Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | floam's commentslogin

It’s both at the same time: a powerful, uniquely dangerous threat

only they can restrain it (with great effort)

Like a circus lion tamer, exaggerating every snarl and flash of teeth, mugging for the crowd about how only he can contain the bloodthirsty beast he bred and trains.


> only they can restrain it (with great effort)

More to the point: we need your help to restrain it, and we'll cooperate with and advise you fully in setting up a framework to restrain the whole industry.


You know that lions actually do maim and kill their handlers all the time right?

> If you're growing onions in the backyard, you don't need a router. If you're writing emails, you're gonna need to send them through a router or two before someone reads

That’s what the cable company wants you to believe. We sent their damned boxes back. They wanted us renting a modem that never hangs up, then buying a router just so our own computers could talk to each other. Mine used to call yours directly over the telephone!

Now there’s a computer inside the modem, another pretending to be a router, and a mess of switches, gateways, and subnet masks to do what two modems and a telephone number used to accomplish.

They took the party line, put it on a television channel, called it broadband, and convinced everybody to rent the equipment.

In my day, when somebody tried to break into your computer, you could hear the bastard dialing. And when you were done with the Internet, you hung up. Now they want you connected twenty-four hours a day.

Just wait until somebody breaks into your television through that cable. You’ll wish you’d kept your rabbit ears.


I for one find it simpler and better to have a single router for multiple computers to talk among themselves, rather than daisy chaining serial ports (or how did you accomplish that back in the day ie before Ethernet?)


> I for one find it simpler and better to have a single router for multiple computers to talk among themselves

That's not what a router does. A router provides communication between two (or, theoretically, more) different networks.

Multiple computers talking among themselves would generally all be on the same network. (Or, if they're not, you'd put a whole mesh of redundant routers between them.)


Sorry, I was using the term router loosely; personally, I have a CPE connected directly to a managed switch, and a Linux PC running as a router on a stick, then some more switches and wireless APs.


You don’t give your battery a break while you sleep?


I only charge my phone at my office desk typically. So I'll go a whole weekend without charging.


They don’t seem to be in contact with the people who actually fixed it.


I don’t follow. Fair use is a copyright defense, and nobody is suggesting distillation attacks are just a copyright violation are they?

Aren’t they alleging these other companies directly entered into a contract and violated the terms, and in cases where question, answer pairs were obtained without such agreement, it was accomplished by outright wire fraud or theft?


Are you suggesting that worldwide copyright violation is more acceptable than contract breach between companies?


com.apple.private.uexc as well?


Same id numbers you use when downloading them. While you might know what a particular URL is available in, I’m not sure I’ve seen an encyclopedic enumeration of the possibilities


That’s surprisingly self-aware, and encouraging.


The article mentioned fertilizer - that’s not straightforward to control and precisely account for.


Yes, to fully fix a certain class of bug on their infra.


Do you know any more about it or have a link where I can read more?


I’ll try to add more later, but it is believed that multiple times, a bug in some random API has allowed for the “hidden” Apple account to be revealed because they resolve hide my emails to the original internally. Using a separate namespace would be the universal fix.

A mitigation for the cause of https://www.404media.co/apple-hide-my-email-vulnerability-re...


This doesn't follow. The bounce message used to (effectively) say,

> [email protected] forwards to [email protected]

If they switched the new domain and did nothing else, it would say:

> [email protected] forwards to [email protected]

That's no better. Fixing that privacy leak is unrelated to whatever the destination domain is.


No, using a different domain makes it easy to across the board add a rule: don’t treat as Apple ID.


I'm not sure if I'm following. Apple is capable of creating a lookup table, or an atomic database read query.


https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48559935

If you dig more you could find the bug, but AFAIK it was that if you sent a large attachment, the bounce email would contain your real address.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: