Hey so listen, I installed Windows 7 Beta 1 x86 and guess what, yes on the 32bit version Aero doesn't crash and the ATI driver doesn't crash. Amazing right? Even on Vista x64 they crashed occasionally.
Congratulations ATI, congratulations Microsoft, congratulations Intel, and also congratulations to any other developers who don't know how to click buttons and things and stuff.
I would like to thank you all very much for successfully not implementing anything in 64bit.
Oh "Adept" and Xilinx, I almost forgot you too, congratulations to you also!
Wednesday, 28 January 2009
Sunday, 25 January 2009
64 bit fail
I have a xilinx coolrunner II board, of which the driver is provided by a third party company called Adept. They certainly do not seem very "adept" though, quite inept in fact. Their driver refuses to install on 64bit Windows Vista Sp1 or 64bit Windows 7 Beta 1. I have tested it in 32bit WindowsXP SP3 which works. I think their driver is just bad, which would be ok if they wrote it in the documentation, that it won't work on 64bit versions of windows.
Now we're talking about 64bit technology, we should really mention the Microsoft and ATI failure (this is probably also and NVIDIA fail). Having Aero enabled causes Windows Vista and Windows 7 to crash randomly, even when idle. I know this because, since I disabled Aero, my graphics driver has not crashed once, and windows has not blue screened once, where as it used to do it on a daily basis. I still play games and do everything else I used to do, the only difference is that Aero is now disabled. There is no way to know if this is a Microsoft fail or an ATI fail, or a combined fail, but certainly it is a fail and I blame them both equally. I have read that on 32bit Windows this does not happen, although I have not tested this, which is why I am going to revert back to 32bit. I suppose I don't really need to be running a 64bit host operatingsytem considering I only have 2gb of memory in my computer. And yes obviously I have tried to use different versions of the ATI driver but they all fail it.
Another ATI fail is their OpenGL fail, on their 64bit Windows 7 preview driver, OpenGL is not supported. All I can say is lawl. A really big lawl considering that OpenGL is the default graphics engine for most popular games.
Now we're talking about 64bit technology, we should really mention the Microsoft and ATI failure (this is probably also and NVIDIA fail). Having Aero enabled causes Windows Vista and Windows 7 to crash randomly, even when idle. I know this because, since I disabled Aero, my graphics driver has not crashed once, and windows has not blue screened once, where as it used to do it on a daily basis. I still play games and do everything else I used to do, the only difference is that Aero is now disabled. There is no way to know if this is a Microsoft fail or an ATI fail, or a combined fail, but certainly it is a fail and I blame them both equally. I have read that on 32bit Windows this does not happen, although I have not tested this, which is why I am going to revert back to 32bit. I suppose I don't really need to be running a 64bit host operatingsytem considering I only have 2gb of memory in my computer. And yes obviously I have tried to use different versions of the ATI driver but they all fail it.
Another ATI fail is their OpenGL fail, on their 64bit Windows 7 preview driver, OpenGL is not supported. All I can say is lawl. A really big lawl considering that OpenGL is the default graphics engine for most popular games.
Tuesday, 30 December 2008
Vegetarians beware!
Last year I thought Masterfoods had revoked their tragic decision to put bits of disgustingly revoltingly horribly nastily and sadly murdered dead rotting animals in their chocolates and confectionery. However after recent reading, I have discovered this simply was not the case and they had put out misleading statements.
It would seem anything that isn't explicitly labeled as being suitable for vegetarians probably isn't, especially if it has whey or gelatin listed as an ingredient.
It is highly ambiguous and ridiculous to list ingredients without stating their source when considering that both whey and gelatin can be produced in a vegetarian friendly manner. It would be better if manufacturers were forced to be explicit rather than implicit when listing ingredients.
It would seem anything that isn't explicitly labeled as being suitable for vegetarians probably isn't, especially if it has whey or gelatin listed as an ingredient.
It is highly ambiguous and ridiculous to list ingredients without stating their source when considering that both whey and gelatin can be produced in a vegetarian friendly manner. It would be better if manufacturers were forced to be explicit rather than implicit when listing ingredients.
Friday, 26 December 2008
Latency Lag Delay Congestion Unresponsive System ASUS EAH 4850 1GB HDMI
It really is amazing how unhelpful the Internet community can be. This is a forum post I made on 10 December 2008 on both the Asus support forum and the ATI support forum. Guess how many replies I got so far? Zero.
I did manage to find a workaround in the end, but it isn't a solution, and it doesn't explain why the issue exists. If I leave the onboard graphics as the default boot video graphics array in the BIOS settings, then the system functions normally, without the latency. However this is quite inconvenient as it means that nothing appears on the screen until Windows has finished booting up and the logon screen appears, so any error messages during boot up would potentially be completely missed, and it also means that if I want to reinstall the operating system I will have to fiddle around connecting the screen to the onboard vga output.
I did manage to find a workaround in the end, but it isn't a solution, and it doesn't explain why the issue exists. If I leave the onboard graphics as the default boot video graphics array in the BIOS settings, then the system functions normally, without the latency. However this is quite inconvenient as it means that nothing appears on the screen until Windows has finished booting up and the logon screen appears, so any error messages during boot up would potentially be completely missed, and it also means that if I want to reinstall the operating system I will have to fiddle around connecting the screen to the onboard vga output.
