So, McAfee identifies a single node as "associated" with the incident: li107-40[dot]members[dot]linode[dot]com. And Linode has a post which specifically references a single node being associated but under Google's control and not malicious control at all times.
Doesn't appear to me that there's any contradiction. There is no evidence that a Linode was used for anything malicious. There is evidence that a Linode was used.
On the contrary, I think they understand exactly what this site is about and are happy to demonize it, possibly to the extent that they can get the powers that be to introduce restrictions on online video so that we can all go back to getting our spoon-fed media.
I don't think ChatRoulette needs anyone's help in regards to demonizing it. It's pretty much as it was portrayed. If anything the Daily Show made it look better (The one time I tried it I saw double the cock and not a single mainstream news personality)
"I sorta find it amusing that McAfee released a PDF of the white paper, considering that Abode’s PDF Reader is also a popular attack vector. It’s like railing again IE6 being insecure, but using it to post the message that IE6 is insecure."
-From the comments in the original article.
I found the above interesting because it suggests to me one of the fundamental principles of security: we must necessarily try to improve our security from inside of systems which are already insecure.
We could say that no one should ever use an IE with a zero-day vulnerability. And that no one should use pdf because it can be an attack vector. Or view jpegs because there have been embedded executable code vulnerabilities. Or run executable code because sometimes it is malicious.
Security is always a matter of trade-offs. One can never build a house which cannot be broken into but one can build a house that is not worth breaking into.
Sounds like there were a number of vulnerabilities here. It also sounds like improving default settings is one of the best solutions here. But it's clearly not a justification for no longer using SCM, or pdf. Perhaps for old IE.
I've been reading your posts on this thread with fascination. Where exactly were you trained, if I might ask? The streets of Compton? No offense intended, it's just that "heavily injured by a baseball bat during training" doesn't sound like national military to me...
Some initial training in the uk with the military. A little in Brazil (that was more for fun) and a week in India. The last was where I got brained with the bat. My fault. It was the last day and I tripped while practicing defence.
I find it somewhat hilarious that you had a clear demonstration that accidents can happen in fights, yet you still advocate escalating to violence before verifying if the violence can be avoided altogether.
I hope his overconfident demeanor isn't giving you ideas about "winning" knife fights. It's very easy to talk tough. Not getting stabbed is a lot harder.
Because success is a problem to be prepared for.
Also because Primer is awesome.