This is a bullshit study. If this was for all people (not only women) the results would be even worse. Nobody is currently happy in IT and the reasons are management, compensation and training.
Imagine having such a mind-boggling, unfathomable amount of money to waste, and using it to exploit work instead of making sure people aren't starving or one foot in homelessness.
...We have all the answers, resources, and manpower. That's crazy-obvious. The problem is we aren't implementing them because that's spending money on people who won't get people (or at least, the individuals) a profit in return. AI can tell you stuff all you want, but if you're too greedy to implement it, then, well...
Our data privacy laws need to be like Switzerland. Corporations shouldn't be allowed to collect information about us the way they do.
If they want to collect information for surveys, they should have to pay us and inform us about what they'll do with that data. It needs to be genuine informed consent.
Someone said elsewhere in this thread that bulk emails are usually sent through other services anyway. The scammers are just going to change the service they use to spam
Probably a good change. Most legitimate bulk email messaging probably goes through a third party service already in your SPF record; surveymonkey, listserv, etc.
A Royal Mail executive does admit that its "overly sensitive" machines can sometimes wrongly flag genuine stamps as fake
They are charging £5 (to the recipient) for these false positives!
When asked why the machine might be wrongly flagging a legitimate stamp, the executive replied: “I mean who knows ..."
Richard Trinder, the chairman of a campaign group that represents those wrongly convicted in the Horizon IT scandal, said: “It goes without saying that postmasters do not want to have to deal with false accusations about something else.”
I am not sure if this is detailed enough to be helpful, but this gadget is just a small code snippet usually just a few instructions long that can be hijacked into doing something useful for attacker.
In the general sense, no. In this case, the researchers were using BPF for part of the work because it’s an easy way to get code running in kernel space, possibly as an unprivileged user if the system is configured to allow this. Many popular distributions restrict this.
The general concept however is still sound. A big contribution of this work is showing that there isn’t necessarily a dependence on access to BPF. Under some circumstances, it’s still possible to inject branch target history leading to information leaks.
I apologize if this is a little vague. This is my best understanding.
Will this only affect sites that use Google as their CA or is this an issue when a site is viewed through chrome but has a cert that expires after 90 days?
Lets encrypt has this already by default. Managing this means automation but with that you may shift the problem. When automation is done poorly (esp when least privileged access is not done correctly). Hence that IAM is one of the cornerstone's of zero trust.
Pulse of Truth
Active
This magazine is not receiving updates (last activity 0 day(s) ago). Subscribe to start receiving updates.