Hello. I have just purchased an ASUS EAH 4850 1GB HDMI graphics card and I am experiencing sluggish behaviour, latency, lag, delay, and unresponsiveness, all the time, in all operating systems and all applications, from the moment the operating system starts to boot. This isn’t just when playing a game – in fact I can’t even play a game because of this issue! This is all the time, under any operating system, using any drivers.
The computer is a Packard Bell IMEDIA J9250 AIO (P/N: PB80X02486) with Intel Core 2 Duo E4400, 2GB RAM, 320GB HDD, DVDRW. It comes with a Packard Bell 22” 1680x1050 TFT. The computer has no expansion cards installed other than the graphics card I just purchased.
The computer was previously running smoothly without latency or any other problem, under default configuration, and has no virus/malware installed. Windows Vista with SP1 (32bit) has been freshly installed with the official latest versions of the Asus graphics drivers downloaded from the Asus support site. I have also tried an older version of the drivers that came on the bundled CD with the graphics card, as well as the latest non-Asus branded drivers from the ATI website. This problem existed also before I installed the drivers for the card. It also exists regardless of which screen resolution I select. I have also verified that all of the fans in my computer (including on the graphics card) are running.
I suspected these possibilities: underpowered PSU, incorrect voltages, throttled CPU, throttled GPU, or overheating. However, none of these appear to be the cause (or solution) going by the following things I have tried:
1. I purchased a PSU with a higher wattage (550w), connected it to the computer - but still had the same issue.
2. I then checked the Asus software for the GPU temperature - but this was fine (about 40 degrees c).
3. I then checked the hardware monitor in my bios for the voltages and system temperatures - but again, these were all fine as well.
4. Then I installed CPUZ to check my CPU core clock speed - which was running as normal also (between 1100mhz and 2000mhz).
5. I tried disabling all of the onboard functionality (Audio/USB/LAN and etc) but this also had no effect.
6. I searched on online and found some forum threads suggesting this problem goes away the HDMI audio device is disabled in the device manager, so I also tried that but it had no effect.
7. I checked my computer BIOS firmware is the latest version – which it is.
8. I ran memtest86 to confirm my system memory is not faulty – no errors found –and none suspected either as my system ran fine prior to installing the Asus EAH4850 graphics card.
9. I checked Task Manager and then also Process Explorer for any strange processes or threads, but did not find anything unusual – except that everything was taking a far higher amount of CPU time than is normal – excessive in fact. For example, task manager (taskmgr) was using around 50% CPU almost constantly. This problem isn’t only isolated to taskmgr though – it is any process that is running which is doing something.
10. Finally, I tried taking out the graphics card, and reinserting it, but this also didn't help.
After trying all of that to no avail, I decided to download Knoppix (Linux Live CD) and see whether or not I also experienced the latency issue with another operating system, and I did experience the same lag/latency/delay... In fact it took Knoppix about 30 minutes just to boot up! Having removed the graphics card, it takes about 2 minutes to boot up (using the onboard graphics).
And also, having removed the graphics card now, the system again functions as normal but with the onboard graphics obviously. It really seems as if the motherboard bus is getting completely congested or the system CPU is throttled, but I can’t find the evidence of it or any cause for it.
This problem does not appear to be isolated to me as I have found other people complaining of the same issue after searching on google.
Any help, advice or suggestions you could give me would be greatly appreciated. Thank you kindly.
Creative S750 GigaWorks 7.1 Speaker Kit Fuse Replacement
A few days ago my after reconnecting my Creative S750 GigaWorks 7.1 Speaker Kit after it had been in storage for some time, the subwoofer suddenly went "pop bang snap duff", powered off and refused to power on.
I tried using a different kettle lead to but to no avail. After googling for others suffering a similar fate, I noticed many people complain about the internal fuse having blown. I was quite worried about the prospect of having to replace an internal fuse but it turns out it is actually externally accessible, just below the kettle lead socket.
Remarkably, the pull-out fuse clip has a section for a spare fuse, but no spare fuse was found there, so I went to my local Maplin Electronics store where I purchased a replacement fuse. Although they could only sell me a pack of ten rather than individually, but the pack was cheap enough so it didn't matter and it also had the bonus of being able to put a spare fuse in the allotted slot for future use!
After replacing the internal fuse and kettle lead, the speakers are back to normal operation which I am quite pleased about as most forums and blogs where I had read similar stories reported that more often than not some internal components also need replacing when the fuse blows, which I think partially defeats the object of having a fuse.
I tried using a different kettle lead to but to no avail. After googling for others suffering a similar fate, I noticed many people complain about the internal fuse having blown. I was quite worried about the prospect of having to replace an internal fuse but it turns out it is actually externally accessible, just below the kettle lead socket.
Remarkably, the pull-out fuse clip has a section for a spare fuse, but no spare fuse was found there, so I went to my local Maplin Electronics store where I purchased a replacement fuse. Although they could only sell me a pack of ten rather than individually, but the pack was cheap enough so it didn't matter and it also had the bonus of being able to put a spare fuse in the allotted slot for future use!
After replacing the internal fuse and kettle lead, the speakers are back to normal operation which I am quite pleased about as most forums and blogs where I had read similar stories reported that more often than not some internal components also need replacing when the fuse blows, which I think partially defeats the object of having a fuse.
PSI and GPG: An easy way to encrypt instant messages
How to connect to Google Talk or any Jabber service with PSI IM, have encrypted instant messaging chats and encrypted file transfers using GnuPG (GPG) with aid of GpgShell on Microsoft Windows:
1. Download and install gnupg from ftp://ftp.gnupg.org/gcrypt/binary/gnupg-w32cli-1.4.7.exe or alternatively find it on google or visit the website http://www.gnupg.org/
2. Add it's installation directory to your windows PATH environment variable (Control Panel, System, Advanced, Environment Variables - select PATH - and add ;c:\program files\gnupg; or whatever you set the installation folder to). You must complete this step before installing gpgshell.
3. Download and install gpgshell from http://www.jumaros.de/rsoft/download/gpgsh.php or find it on google.
4. Open GPGkeys (a program which is part for gpgshell). Generate a new key selecting the defaults. Enter your real name and real email address when prompted, as well as a password (passphrase) for your keyring. Make sure you do not forget the password or you will not be able to access your keys!
5. Export your public key. When prompted do not export your private key, unless you want to back it up and store it in a location where it will not be found by anyone other than yourself, and then securely delete the private key file once backed up. Never give out your private (aka secret) key to anyone - no one needs it other than you.
6. Send your the contacts you trust public key (the file that has pub in the file name, in this example "Your Name (any comment) (0x4F9F5F97) pub.asc"). They will need to follow the above steps and then import your public key onto their keyring.
7. Ask your contacts that you trust to give you their public keys and import them into your keystore via GPGkeys. You can either do this by selecting Import from the Keys menu or dragging the public key file (.asc) into the GPGkeys window.
8. Download and install PSI-IM from http://mesh.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/psi/psi-0.10-win-setup.exe or the website http://psi-im.org/ or find it on google.
9. Configure your Google Talk (gtalk) account via the instructions provided by google support or psi wiki.
10. In your newly configured PSI account for Google Talk, select the account properties by clicking modify, and under the details tab select your OpenPGP key by clicking the 'Select Key...' button.
11. In conversation windows, make sure the encryption button (padlock) is enabled. You may be required to select the public key of the person you are conversing with by clicking 'Assign OpenPGP Key' on their context menu. Obviously you will need to import their public keys into the GPGkeys application if you haven't already done so.
12. Use the GPGtools application to encrypt files before you transfer them.
You may be required to take additional steps, some of the steps here may change altogether, or some nay not be applicable in the future.
1. Download and install gnupg from ftp://ftp.gnupg.org/gcrypt/binary/gnupg-w32cli-1.4.7.exe or alternatively find it on google or visit the website http://www.gnupg.org/
2. Add it's installation directory to your windows PATH environment variable (Control Panel, System, Advanced, Environment Variables - select PATH - and add ;c:\program files\gnupg; or whatever you set the installation folder to). You must complete this step before installing gpgshell.
3. Download and install gpgshell from http://www.jumaros.de/rsoft/download/gpgsh.php or find it on google.
4. Open GPGkeys (a program which is part for gpgshell). Generate a new key selecting the defaults. Enter your real name and real email address when prompted, as well as a password (passphrase) for your keyring. Make sure you do not forget the password or you will not be able to access your keys!
5. Export your public key. When prompted do not export your private key, unless you want to back it up and store it in a location where it will not be found by anyone other than yourself, and then securely delete the private key file once backed up. Never give out your private (aka secret) key to anyone - no one needs it other than you.
6. Send your the contacts you trust public key (the file that has pub in the file name, in this example "Your Name (any comment) (0x4F9F5F97) pub.asc"). They will need to follow the above steps and then import your public key onto their keyring.
7. Ask your contacts that you trust to give you their public keys and import them into your keystore via GPGkeys. You can either do this by selecting Import from the Keys menu or dragging the public key file (.asc) into the GPGkeys window.
8. Download and install PSI-IM from http://mesh.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/psi/psi-0.10-win-setup.exe or the website http://psi-im.org/ or find it on google.
9. Configure your Google Talk (gtalk) account via the instructions provided by google support or psi wiki.
10. In your newly configured PSI account for Google Talk, select the account properties by clicking modify, and under the details tab select your OpenPGP key by clicking the 'Select Key...' button.
11. In conversation windows, make sure the encryption button (padlock) is enabled. You may be required to select the public key of the person you are conversing with by clicking 'Assign OpenPGP Key' on their context menu. Obviously you will need to import their public keys into the GPGkeys application if you haven't already done so.
12. Use the GPGtools application to encrypt files before you transfer them.
You may be required to take additional steps, some of the steps here may change altogether, or some nay not be applicable in the future.
A true Christmas message
During Eid al-Adha Muslims should have given up murdering sheep and goats on an annual basis and to go on to give up meat for good for religious and health reasons. This Christmas and New Year season Christians should give up the murdering of turkeys and other birds.
