security standards, I have no interest

Re: WannaCry [OT]

http://hackaday.com/2017/05/04/google-aiy-artificial-intelligence-yourself/ On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Jonathan Lynch via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > Right before it absorbs us into the machine overlord. > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On May 16, 2017, at 10:45

Re: WannaCry [OT]

Right before it absorbs us into the machine overlord. Sent from my iPhone > On May 16, 2017, at 10:45 AM, Alejandro Tejada via use-livecode > wrote: > > Mark Waddingan wrote: >> the fact that there are probably not just billions >> but trillions of lines of

WannaCry [OT]

Mark Waddingan wrote: > the fact that there are probably not just billions > but trillions of lines of C/C++ code in the world > means that things are probably not going to change > much soon - the cost to rewrite all of that in a language > such as Rust would probably be larger than the entire >

Re: WannaCry [OT]

On 2017-05-16 02:23, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: Until we see some enforced security standards, I have no interest in "smart cars", "smart TVs" or "smart homes". When I look at those products I just see one big botnet. I'd at least hope that 'smart cars' software is engineered to a

Re: WannaCry [OT]

On 5/15/17 7:23 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: Until we see some enforced security standards, I have no interest in "smart cars", "smart TVs" or "smart homes". When I look at those products I just see one big botnet. Ditto. But I do want a smart home and I've had one for years.

Re: WannaCry [OT]

Good thoughts, Kay. The DDoS last October only reinforced my inherent distrust of IoT devices. Until we see some enforced security standards, I have no interest in "smart cars", "smart TVs" or "smart homes". When I look at those products I just see one big botnet. -- Richard Gaskin

Re: WannaCry [OT]

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 3:13 AM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: > > Might it be (again, we can't know for sure until we talk with each vendor) > that they simply soldered too little RAM onto the motherboard and provided > no means of updating the OS because

Re: WannaCry [OT]

Governments of the world are simply never going to cooperate in this regard. If they find an advantage they will lock it down then exploit it. The public can cry out all they want. Governments will simply agree that more needs to be done to cooperate about this sort of thing, then quietly go

Re: WannaCry [OT]

Mike Kerner wrote: So back to what happened on Friday, in the western world, firms that have large investments in large and very expensive pieces of gear (which, I forgot to mention also carry lead times of 12-18 months in many cases), and large and very expensive software systems weren't

Re: WannaCry [OT]

So back to what happened on Friday, in the western world, firms that have large investments in large and very expensive pieces of gear (which, I forgot to mention also carry lead times of 12-18 months in many cases), and large and very expensive software systems weren't paranoid enough. I can't

Re: WannaCry [OT]

Mike Kerner wrote: > First and foremost, you might expect M$ to be able to deliver an OS > that is backward compatible, since they are the 800 lb. gorilla in > this conversation. They put out the specs that all the hardware > vendors built to, before they decided to change the rules and go in >

Re: WannaCry [OT]

The 800 lb gorilla would died of a broken thigh-bone because while a gorilla's height may increase in one dimension, its volume and weight will increase in 3 dimensions, and its bone cross-section in 2 dimensions, so its thigh-bones will not be strong enough to carry its weight: hence King

Re: WannaCry [OT]

That happens all the time. Try getting support for a golfball typewriter . . . I couldn't get a new monitor for my BBC Master Compact and had to fool around with SCART sockets, RGB gubbins and a soldering iron. But, as King Camp Gillette didn't say, but certainly implied, planned

Re: WannaCry [OT]

First and foremost, you might expect M$ to be able to deliver an OS that is backward compatible, since they are the 800 lb. gorilla in this conversation. They put out the specs that all the hardware vendors built to, before they decided to change the rules and go in a direction that broke

Re: WannaCry [OT]

Agreed Richard. And yet, here we are. My Dad for years had to run an old Windows 98 box because he had purchased devices and DOS applications for integrating with his radio system which would only talk directly to the device, and would not access a Windows driver to do it. We pay our money and

Re: WannaCry [OT]

Mike Kerner wrote: > Unfortunately, there are very expensive pieces of gear that have > controls on them that for one reason or another cannot be controlled > by OS's newer than XP. I happen to have one, here. It cost > $750,000. There is no dealing with the OS issue without replacing > the

Re: WannaCry [OT]

Unfortunately, there are very expensive pieces of gear that have controls on them that for one reason or another cannot be controlled by OS's newer than XP. I happen to have one, here. It cost $750,000. There is no dealing with the OS issue without replacing the control, and that is also

Re: WannaCry [OT]

David V Glasgow wrote: > I recently finished a fixed term contract working for a pretty IT > savvy NHS Trust. The NHS has been forced by central government to > reallocate IT (and other infrastructure) monies to front line > services. They are also trapped by legacy software with dependencies

Re: WannaCry [OT]

On 2017-05-13 16:53, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode wrote: " The WannaCry virus only infects machines running Windows" http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39896393 Err . . . Linux *cough* Heartbleed *cough* ;) Mark. -- Mark Waddingham ~ m...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/

Re: WannaCry [OT]

On 2017-05-13 19:05, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode wrote: You cannot send a virus to a BBC because the whole system resides on a ROM chip! Not true - if you have any persistent storage attached to a system (e.g. your winchester disk), and that system interacts with data which comes from

Re: WannaCry [OT]

> On 13 May 2017, at 6:05 pm, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode > wrote: > > What I do not understand is how organisations like the British State Health > System (NHS) cane be so bl**dy stupid to > rely on Windows, without (obviously) all sorts of safeguards.

RE: WannaCry [OT]

...@lists.runrev.com] On Behalf Of Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2017 1:05 PM To: How to use LiveCode Cc: Richmond Mathewson Subject: Re: WannaCry [OT] I cannot afford to be smug as my Linux rig (Xubuntu 16.04 64-bit) was hosed completely about 4 months ago and I only manage

Re: WannaCry [OT]

Richmond Mathewson wrote: > What I do not understand is how organisations like the British State > Health System (NHS) cane be so bl**dy stupid to > rely on Windows, without (obviously) all sorts of safeguards. While this specific exploit happened to be Windows-specific, this isn't really a

Re: WannaCry [OT]

I cannot afford to be smug as my Linux rig (Xubuntu 16.04 64-bit) was hosed completely about 4 months ago and I only managed to reciver about 5% of my files. What I do not understand is how organisations like the British State Health System (NHS) cane be so bl**dy stupid to rely on Windows,

Re: WannaCry [OT]

Richmond Mathewson wrote: > " The WannaCry virus only infects machines running Windows" > > http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39896393 > > Err . . . Linux While it's true that this particular exploit is dependent on a Windows-specific vulnerability, this is no time for smugness. There's a

WannaCry [OT]

" The WannaCry virus only infects machines running Windows" http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39896393 Err . . . Linux Richmond. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage