Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:managers argue that (Score 1) 101

That's just not true. It could be sheer luck by placing the right bet at the right time, creating a rigged system of legal financial fraud, or maybe systematically destroying organisations by leveraged acquisitions and extracting assets. Making money at that scale often does not align with creating value in society.

Comment Re:Not Suprising (Score 1) 33

In theory Multi-VA [letsencrypt.org] should still prevent getting a TLS certificate

Yeah, that's why I only said plausibly, rather than possibly, as it'd take that 1:20 shot to make it happen. But plausibly may be overstating it a bit, still.

Any certificates from LE would also appear in the certificate transparency log that currently only has EnTrust and DigiCert certificates. A few hundred pages' worth of certificates.

Given everything we've learned here, do you think they're actually monitoring CT logs? Or hiring a brand reputation service to do it for them? I would bet a lot of money on the answer to that question being no. As you said, asleep at the switch :)

Comment Re:Naturally (Score 2) 94

Hah - as soon as we can get people to understand that LLMs aren't actual intelligence, the better off we'll be. OpenAI has done some wonderful work and marketing with ChatGPT to make people believe otherwise, though. Once they understand what LLMs are (both their real value and their limitations), people can start actually leveraging them in their lives instead of thinking the models can answer all of the open questions of the universe.

Comment Re:You are mistaken. (Score 1) 4

I could be wrong, but a quick google search seems to imply that whitehouse.gov hasn't hosted mail services since the Obama administration. If you have anything that shows it has, I'd love to see it.

Note: I'm largely basing this on the fact that the comments@whitehouse.gov email address stopped being referenced after the W administration's website. I also found some old reports on dnsspy and such from years ago (including during the previous administration) that had no mx records at all.

Comment Incorrect (Score 1) 4

The abstract for that RFC makes it clear it's optional:

organizations which support email exchanges with the Internet are encouraged to support AT LEAST each mailbox name for which the associated function exists within the organization.

Emphasis mine.

Comment Re:Naturally (Score 2) 94

I have more faith we'll be on Mars in the near future than AI taking over human jobs. That said, I think some flavor of AI will be critical to the Mars mission - at least in a "here, bold-faced checklist items for you while we wait for signal delay to get us a message from Earth" kind of way. As it is today, these technologies are great enabler and force multipliers, but they're not human-replacements.

Comment Re:not a risk to our systems? (Score 2) 33

Reputational risk isn't the same everywhere. It's a much bigger deal for B2B, for example. But people absolutely care - Take a look at the flood of people that left LastPass after their large breach. It's harder for people to walk away from the big banks or retailers, so their impact is significantly reduced. But in any case, it's not just a myth. It just has to be taken in context.

Comment Not Suprising (Score 4, Insightful) 33

I'm not surprised that a company of that size had such an issue lurking -- but how many eyes have probably looked at that DNS record over the years and looked right past that typo? Something should have eventually seen it, even if it was just DNS propagation monitoring. But the claim that it created no risk? Absolute hogwash. Without trying, a threat actor could have gotten a fifth of the traffic headed to destinations that used that same NS record content... which looks like it included their own API gateways!

Submission + - Fifteen Years Later, Citizens United Defined the 2024 Election (brennancenter.org)

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes: The influence of wealthy donors and dark money was unprecedented. Much of it would have been illegal before the Supreme Court swept away long-established campaign finance rules. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court’s controversial 2010 decision that swept away more than a century’s worth of campaign finance safeguards, turns 15 this month. The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg called it the worst ruling of her time on the Court. Overwhelming majorities of Americans have consistently expressed disapproval of the ruling, with at least 22 states and hundreds of cities voting to support a constitutional amendment to overturn it. Citizens United reshaped political campaigns in profound ways, giving corporations and billionaire-funded super PACs a central role in U.S. elections and making untraceable dark money a major force in politics. And yet it may only be now, in the aftermath of the 2024 election, that we can begin to understand the full impact of the decision.

Slashdot Top Deals

Economists state their GNP growth projections to the nearest tenth of a percentage point to prove they have a sense of humor. -- Edgar R. Fiedler

Working...