God has commanded us to treat animals with dignity and respect; not to murder them without true necessity, and not to abuse them in anyway. Currently, in developed regions there certainly is no necessity whatsoever to murder or abuse an animal.
It is clear that those who treat animals well will have a place in heavenly gardens of paradise and those who treat animals bad will have a place in the hellish hellfire that is hell.
I thank God that we have organisations such as PETA to expose and work against the true nature of animal farming, so that when judged, no human has any excuse for their revoltingly nasty habits of eating murdered animals.
I suggest a hypothesis for why some people find giving up meat for good an untenable option. It is a possibility that the hormones found in dead animals, including stress hormones, are addictive, as most chemicals are known to be addictive. In this case, seeing as usually humans are introduced to dead animals as babies, they will be disgustingly dependant on them for the rest of their lives. As such, just as smokers do, meat eaters will come up with any lavish nonsense argument in order to continue their socially unacceptable habit.
It is truly a sickly double standard to selectively eat certain animals and exclude others, such as humans, seeing as animals, just as humans, have both physical feelings and emotions. In fact we know from both religious text and common sense that animals also have their own soul, their own mind and their own life; their own self; their own consciousness. What right do we have to take their life and to eat them? We certainly would not agree with them taking our lives and eating us and that is why we prevent them from doing so.
It is even increasingly hard to separate animals from humans as animal parts are being used for human tissue transplants, and as well as this, scientists are planning to use animal organs in humans. Scientists observe many social similarities too. Where and when will the line finally be drawn?
It still shocks me that some people believe that they require meat to live a healthy life when the fact of the matter is that vegetarians, on average, have a better life expectancy, and are far less plagued with diseases such as cancer. I have heard many times the untrue arguement that we need special types of protein only found in meat and this again is clearly not the case considering the former points. Incidentally, there are plenty of vegetarian sources of protein in high quantities including but by no means limited to, almost all types of beans.
God has commanded us to treat animals with dignity and respect; not to murder them without true necessity, and not to abuse them in anyway. Currently, in developed regions there certainly is no necessity whatsoever to murder or abuse an animal.
It is clear that those who treat animals well will have a place in heavenly gardens of paradise and those who treat animals bad will have a place in the hellish hellfire that is hell.
I thank God that we have organisations such as PETA to expose and work against the true nature of animal farming, so that when judged, no human has any excuse for their revoltingly nasty habits of eating murdered animals.
I suggest a hypothesis for why some people find giving up meat for good an untenable option. It is a possibility that the hormones found in dead animals, including stress hormones, are addictive, as most chemicals are known to be addictive. In this case, seeing as usually humans are introduced to dead animals as babies, they will be disgustingly dependant on them for the rest of their lives. As such, just as smokers do, meat eaters will come up with any lavish nonsense argument in order to continue their socially unacceptable habit.
It is truly a sickly double standard to selectively eat certain animals and exclude others, such as humans, seeing as animals, just as humans, have both physical feelings and emotions. In fact we know from both religious text and common sense that animals also have their own soul, their own mind and their own life; their own self; their own consciousness. What right do we have to take their life and to eat them? We certainly would not agree with them taking our lives and eating us and that is why we prevent them from doing so.
It is even increasingly hard to separate animals from humans as animal parts are being used for human tissue transplants, and as well as this, scientists are planning to use animal organs in humans. Scientists observe many social similarities too. Where and when will the line finally be drawn?
It still shocks me that some people believe that they require meat to live a healthy life when the fact of the matter is that vegetarians, on average, have a better life expectancy, and are far less plagued with diseases such as cancer. I have heard many times the untrue arguement that we need special types of protein only found in meat and this again is clearly not the case considering the former points. Incidentally, there are plenty of vegetarian sources of protein in high quantities including but by no means limited to, almost all types of beans.
Thursday, 25 December 2008
Be careful...
I found this when I was browsing FFFFound. You have been warned!image source: http://ffffound.com/image/81f0eb5f71dd92f97f0317e33f3b494295ab68bf
Alcohol, who needs it?
With the variety of lovely drinks on offer, why would anyone drink on a regular basis, something that not only tastes vile but has negative repercussions including being known to cause cancer and death?
Personally, I cannot stand and thus do not purchase juice which is made from concentrate. Luckily, brands such as Innocent and Tropicana exist so I need not suffer the woes of disgusting juice and smoothie, instead I taste sheer joy in a carton.
Innocent Drinks
Tropicana
Alpro Soya Milk Alternative
Volvic spring water
Kenco Coffee
Clipper Teas
Personally, I cannot stand and thus do not purchase juice which is made from concentrate. Luckily, brands such as Innocent and Tropicana exist so I need not suffer the woes of disgusting juice and smoothie, instead I taste sheer joy in a carton.
Innocent Drinks
Tropicana
Alpro Soya Milk Alternative
Volvic spring water
Kenco Coffee
Clipper Teas
Vulnerable software and services: Who needs a trojan anyway?
It is strange how in the very same websites they talked about my case, they also had articles about vulnerable software and services, and the exploits which are used on them, isn't it? Yet in almost any article I have read about my case, they neglect to mention this was a viable possibility.
