nullrouted

https://www.insynchq.com/

Use www.dnsmadeeasy.com and then dns.he.net as your secondary dns service or vice-versa. They will do transfers/updates from each other and work just fine.

It doesn't always require root privileges...for instance if some program (wireshark) changes the permissions on your loopback. There are other questions there but I'll probably dig into it later.

The thing I guess I would say bothers me about your post is you just say well, if a person gets access to a machine it is basically all over which isn't necessarily the case. Even if they get root access we don't want to make it easy, right? Thats why we encrypt databases or in certain cases storage at rest so even if the hacker has root access it is sure going to be hard.

1Password can never absolutely protect against an attack when an attacker has root. But they can make it harder then just dumping out lo0. Level of effort does account for something.

Author here:

Thank you for responding. The reason I wrote this up is not to let people oh my god the world is ending but to let them know, hey if you are using the browser extension there is clear text passwords being sent over the loopback, if you don't like that then don't use their extensions.

You have made very well informed arguments about how hard it is to protect if someone has access to your machine, specifically elevated. But the argument to me seems kind of like "well, it's hard to protect against then so we just decided to not do anything at all." It seems like one other password manager company did something, so why wouldn't you?

Can you explain why it would require a pairing request every time? Couldn't you just pair it once and then be done with it? Can you explain the other approaches?

18% of their export economy is, which is a pretty large amount.

http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/jpn/

He'll try it once....refusing to comply with a sobriety test means the loss of a license for a year in most states.

So I work in information security and I'll tell you i haven't seen good standards around this. In some places IT people regularly look at emails or web traffic, which i think is wrong.

When I go into a company I make sure we put a policy in place that to review an employees emails / web traffic / devices we need to have Legal and HR sign off on it unless the person being investigated is part of one of those groups then it is one group and an executive.

This covers me from legal/HR fallout and it covers the employees because they know we aren't just sneaking around looking at their stuff, it creates trust.

That cannot be true or you could never do proper security or investigations. How would you know if an employee machine was compromised if you absolutely cannot read their internet traffic? Sometimes you actually have to dump traffic an analyze it with wireshark to figure out something is wrong.

Time to buy magic 8 ball stock as Yahoo is certainly increasing demand.

I sure hope they aren't giving you their work credentials....geezus, talk about an infosec nightmare.

That is actually pretty hilarious....I wonder if they grabbed it because of potential issues with the name or mainly because of mistypes.

We grabbed quite a few names due to people misspelling the domain so we could direct them to the proper site, never really cared about the <name>sucks.com stuff.

You equate a site trying to compensate themselves by showing you an AD you should be seeing for viewing their content with someone creating a program that maliciously alters your computer and can take control of it? Seriously? Would you like to retract that statement as hyperbole or are you still wanting to stand by it?

Always on scrubbing has a number of factors depending on the provider you use. All charge for clean traffic but some charge for number of netblocks/ASNs, number of routers, number of attacks mitigated, etc. It can get extremely expensive depending on your traffic needs and all the other variables. Paying an extra $250,000+ year for 2 Gb/s of traffic is extremely expensive to me.

Cloudflare is a WAF/Proxy that can handle DDoS, it isn't a DDoS specific product. If your actual network space is getting hit (e.g. 8.8.8.8) cloudflare will not help you.

It however does meet the requirement I have which is a lightning port which means I'll probably buy it bump and all. Being able to see the juice left from IOS is also an excellent feature.

tl:dr Used cloudflare for DNS and Level3/Blacklotus for network filtering.

In DDoS attacks you have three models: On-Prem: Buy hardware and big fat internet pipes to filter traffic (expensive / time \ resrouce intensive) Hybrid: On-Prem devices that can mitigate X/Mbps and then starts announcing your routes after X to their cloud scrubbing centers which can filter it at a much higher capacity (best option) Cloud: Full on filtering by a provider where all your traffic goes through their scrubbing centers full time (usually adds latency, extremely expensive)

The hybrid model is the best and what most companies are going to as it allows you to filter smaller attacks out with little cost as well as scaling up to large 100 Gb/s+ attacks without having to buy massive amounts of hardware/transit.

Seriously I don't think you really understand the implications here or you aren't taking them seriously, if you did you sure wouldn't be talking about this so nonchalantly. You should seriously shut this down before you get some young programmers/admins fired or worse.

Also from your FAQ what the hell is "strong level encryption", can you not name it? Can you go into the extreme technical details of what encryption you are using, how data is protected in memory and at rest?

You are giving all your bash history to a third party, that is incredibly scary and if you can't see the security implications then you need to rethink your product.

It will be brought into Airwatch and used exclusively for that.

Thats why you have multiple hubs and multiple client servers....redundancy!

What high quality carrier would you recommend for Detroit? They can go to Cogent, HE, Level3 or one of their competing Telcos. There is nothing wrong with using Cogent/HE for their eyeball network, it gives them cheap connectivity and allows Cogent/HE to balance their traffic ratios Win/Win.

Also to note Google Fiber uses a lot of nLayer/GTT for their eyeball traffic.

There are quite a few solutions to this: www.staminus.net

www.arbor.net

www.radware.com

www.voxility.com

That is cloud backup...not cloud storage and they limit you.

Those are cloud backup....not cloud storage and usually allow you to backup a single computer. It's not like you can upload 50 TB to them.

I think your last statement says it all "for free" being the keywords. They aren't making money off of you and you are actually a cost center. So someone decided it is better to reduce that cost. I think it is a horrible PR move but I always get a little chuckle when "free" users complain and say they are switching to another "free" service where they will pay them no money as well. The purpose of the free service is to hook you in an upsell you and it sounds like Microsoft is betting that they can turn some free customers into paid ones with this move without hurting their service/brand too much.

You cannot offer unlimited storage when you offer a cloud storage product. Bitcasa found out the hard way and now OneDrive is taking the same lesson, people will abuse it.

I think any company has the right to change their business model and/or product offerings. The one thing I'm a bit confused about is why are they decreasing their free storage tier and taking away the camera roll bonus? To me that just seems like a really bad PR move. In a similar fashion Box did the same type of thing way back in the day and while that was their right I still won't use them to this day.

Sure I use SSD Persistent disk and the latency is pretty horrible with the throughput being worse, it is much slower than a similar AWS EBS volume.

--- /dev/sda1 (device 20.0 GiB) ioping statistics --- 13 requests completed in 12.5 s, 161 iops, 647.9 KiB/s min/avg/max/mdev = 213 us / 6.2 ms / 18.2 ms / 6.0 ms

This is pretty bad, everything on AWS is under a millisecond.

I submit feedback through the feedback links in the panel and on the product forums. Since you folks don't offer any other way of communicating.

Can you tell me why your disk latency and throughput is so horrible, even compared to AWS? I've seen ioping spikes in the 7-8 ms range and it has far worse throughput than AWS.

Also any idea if your folks are ever going to let people set RDNS records for their IPs? It has been requested but no one at GCE seems to communicate.

Don't forget fantasy sports tracking!

I would seriously take a look at Eset (www.eset.com) and while I know Symantec had a really poor reputation their stuff seems a bit more solid these days. Check out av-test.org or av-comparatives for more info.