Advanced

Insecure about Being Unsecure

Posted by bob on · 10 comments
Linux Journal
Mail this story
Print this story

There have been epic battles over whether "insecure" or "unsecure" should be used when referring to computer security.

Full Story

  Nav
» Read more about: Story Type: News Story; Groups: Community, Linux

» Get new stories by e-mail: nightly or as they are published

« Return to the newswire homepage

  Related stories
» More like this

Comments (10)

Linux Journal wrote: We're not far from a time when a hacker could infiltrate our toaster to ruin breakfast.


I don't plan on toasting anything unless I can reach it fast enough to butter it and have the delicious fat melt and absorb into the toasted product. So, my toasters will remain purely resistive heating elements arranged in vertically aligned rows and timed with a simple circuit.

And if the market for 'dumb' toasters becomes too small for vendors to support, I'll use my fire pit and enjoy the stars and meteorite showers.
I agree, dotmatrix, and I will also not be connecting my appliances to the net.
Quoting:I went to my first computer conference at the New York Hilton about 20 years ago. When somebody there predicted the market for microprocessors would eventually be in the millions, someone else said, "Where are they all going to go? It's not like you need a computer in every doorknob!"

Years later, I went back to the same hotel. I noticed the room keys had been replaced by electronic cards you slide into slots in the doors.

There was a computer in every doorknob.

-- Danny Hillis
> There was a computer in every doorknob.

And now when there's a power failure you have to worry about being locked out of your room with no way to open it.
> There was a computer in every doorknob.

It's more than that...

The better hotel cards are actually smart cards. Those contain a processor and an OS as well.

>And now when there's a power failure you have to worry about being locked out of your room with no way to open it.

If I were designing the system, I would include a battery or generator powered backup source. And I would default the doors to open if there is no power. My guess is, the real systems have been designed around a total power failure.
> My guess is, the real systems have been designed around a total power failure.

I have personally at least one that wasn't. Why do you think I used that example? Now that was several years ago, and hopefully they've learned their lessons.
>I have personally at least one that wasn't.

I was thinking that the locked doors would present a safety hazard. However, on second thought, the doors would only need to open from the inside... so.. maybe default to locked is the safer option, inconvenient but safer for those in a room as well as the possessions contained therein.
seatex wrote:I agree, dotmatrix, and I will also not be connecting my appliances to the net.


That's what you think.

http://blog.electricitybid.com/index.php/2013/07/19/smart-me...
Smart Meters and State Control over personal electricity use:

Hopefully most of these totalitarian ideas will be thoroughly trashed by the incoming administration.

Let the wailing and gnashing of Big Green teeth begin!

Little Green can stay. Little Green is about good sensible and cost effective stewardship of natural resources. I like that.

Quoting:That's what you think.

http://blog.electricitybid.com/index.php/2013/07/19/smart-me...


I do not have a smart meter - was able to opt out here in Texas.

Post a comment

A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.

Your message:
|||||
10
Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help

Sign up and post (it is free)  or  Log in and post