The fact of the matter is it was only this week that Microsoft disclosed that several versions of Internet Explorer have in fact been vulnerable to exploitation for several years prior. What other software or services have they left a big wide gaping security hole in, which has gone either ignored or unnoticed for several years?
Do you remember Code Red and Nimda? Code Red is a perfect example of a self wiping Trojan; although it may leave some other evidence of its activities, it could have been programmed to clear everything. Code Red ran in the systems volatile memory after using code injection in the exploitation process of a running service, meaning that when the computer are reboot, the Trojan no longer remained, unless the system was reinfected.
If you were so enclined to believe that volatile memory was somehow stateful or left traces of some kind of electronic noise (and by the way, the Ministry of Defense are known for physically destorying their volitile memory), then you should also be aware that once that memory is overwritten, be it once or several times, then surely no mysteriously magic data can be retained. This same process also applies to stateful memory, such as a hard disk.
If a file is deleted from a computer without using a secure wiping tool, eventually after normal use, the areas of the disk where that file and any associated files were stored would be completely overwritten and untraceable, thus rendering any forensic tests useless and actually potentially yielding misleading results.
It is true that forensics cannot find what is simply not there, but be careful to not assume that if something is not there, then it never was. Especially considering the ability of applications to run in volatile memory, leaving no trace on disk, the existence of algorithms to wipe files securely, and ready made secure wiping applications.
As for log files, not every file that was ever on a disk is written down, nor does every application that exists (including virii) create a log file. Log files can also be deleted or securely wiped, modified and forged. It was argued that they cannot be forged due to the physical format of how a file is stored in the sectors of a disk. However that is complete nonsense as that still does not disallow for forgery, and simply defragging the disk would correctly organise files into correctly ordered segments anyway. The fact defragmenting software exists proves it is possible to rearrange segments on disk anyway, and this can in turn be used for forgery.
The prosecution choose to not do any forensic examination of the server which was allegedly compromised. I found this to be highly remarkable, if they thought so highly of forensic examinations and what not.
It was also quite shocking to hear one of the witnesses claim that it is impossible to remotely control a computer. Consumer versions of Windows does have remote control facilities built into it, in terms of a cut down version of terminal services, dubbed Remote Assistance and Remote Desktop Connection. There is of course other third party software that does this such as several forks of VNC, Laplink, RAdmin, pcAnywhere and plenty of others. Surely they must have been aware that this software exists? Even if they were not aware of graphical user interface (gui) control software, they must also be aware of command line (cli) protocols and applications such as telnet, ssh, or others?
In the trial as defence we cited some known vulnerabilities which had subsequent to the allegations been found and patched, but at the time were open for exploitation. Trojan horses and other viruses are not always detected by antivirus software, even with the advent of heuristics. Just ask Valve, who had Half Life 2 leaked due to malicious activity with what they claim is a modified version of some remote control software.
It isn't just the operating system that might have vulnerable services or bundled software. Any third party software might also potentially be vulnerable to unintended (or secretly intended) usage or abuse.
Social engineering or sheer misplaced trust is also a possibility. If someone we trust sent an application, (in this case a Trojan) and the antivirus software didn't detect it as such, we would almost undoubtedly run it. In this case, no exploitation is even required. There is also the possibility of simply running a file by mistake, due to lack of concentration or distraction.
Finally, even if vulnerable software didn't exist, even if virii didn't exist, even if the Internet as we know it didn't exist, there is still the simple possibilty of a different enduser using a computer. It is unimportant how they would gain access to the building or what motivates they might have. It is even unimportant if there is a password set on the computer as another operating system could be booted via an optical disc or external hard disk, not to mention there are tools to remove or crack passwords, and the fact that passwords can also be guessed.
The fact of the matter is it was only this week that Microsoft disclosed that several versions of Internet Explorer have in fact been vulnerable to exploitation for several years prior. What other software or services have they left a big wide gaping security hole in, which has gone either ignored or unnoticed for several years?
Do you remember Code Red and Nimda? Code Red is a perfect example of a self wiping Trojan; although it may leave some other evidence of its activities, it could have been programmed to clear everything. Code Red ran in the systems volatile memory after using code injection in the exploitation process of a running service, meaning that when the computer are reboot, the Trojan no longer remained, unless the system was reinfected.
If you were so enclined to believe that volatile memory was somehow stateful or left traces of some kind of electronic noise (and by the way, the Ministry of Defense are known for physically destorying their volitile memory), then you should also be aware that once that memory is overwritten, be it once or several times, then surely no mysteriously magic data can be retained. This same process also applies to stateful memory, such as a hard disk.
If a file is deleted from a computer without using a secure wiping tool, eventually after normal use, the areas of the disk where that file and any associated files were stored would be completely overwritten and untraceable, thus rendering any forensic tests useless and actually potentially yielding misleading results.
It is true that forensics cannot find what is simply not there, but be careful to not assume that if something is not there, then it never was. Especially considering the ability of applications to run in volatile memory, leaving no trace on disk, the existence of algorithms to wipe files securely, and ready made secure wiping applications.
As for log files, not every file that was ever on a disk is written down, nor does every application that exists (including virii) create a log file. Log files can also be deleted or securely wiped, modified and forged. It was argued that they cannot be forged due to the physical format of how a file is stored in the sectors of a disk. However that is complete nonsense as that still does not disallow for forgery, and simply defragging the disk would correctly organise files into correctly ordered segments anyway. The fact defragmenting software exists proves it is possible to rearrange segments on disk anyway, and this can in turn be used for forgery.
The prosecution choose to not do any forensic examination of the server which was allegedly compromised. I found this to be highly remarkable, if they thought so highly of forensic examinations and what not.
It was also quite shocking to hear one of the witnesses claim that it is impossible to remotely control a computer. Consumer versions of Windows does have remote control facilities built into it, in terms of a cut down version of terminal services, dubbed Remote Assistance and Remote Desktop Connection. There is of course other third party software that does this such as several forks of VNC, Laplink, RAdmin, pcAnywhere and plenty of others. Surely they must have been aware that this software exists? Even if they were not aware of graphical user interface (gui) control software, they must also be aware of command line (cli) protocols and applications such as telnet, ssh, or others?
In the trial as defence we cited some known vulnerabilities which had subsequent to the allegations been found and patched, but at the time were open for exploitation. Trojan horses and other viruses are not always detected by antivirus software, even with the advent of heuristics. Just ask Valve, who had Half Life 2 leaked due to malicious activity with what they claim is a modified version of some remote control software.
It isn't just the operating system that might have vulnerable services or bundled software. Any third party software might also potentially be vulnerable to unintended (or secretly intended) usage or abuse.
Social engineering or sheer misplaced trust is also a possibility. If someone we trust sent an application, (in this case a Trojan) and the antivirus software didn't detect it as such, we would almost undoubtedly run it. In this case, no exploitation is even required. There is also the possibility of simply running a file by mistake, due to lack of concentration or distraction.
Finally, even if vulnerable software didn't exist, even if virii didn't exist, even if the Internet as we know it didn't exist, there is still the simple possibilty of a different enduser using a computer. It is unimportant how they would gain access to the building or what motivates they might have. It is even unimportant if there is a password set on the computer as another operating system could be booted via an optical disc or external hard disk, not to mention there are tools to remove or crack passwords, and the fact that passwords can also be guessed.
The Trojan did it? Hang on a second, that isn't quite what I said...
It has been called the Trojan Horse Defense (THD), but essentially almost every run of the mill news site and blogger seems to have completely missed the point. There has been a couple of exceptions, and I'm sure those sites know who they are.
You might wonder in that case, how did they manage to miss the point so badly? It is really very simple. In the courtroom throughout the trial, except on the last day, there was usually only a couple of members of the media, who were freelance journalists and not from a background in computer technology. Only on the last day of the trial did the mainstream media come, but that was only because it was the day of the verdict, and most of that day was actually the deliberation by the jury to reach the only verdict they could have reached which was to acquit on grounds of no guilt.
Some of the blogs I have read are implicit of guilt, as if they had seen all of the evidence and heard from all of the witnesses at the trial. This is very arrogant and also dangerous. If someone is acquitted, then the jury know better, as they are the only ones who sat to hear all of the evidence in the case, not some random blogger who read the news. A brief summary in a news article really does not amount to several days of evidence.
It also seems to be a case of the game Chinese whispers, as the further down the chain it gets, the more terrible it gets. Bloggers read other bloggers, who may get their information from other bloggers or news websites, which get their information from other sources such as inexperienced journalists or other third parties, including but not limited to, the so called expert witnesses that the prosecution employed. Personally as a matter of law, I don't think the prosecution should be allowed to use expert witnesses that they also have a financial relationship with, even if it is indirect, as this allows for a conflict of interests.
This process is enough to wreck the career options available to those who were wrongly accused of crimes. In the first job I had after my acquittal and thus exoneration, they had recently experienced some issues with their network. One of the other staff recognised me from the news and told the management, who then searched for me on google and found a lot of randomly written, hurtful, almost hateful drivel written against me.
Although I was allowed to keep my job, I never felt secure there again. I developed an avoidance problem due to the stress caused by some of the other staff clearly trying to get me fired on my first day and the formal interview I had been called into because of it. When I walked into the interview, I was very disturbed by the fact that they had printed out from several news websites and blogs details about me, and the management then accused me of being associated with the network trouble they had been having, even though I had in fact never heard of their organisation prior to applying for a job there, and especially not at the time it had occurred. How will those of us with Asperger's Syndrome ever be able to overcome our social anxiety issues when we are constantly undermined like this?
Even some of the more expert opinions I have read about this issue online seem to have drifted off into unrelated drivel and completely forgot to mention what would essentially be the other side to the story, but let's face it, if computer forensics really were shown to be as useless as they really are, then perhaps the forensics companies would get less business. Does it really come down to money? It would seem these companies are willing to infer guilt even though they know full well the full truth of the technological issues.
You might wonder in that case, how did they manage to miss the point so badly? It is really very simple. In the courtroom throughout the trial, except on the last day, there was usually only a couple of members of the media, who were freelance journalists and not from a background in computer technology. Only on the last day of the trial did the mainstream media come, but that was only because it was the day of the verdict, and most of that day was actually the deliberation by the jury to reach the only verdict they could have reached which was to acquit on grounds of no guilt.
