|
Microsoft is removing its OneDrive storage limits for Office 365 subscribers. If you’re an Office 365 Home, Personal, or University subscriber then OneDrive storage will be unlimited in the coming months as Microsoft rolls out its changes to every account. Finally someone gives me a space to back up my Internets!
|
|
|
|
|
Once you have all your stuff there; they'll increase the price.
|
|
|
|
|
As I commented elsewhere, along with Google, Apple, and Amazon, MS is one of the four companies I don't expect to back peddle from offering an unlimited tier for consumer users. They know the PR backlash from doing so would be huge, and even if they flubbed their estimate about how many users went crazy with uploading files, the server cost above what they budgeted being subsidized by the vast majority of lighter users is a much smaller number.
I do however expect them to be pickier about the consumer unlimited plan being for consumers and not business customers (who must buy metered data) when a pro photographer/videographer starts trying to upload a TB of raws/video a month.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft is reportedly pondering an ARM-based flavor of Windows Server. The idea may just make sense. Yeah, multiple CPU architecture support for Windows Server. Crazy talk.
|
|
|
|
|
ZD Net article wrote: Meanwhile, Intel is trying to break ARM's lock on mobile.
Sounds like a cage match. "Intel breaks ARM bar, spins around, drives the opponent to the mat. ARM is dazed but this ain't over yet."
|
|
|
|
|
Some rather crazy ideas[^].
A new time waster.
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
---
The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.
|
|
|
|
|
Eclipse Cloud Development initiative looks to host browser-based development tools in the cloud For those who wondered, "Can they make Eclipse any slower?"
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: For those who wondered, "Can they make Eclipse any slower?"
Seriously caused uproarious LOL!!
And, to answer, I think it can only theoretically get any slower since, according to human perception Eclipse has entirely stopped while loading / building / spinning / churning etc.
Good news: things have to get better. Bad news: They can't get any worse.
|
|
|
|
|
The idea that computer users should use long, complex passwords is one of computer security's sacred cows. Or maybe admins could stop allowing people to download the full list of passwords?
|
|
|
|
|
I do wonder which cows aren't sacred.
|
|
|
|
|
The pink ones with the curly tails.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah. Chop them up into lovely pink burgers! (Pink with straight tails though - totally sacred)
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Same answer as every other time the question is asked: yes, we do.
Now, they explain why we use long and strong passwords in the second paragraph. Bravo for that. Next they claim that since people ignore security that the preceeding advice is wrong.
So, if people forget to lock the front-door, the writer recommends using something simpeler? Implying a short string is preferable over a long chain?  Attackers cannot subject a system to too many guesses because of the amount of activity their attack generates. An attacker sending one guess per second per account would likely generate thousands or even tens of thousands of times the normal level of login traffic. That is assuming that they try each password on each account. I would not recommend writing complete articles recommending a security-strategy based on assumptions.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Implying a short string is preferable over a long chain?
If a short one is memorized... IMHO is definitively better than a post it on the monitor with the complicated one
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Nelek wrote: a post it on the monitor
That's not the password's fault.
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: That's not the password's fault
I know... and that is exactly the point, the biggest security risk are the users themselves.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Nelek wrote: If a short one is memorized... IMHO is definitively better than a post it on the
monitor with the complicated one
Longer does not mean more complex; and you don't have to store what you can calculate or derive.
The first phrase of a song. Two half phrases from a book. The top five curses that come to mind when hitting your thumb with a hammer. The main-ingredients for chilli.
Replace the spaces with some other separator of your choosing. Mix languages if you speak more than one, or replace/omit certain characters.
In1het1begin1there1was1nothing1was1explodierte.
Unless you have a password-manager, then one can simply generate a GUID 
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
You don't need to explain me how to construct passwords. Explain it to the one 60+ years old (whatever you want to imagine), that doesn't even remember the plate number of his/her car, his own telephone, the PIN of the credit card...
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Nelek wrote: Explain it to the one 60+ years old
If it works for someone @59, I do not see why it would no longer work @60.
Nelek wrote: that doesn't even remember the plate number of his/her car, his own telephone,
the PIN of the credit card...
Does this hypothetical person remember his own name?
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Even with the post-it, access to the password is restricted to people with physical access to the machine. A weak password is guessable by the whole world.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
The answer is no. You just need to program the security system intellegently.
It's quite simple, you only allow x amount of wrong password attempts and further attempts from the same IP address are blocked (but not blocked from different IP addresses - that stops hackers from provoking lock-outs)
|
|
|
|
|
Length is not only required to make brute-force attacks harder; it also makes it harder to copy the password by simply looking over a shoulder. It is relatively easy to do for anything that consists of a just a few characters, and a little practice gets you a long way.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
No. Long passwords waste users time and are not necessary. If you actually read the article it explains why.
|
|
|
|
|
I did and refuted the statements with arguments.
Did I miss any? If yes, I'd like to know, as it is actually the equivalent of installing a Raspberry Pi on your front door to open it with a "secret knock". Any argument in favor of that should be easily refuted.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
No, you didn't. The article states enforcing a password try limit ( IP specific, as I mentioned) would stop brute force attacks and thus save the user from requireing to memorise unwieldly long passwords. You have not refuted this at all.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
