Miscellaneous Tech News
-
XenServer has XenCenter, XCP-NG has XCP-ng Console.
-
@dustinb3403 Figured it was just a matter of time. This is great.
-
@dustinb3403 said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
XenServer has XenCenter, XCP-NG has XCP-ng Console.
Awesome.
-
This is a really big deal.
-
@coliver said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
This is a really big deal.
I think small ISP's haven't looked at the entire market to find better products, such as ubiquiti. But, if they are forced out of the market (which I hope they are), then that could also drive up the prices for other manufacturers as demand increases.
-
@coliver I've already read the article, the goal, as far as Pai and the article describe it is an attempt to make it look like things more secure.
No testing of any kind should take place, but rather the approach of "it's not american made" must mean it's insecure. . .
-
More importantly it would seem the FCC wants ISPs to use equipment which is known to have security flaws and or has worked to create backdoors for the 3 letter agencies of the US.
-
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@coliver said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
This is a really big deal.
I think small ISP's haven't looked at the entire market to find better products, such as ubiquiti. But, if they are forced out of the market (which I hope they are), then that could also drive up the prices for other manufacturers as demand increases.
But banning products based on country of origin isn't a realistic means of security. Ignoring everything else this doesn't make sense from a security perspective.
-
@coliver Well it does create security, security in the sense that the US Government has backdoors installed in vendor hardware who've work with them to create the door . . . .
I guess. . IDK I'm so tired of this crap lately. . .
-
@dustinb3403 said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
More importantly it would seem the FCC wants ISPs to use equipment which is known to have security flaws and or has worked to create backdoors for the 3 letter agencies of the US.
That might be the case if they were mandating the use of particular vendors. Instead they're proposing removing support for two companies with concerning levels of PRC government ownership/influence. I don't know that I agree with the FCC proposal, but your statement doesn't make sense.
-
@kelly said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@dustinb3403 said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
More importantly it would seem the FCC wants ISPs to use equipment which is known to have security flaws and or has worked to create backdoors for the 3 letter agencies of the US.
That might be the case if they were mandating the use of particular vendors. Instead they're proposing removing support for two companies with concerning levels of PRC government ownership/influence. I don't know that I agree with the FCC proposal, but your statement doesn't make sense.
By eliminating choice, there is the obvious threat and real possibility that any hardware vendor an ISP wishes to use may be on the "no fly list" and thus force the vendor to use hardware that is known to be compromised.
-
Cisco is known to work with numerous 3 letter agencies to create backdoors that can be exploited to not only intercept traffic, but to also further infect a set of systems.
-
@dustinb3403 said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Cisco is known to work with numerous 3 letter agencies to create backdoors that can be exploited to not only intercept traffic, but to also further infect a set of systems.
I don't know that I would call restrictions on two vendors out of the dozens a removal of choice. If they mandated Cisco then I would accept your statement as accurate, but this is not the case.
-
@coliver said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@coliver said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
This is a really big deal.
I think small ISP's haven't looked at the entire market to find better products, such as ubiquiti. But, if they are forced out of the market (which I hope they are), then that could also drive up the prices for other manufacturers as demand increases.
But banning products based on country of origin isn't a realistic means of security. Ignoring everything else this doesn't make sense from a security perspective.
I bet a lot of Apple products will be in that category as well as the chips are not made here...
-
@dbeato said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@coliver said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@coliver said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
This is a really big deal.
I think small ISP's haven't looked at the entire market to find better products, such as ubiquiti. But, if they are forced out of the market (which I hope they are), then that could also drive up the prices for other manufacturers as demand increases.
But banning products based on country of origin isn't a realistic means of security. Ignoring everything else this doesn't make sense from a security perspective.
I bet a lot of Apple products will be in that category as well as the chips are not made here...
They're not actually banning based on country of origin. They're proposing banning gear made by Hauwei and ZTE.
-
@dbeato said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@coliver said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@nerdydad said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
@coliver said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
This is a really big deal.
I think small ISP's haven't looked at the entire market to find better products, such as ubiquiti. But, if they are forced out of the market (which I hope they are), then that could also drive up the prices for other manufacturers as demand increases.
But banning products based on country of origin isn't a realistic means of security. Ignoring everything else this doesn't make sense from a security perspective.
I bet a lot of Apple products will be in that category as well as the chips are not made here...
I don't know if the CoO matters as much as the Main Office matters in this case. . . These companies are based in China and make their product there.
-
-
Hills ditches Salesforce for Microsoft
-
@tim_g said in Miscellaneous Tech News:
Hills ditches Salesforce for Microsoft
I bet they are going to be sorry
-