Some of the blogs I have read are implicit of guilt, as if they had seen all of the evidence and heard from all of the witnesses at the trial. This is very arrogant and also dangerous. If someone is acquitted, then the jury know better, as they are the only ones who sat to hear all of the evidence in the case, not some random blogger who read the news. A brief summary in a news article really does not amount to several days of evidence.
It also seems to be a case of the game Chinese whispers, as the further down the chain it gets, the more terrible it gets. Bloggers read other bloggers, who may get their information from other bloggers or news websites, which get their information from other sources such as inexperienced journalists or other third parties, including but not limited to, the so called expert witnesses that the prosecution employed. Personally as a matter of law, I don't think the prosecution should be allowed to use expert witnesses that they also have a financial relationship with, even if it is indirect, as this allows for a conflict of interests.
This process is enough to wreck the career options available to those who were wrongly accused of crimes. In the first job I had after my acquittal and thus exoneration, they had recently experienced some issues with their network. One of the other staff recognised me from the news and told the management, who then searched for me on google and found a lot of randomly written, hurtful, almost hateful drivel written against me.
Although I was allowed to keep my job, I never felt secure there again. I developed an avoidance problem due to the stress caused by some of the other staff clearly trying to get me fired on my first day and the formal interview I had been called into because of it. When I walked into the interview, I was very disturbed by the fact that they had printed out from several news websites and blogs details about me, and the management then accused me of being associated with the network trouble they had been having, even though I had in fact never heard of their organisation prior to applying for a job there, and especially not at the time it had occurred. How will those of us with Asperger's Syndrome ever be able to overcome our social anxiety issues when we are constantly undermined like this?
Even some of the more expert opinions I have read about this issue online seem to have drifted off into unrelated drivel and completely forgot to mention what would essentially be the other side to the story, but let's face it, if computer forensics really were shown to be as useless as they really are, then perhaps the forensics companies would get less business. Does it really come down to money? It would seem these companies are willing to infer guilt even though they know full well the full truth of the technological issues.
Not a Virtual Machine so say he?
I had a discussion with someone in my class about the differences in technology between an operating system hosting virtual machine such as VirutalBox or VMWare, compared to the technological processes involved in a virtual machine which runs byte code such as the Java Virtual Machine (JVM) or .NET which obviously run byte-code compiled from Java or a .NET language respectfully.
Aside the obvious differences, such as a virtual BIOS being provided by the former, (and thus the ability to boot an operating system, virtually, with virtual devices), I don't see any real difference, except perhaps the added ability of the software to use the extended instruction sets which some modern processors have, which aid the running of a virtually hosted operating system.
My opponent's argument was that the JVM could not access devices, which is a bit of a strange statement to make considering that it can, and does, except when security policy disallows it. It is of course also possible (although possibly slightly pointless and slow) to program an entire operating system in an interpreted language, including the provision of creating virtual devices, or in fact create a virtual machine within a virtual machine.
One of the usually unfortunate things about Asperger's Syndrome is the communication difficulties, and although I knew these things, I was unable to effectively get my points across. This in turn means that my social anxiety is now greater due to having publicly lost a debate which I clearly should have won, leaving me looking bad when I should have looked knowledgeable.
I do wonder why people make the most pointless of arguments, which only spread misinformation and doubt. If you find out, please let me know.
Aside the obvious differences, such as a virtual BIOS being provided by the former, (and thus the ability to boot an operating system, virtually, with virtual devices), I don't see any real difference, except perhaps the added ability of the software to use the extended instruction sets which some modern processors have, which aid the running of a virtually hosted operating system.
My opponent's argument was that the JVM could not access devices, which is a bit of a strange statement to make considering that it can, and does, except when security policy disallows it. It is of course also possible (although possibly slightly pointless and slow) to program an entire operating system in an interpreted language, including the provision of creating virtual devices, or in fact create a virtual machine within a virtual machine.
One of the usually unfortunate things about Asperger's Syndrome is the communication difficulties, and although I knew these things, I was unable to effectively get my points across. This in turn means that my social anxiety is now greater due to having publicly lost a debate which I clearly should have won, leaving me looking bad when I should have looked knowledgeable.
I do wonder why people make the most pointless of arguments, which only spread misinformation and doubt. If you find out, please let me know.
A question of Autism?
Due to the social anxiety issues that come with Asperger's Syndrome, which bring forth other mental health issues such as depression, which in turn bring about other conditions and disorders, including eating disorders and problems processing foods, would it not be easier if we were helped by our governments to study or work, practical and realistic courses or jobs from home?
The majority of us, arguably would potentially be able to study or work from home. Although some sufferers may not be able to work full time hours due to concentration issues and the extra time we may require for our obsessive behaviours. Admittadly, some may also not be able to work at all but surely there is only one way to find out and that is for the government to provide this as a service to us.
The fact remains though that a certain number of us with Asperger's Syndrome (or Geek Syndrome as it has been referred to by the media on occasion) have overwhelmingly excellent computer skills. If we had the right help and incentive, including the government marketing us to the appropriate companies, then we could probably be earning pretty high figures and contributing to the economy, instead of taking from it.
