Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

DARPA Wants Distributed Network of Deep Sea Storage Units

Unknown Lamer posted about 2 years ago | from the release-the-non-lethal-military-assets dept.

The Military 81

Zothecula writes "DARPA has seen the future of naval warfare and it's falling upward. As part of an effort to reduce the logistics of sending equipment into trouble areas, the agency's Upward Falling Payloads project is aimed at developing storage capsules capable of remaining on the deep seabed for years. These would contain non-lethal military assets that could be deployed on the spot years in advance and rise to the surface as needed." Possible side benefit: they need to research communications systems reliable enough to command the deep sea capsules when needed.

cancel ×

81 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Use Concrete .... (2)

pollarda (632730) | about 2 years ago | (#42604899)

Concrete becomes stronger under compression. There was some experimentation among the smaller nations of the world a few years ago to build inexpensive submarines using concrete hulls since concrete has such good compressive strength. There is no reason why concrete wouldn't make an excellent storage container.

Re:Use Concrete .... (1)

cslibby (626565) | about 2 years ago | (#42605031)

Except it is too porous to protect anything from corrosion.

Re:Use Concrete .... (3, Interesting)

Antipater (2053064) | about 2 years ago | (#42605073)

That was my first thought too, but wp [wikipedia.org] says otherwise.

Re:Use Concrete .... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42605917)

WordPress?

You douches and your retarded abbreviations. You're just too lazy to spend the extra 500ms to actually key the word. Or research a reliable source for that matter.

Re:Use Concrete .... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42606563)

That was my first thought too, but wp [wikipedia.org] says otherwise

Not anymore it doesn't.

Re:Use Concrete .... (1)

specific (963862) | about 2 years ago | (#42607983)

That was my first thought too, but wp [wikipedia.org] says otherwise

Not anymore it doesn't.

LMAO

Re:Use Concrete .... (1)

Copper Nikus (1615089) | about 2 years ago | (#42605991)

Concrete has a very poor compressive strength compared to many metals.

Let me get this straight (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42604917)

DARPA wants to invent robots that are designed to "rise up"? Sounds like a pretty dangerous precedent to me.

Re:Let me get this straight (4, Funny)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 2 years ago | (#42605413)

RELEASE THE KRAKEN!

Re:Let me get this straight (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42606539)

Why'd ya pull yer resume off LinkedIn Jeremiah Cornelius -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3368135&cid=42529887 [slashdot.org] Is it since someone spotted you're not only a "San Fran 'Man'" (a fella is more like it) and that you can't even spell what you allegedly used to do for a job? It's correctly spelled PENETRATION, not "pentration" as you misspelled it there in front of 1,000's no doubt (one would think an anal penetration man from San Fran'd know how THAT is spelled at least, lol). Jeremiah Cornelius likes to troll others -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2238996&cid=36457426 [slashdot.org] , but can't handle it when it's done in return showing he is illiterate, and that much is obvious. You fail troll. How many years did you leave your resume up there with that basic literacy fail on it? Yes you have been trolled. You like? I wager you don't since you removed your faulty resume (on the very thing you took pride in that you can't even spell correctly most likely indicating you weren't any good at it either).

Re:Let me get this straight (0)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 2 years ago | (#42622423)

The FBI has been after him, since he began promoting usage of the Windows hosts file to evade tracking and detection. They have a black mark next to his name and are looking for enough evidence for a "material support of terrorism charge" based on messages like these:

[bollocksquote]

Want to REALLY know what a HOSTS file can do for you, the end user (or corporate environs) & how/why itâ(TM)s BETTER THAN AdBlock &/or DNS servers alone? Take a peek here guys & enjoy -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1913212&cid=34576182 [slashdot.org]

Iâ(TM)ve been using them for BETTER SPEED, BETTER ONLINE LAYERED SECURITY, & to an extent? Even BETTER âoeANONYMITYâ (vs. DNS request logs &/or DNSBL)â¦

Iâ(TM)ve been doing this since 1997 or thereabouts, & itâ(TM)s just like putting a âoeTurboâ onto an engine in a vehicle (w/out the âoeturbo lagâ).

P.S.=> And, yes, they really DO work (something âoeoldâ folks seemed to have forgotten, that lets YOU get âoemore bang for the buckâ in what you pay every month for ISP/BSP online access by also making you NOT download adbanners as well if you like (which have been found w/ malicious code in them MANY TIMES since 2004 (see URL above))⦠& since ISP/BSPâ(TM)s like AT&T & others are moving to a âoepay by bandwith use/bandwith capâ type scenarios?? Blocking out adbanners can see you have a gain there not only speed, or potential security, but also BANDWIDTH CONSERVATION!

IF youâ(TM)re a security pro & a network admin, then what the HELL is stopping you from using login scripts to migrate HOSTS files that are updated across all your network nodes/clients/workstations then?? HOSTS are good for stopping domainname/hostname based links (which IS what the majority of malware makers use, period)

I know â" been populating a HOSTS file this way since 1997, & they use host/domain names, because they are RECYCLABLE, unlike IP addresses that once known as bad, get shut down & turned off⦠whereas a host/domain name means since you own it, you can go to yet another hosting provider & startup a botnet server or maliciously scripted site, in minutes, all over again & with the SAME domain/hosts name â" the RBN (Russian Business Network) was notorious for it⦠(& today, CoreFlood botnet did the same until the FEDS took over their C&C servers)

If youâ(TM)re a âoesecurity proâ as YOU allegedly SAY you are, you didnâ(TM)t seem to note anything I stated, & youâ(TM)d also have noted that LAYERED SECURITY IS THE BEST THING WE HAVE GOING vs. these maliciously scripted threats out there today (& that means using HOSTS files in combination with other tools such as antivirus/antimalware, firewalls, HIPS & more).

