|
Post by beth on Jan 2, 2017 19:50:11 GMT -5
Here's another article tonight about Trump claiming to have more information about the hacks than the public now knows. You're not a network engineer, Beth. Why does your opinion matter? I'm in the conversation, which is open to all. It matters exactly as much as yours.
|
|
josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on Jan 2, 2017 20:05:08 GMT -5
It matters exactly as much as yours. I think not. You're as ignorant about malware as the rest of the idiots. You people will have your chance again in 2024.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Jan 2, 2017 20:14:35 GMT -5
It matters exactly as much as yours. I think not. You're as ignorant about malware as the rest of the idiots. You people will have your chance again in 2024. Oooo you never know, I've never been heavily anti-Trump. Just loathe Ryan, McConnell and Pence. You're right, I don't really understand TP's cryptic post. Maybe you and Fret can explain it for the non-techies tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jan 3, 2017 5:20:22 GMT -5
Here's another article tonight about Trump claiming to have more information about the hacks than the public now knows. You're not a network engineer, Beth. Why does your opinion matter? her opinion matters for the very simple reason she is a member of this message board which is for posters to post upon... and her opinion matters because she is a user of facilities such as waters/electricity a paying consumer too
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jan 3, 2017 5:26:06 GMT -5
in cahoots with Putin ? isn't that going a bit far ? does anyone seriously think that Trump is so involved with Putin that they would discuss pathetic hacking ? or that Trump is Russia lickspittle ? I would have Trump down as first and formost an American..no iffs no buts ..
|
|
|
Post by beth on Jan 3, 2017 8:26:08 GMT -5
in cahoots with Putin ? isn't that going a bit far ? does anyone seriously think that Trump is so involved with Putin that they would discuss pathetic hacking ? or that Trump is Russia lickspittle ? I would have Trump down as first and formost an American..no iffs no buts .. I said "if", mouse. You're nit-picking to find disagreement. You may think Trump is Mr. America but I'm far from sure about that. He's 70, or thereabouts. He's always been a me me me kinda guy. What is that about teaching an old dog new tricks?
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jan 3, 2017 9:22:30 GMT -5
no not nit picking...I don't understand how even an IF is contemplated.. and no I don't think he is Mr America ... but I don't see him as a deliberate enemy of his country either...
|
|
josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on Jan 3, 2017 10:28:58 GMT -5
I don't really understand TP's cryptic post. Of course not. You can't stand him. The current, most popular version of Internet Protocol is 4, commonly called IPv4. It was created to enable communication between trusted, and trustworthy, university researchers, and for the U.S. military. It was never intended for commercial or consumer use, which is why we have all these problems. Moreover, IPv4 addresses are not, as commonly believed, traceable. They are logical, not physical, addresses. At best you can narrow down a search to a country of origin, or even to an ISP, but never to a specific physical address -- and even then IP addresses can be spoofed (faked), to throw off investigations. The long-term solution is (a) IPv6, which is traceable down to the computer of origin, and (b) whitelisting. Democrats like neither of these options, so they're really not against malware or hacking.
|
|
|
Post by annaj26 on Jan 3, 2017 10:53:06 GMT -5
I don't really understand TP's cryptic post. Of course not. You can't stand him. The current, most popular version of Internet Protocol is 4, commonly called IPv4. It was created to enable communication between trusted, and trustworthy, university researchers, and for the U.S. military. It was never intended for commercial or consumer use, which is why we have all these problems. Moreover, IPv4 addresses are not, as commonly believed, traceable. They are logical, not physical, addresses. At best you can narrow down a search to a country of origin, or even to an ISP, but never to a specific physical address -- and even then IP addresses can be spoofed (faked), to throw off investigations. The long-term solution is (a) IPv6, which is traceable down to the computer of origin, and (b) whitelisting. Democrats like neither of these options, so they're really not against malware or hacking. lololololo Joe, you're putting "Democrats" under a big blanket there. Here's a "true" erxample. I was in a lecture class where the prof was not well liked for good reason. He was a bully. Grades went down, class attendance was bad. Then, the head of the department sent in a "spy" to see what was going on. That lasted a month and all of a sudden, we had a new professor. It does not matter how good the grasp of the subject is if people don't want to stop long enough to hear the speaker, does it. As Donlad Trump would say, "Sad".
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Jan 3, 2017 11:21:47 GMT -5
I’ve looked for the posting of TruePatriot that has been referred to and had assumed that it was in this thread, but I couldn’t find it. The closest I could find was one in the thread Experts Comment on Accusations of Russian Hacking and if that is it, it is quite clear in meaning.
Add this to Joseph’s postings and this entire issue is a tempest in a tea pot as to the Russians.
After all has been said, all countries with the technical capability hack into systems around the world and that includes the United States as a hacker. Do we like it? No one likes it! However, the smart thing to do is to protect your own systems. At the very least, to address such concerns the main system computers should not be accessible through the internet. That may not stop invading systems but certainly will increase the protection.
In the case of Vermont, it appears that only a single desk top was invaded by some software (malware?). There is nothing new here except the software used to hack into some system is continually improved and the steps taken to improve defensive efforts.
In the early 1970s we had such challenges and they have only evolved in sophistication through the years. Sometimes it can be quite innocent. I remember once where we were using early forms of computer to computer communication and one computer was in a small town that still had telephone mechanical relays and live operators and we would have to go through the operators to establish the linkage. Every once in a while one of those operators would listen in just to hear what a computer sounded like. Of course, as soon as the operator tapped in the link was broke. It was frustrating and it took a while to figure out what was happening but it was funny and no evil intent was intended.
The main point is that protecting one’s system is the first and primary step.
|
|
|
Post by Sysop3 on Jan 3, 2017 12:53:17 GMT -5
I’ve looked for the posting of TruePatriot that has been referred to and had assumed that it was in this thread, but I couldn’t find it. The closest I could find was one in the thread Experts Comment on Accusations of Russian Hacking and if that is it, it is quite clear in meaning. I think this is the opne, Men. It IS difficult to grasp the details for anybody without a tech background. gatesofbabylon.com/thread/22412/experts-comment-accusations-russian-hacking
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Jan 3, 2017 17:42:19 GMT -5
I’ve looked for the posting of TruePatriot that has been referred to and had assumed that it was in this thread, but I couldn’t find it. The closest I could find was one in the thread Experts Comment on Accusations of Russian Hacking and if that is it, it is quite clear in meaning. I think this is the one, Men. It IS difficult to grasp the details for anybody without a tech background. gatesofbabylon.com/thread/22412/experts-comment-accusations-russian-hackingThank you Sysop3. That is the one I was guessing that it might be. Thankfully I guess that I am still up to date enough to understand. My misspent younger years must not have been as misspent as I thought they were.
|
|