As a matter of fact, currently at my University, I am having attendance issues partially due to the anxiety and stress of the anxiety, as well as the fact that I then get more unwell due to the stress. I asked for help from the University but I was told that there was no help available for me in the form that I had requested, due to University policy. Whilst of course the University is entitled to have policies which prevent disabled and non-disabled students alike from achieving, if it protects their intellectual property, I find it highly inconvenient and inconsiderate, not to mention uncompasionate.
Organisations urgently need to stop treating disabled and non-disabled persons alike, as they are not alike; they are fundimentally different in the way they can interact with society and with said organisations. They also need to stop treating all disabled persons alike, saying one disability policy is suitable for all disabled persons. Mental health is clearly very different from mobility issues, although of course they can be intwined.
I had asked if I would be able to employ someone, including a member of staff of the University, to record videos of the lectures that I was missing, and then I would be able to watch them, either at home or at University, to keep up with my programme of study. They told me that they have this policy as they are concerned about copyright or intellectual property issues, but if this was the case, then they simply could refuse to give me a copy of the videos and insist that I must watch it at the Unversity.
This makes it blatently obvious that disability laws are still not in tune if this sort of policy is allowed to exist, as the fact of the matter is that some people will be unable to attend lectures at University, so they should be allowed an alternative way to access the lecture. Organisations must be forced to make changes requested my disabled persons which are within reason, and within reason should include a simple request of recording lectures for viewing within the establishment in which it was recorded.
The majority of us, arguably would potentially be able to study or work from home. Although some sufferers may not be able to work full time hours due to concentration issues and the extra time we may require for our obsessive behaviours. Admittadly, some may also not be able to work at all but surely there is only one way to find out and that is for the government to provide this as a service to us.
The fact remains though that a certain number of us with Asperger's Syndrome (or Geek Syndrome as it has been referred to by the media on occasion) have overwhelmingly excellent computer skills. If we had the right help and incentive, including the government marketing us to the appropriate companies, then we could probably be earning pretty high figures and contributing to the economy, instead of taking from it.
As a matter of fact, currently at my University, I am having attendance issues partially due to the anxiety and stress of the anxiety, as well as the fact that I then get more unwell due to the stress. I asked for help from the University but I was told that there was no help available for me in the form that I had requested, due to University policy. Whilst of course the University is entitled to have policies which prevent disabled and non-disabled students alike from achieving, if it protects their intellectual property, I find it highly inconvenient and inconsiderate, not to mention uncompasionate.
Organisations urgently need to stop treating disabled and non-disabled persons alike, as they are not alike; they are fundimentally different in the way they can interact with society and with said organisations. They also need to stop treating all disabled persons alike, saying one disability policy is suitable for all disabled persons. Mental health is clearly very different from mobility issues, although of course they can be intwined.
I had asked if I would be able to employ someone, including a member of staff of the University, to record videos of the lectures that I was missing, and then I would be able to watch them, either at home or at University, to keep up with my programme of study. They told me that they have this policy as they are concerned about copyright or intellectual property issues, but if this was the case, then they simply could refuse to give me a copy of the videos and insist that I must watch it at the Unversity.
This makes it blatently obvious that disability laws are still not in tune if this sort of policy is allowed to exist, as the fact of the matter is that some people will be unable to attend lectures at University, so they should be allowed an alternative way to access the lecture. Organisations must be forced to make changes requested my disabled persons which are within reason, and within reason should include a simple request of recording lectures for viewing within the establishment in which it was recorded.
No right to reply?
Do you ever feel like you've been totally trolled online, over a period of magnitude that just goes to an unbearable extent? If so then welcome to my world.
Bloggers are well known for their trolling capability, lack of knowledge about the subjects they blog about and a general and quite massive lack of research. Shall we correct that? Perhaps even just a quick trip to Wikipedia would have lead to a much more coherent understandable and sense-making blogging extravaganza.
However due to the fact that bloggers tend to, in general, blog from thought rather than from research, it would seem that in effect, bloggers are keenly and callously set on flaming, lying, discrediting, and unjustly completely destroying the reputation of anyone who they have thought negatively about in the brief seconds of their life.
Even if I were to reply to some of the posts, I'm sure the comments section goes largely unread, and the interface usually does not provide a reasonable forum to make a prolonged argument or discussion of the topic.
Let's explore this further in my future posts.
Bloggers are well known for their trolling capability, lack of knowledge about the subjects they blog about and a general and quite massive lack of research. Shall we correct that? Perhaps even just a quick trip to Wikipedia would have lead to a much more coherent understandable and sense-making blogging extravaganza.
However due to the fact that bloggers tend to, in general, blog from thought rather than from research, it would seem that in effect, bloggers are keenly and callously set on flaming, lying, discrediting, and unjustly completely destroying the reputation of anyone who they have thought negatively about in the brief seconds of their life.
Even if I were to reply to some of the posts, I'm sure the comments section goes largely unread, and the interface usually does not provide a reasonable forum to make a prolonged argument or discussion of the topic.
Let's explore this further in my future posts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