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added layered security:

1.) Adblock blocks ads in only 1 browser family (Disclaimer: Opera now has an AdBlock addon (now that Opera has addons above widgets), but I am not certain the same people make it as they do for FF or Chrome etc.).

2.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 4-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html [networkworld.com] [networkworld.com] for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions via NSLOOKUP, PINGS, &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

6.) HOSTS files protect you vs. DNS-poisoning &/or the Kaminsky flaw in DNS servers, and allow you to get to sites reliably vs. things like the Chinese are doing to DNS -> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/29/1755230/Chinese-DNS-Tampering-a-Real-Threat-To-Outsiders [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]

7.) AdBlock doesn't let you block out known bad sites or servers that are known to be maliciously scripted, hosts can and many reputable lists for this exist:

GOOD INFORMATION ON MALWARE BEHAVIOR LISTING BOTNET C&C SERVERS + MORE (AS WELL AS REMOVAL LISTS FOR HOSTS):

http://ddanchev.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com] [blogspot.com]
  http://www.malware.com.br/lists.shtml [malware.com.br] [malware.com.br]
  http://www.stopbadware.org/ [stopbadware.org] [stopbadware.org]
  http://blog.fireeye.com/ [fireeye.com] [fireeye.com]
  http://mtc.sri.com/ [sri.com] [sri.com]
  http://news.netcraft.com/ [netcraft.com] [netcraft.com]
  http://www.shadowserver.org/ [shadowserver.org] [shadowserver.org]

REGULARLY UPDATED HOSTS FILES SITES (reputable/reliable sources):

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm [mvps.org] [mvps.org]
  http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ [someonewhocares.org] [someonewhocares.org]
  http://hostsfile.org/hosts.html [hostsfile.org] [hostsfile.org]
  http://hostsfile.mine.nu/downloads/ [hostsfile.mine.nu] [hostsfile.mine.nu]
  http://hosts-file.net/?s=Download [hosts-file.net] [hosts-file.net]
  https://zeustracker.abuse.ch/monitor.php?filter=online [abuse.ch] [abuse.ch]
Spybot "Search & Destroy" IMMUNIZE feature (fortifies HOSTS files with KNOWN bad servers blocked)

And yes: Even SLASHDOT &/or The Register help!

(Via articles on security (when the source articles they use are "detailed" that is, & list the servers/sites involved in attempting to bushwhack others online that is... not ALL do!)).

2 examples thereof in the past I have used, & noted it there, are/were:

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1898692&cid=34473398 [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]
  http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1896216&cid=34458500 [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]

8.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server & back to you).

9.) AdBlock & DNS servers are programs, and subject to bugs programs can get. Hosts files are merely a filter and not a program, thus not subject to bugs of the nature just discussed.

10.) Hosts files don't eat up CPU cycles like AdBlock does while it parses a webpages' content, nor as much as a DNS server does while it runs.

11.) HOSTS files are EASILY user controlled, obtained (for reliable ones -> http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm [mvps.org] [mvps.org] ) & edited too, via texteditors like Windows notepad.exe or Linux nano (etc.)

12.) With Adblock you had better be able to code javascript to play with its code. With hosts you don't even need source to control it (edit, update, delete, insert of new entries via a text editor).

13.) Hosts files are easily secured via using MAC/ACL &/or Read-Only attributes applied.

14.) Custom HOSTS files also speed you up, unlike anonymous proxy servers systems variations (like TOR, or other "highly anonymous" proxy server list servers typically do, in the severe speed hit they often have a cost in).

15.) HOSTS files usage lets you avoid being charged on some ISP/BSP's (OR phone providers) "pay as you use" policy http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/12/08/2012243/FCC-Approving-Pay-As-You-Go-Internet-Plans [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org] , because you are using less bandwidth (& go faster doing so no less) by NOT hauling in adbanner content and processing it (which can lead to infestation by malware/malicious script, in & of itself -> http://apcmag.com/microsoft_apologises_for_serving_malware.htm [apcmag.com] [apcmag.com] ).

16.) If/when ISP/BSP's decide to go to -> FCC Approving Pay-As-You-Go Internet Plans: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/12/08/2012243/FCC-Approving-Pay-As-You-Go-Internet-Plans [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org] your internet bill will go DOWN if you use a HOSTS file for blocking adbanners as well as maliciously scripted hacker/cracker malware maker sites too (after all - it's your money & time online downloading adbanner content & processing it)

Plus, your adbanner content? Well, it may also be hijacked with malicious code too mind you:

---

HACKERS USE ADBANNERS ON MAJOR SITES TO HIJACK YOUR SYSTEM: -> http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2007/11/doubleclick [wired.com] [wired.com] [wired.com]

THE NEXT AD YOU CLICK MAY BE A VIRUS: -> http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]

NY TIMES INFECTED WITH MALWARE ADBANNER: -> http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/09/13/2346229 [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]

MICROSOFT HIT BY MALWARES IN ADBANNERS: -> http://apcmag.com/microsoft_apologises_for_serving_malware.htm [apcmag.com] [apcmag.com] [apcmag.com]

ADBANNERS SLOW DOWN THE WEB: -> http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/11/30/166218 [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]

2 MAJOR AD NETWORKS FOUND SERVING MALWARE: -> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/12/13/0128249/Two-Major-Ad-Networks-Found-Serving-Malware [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]

---

As my list "multiple evidences thereof" as to adbanners & viruses + the fact they slow you down & cost you more (from reputable & reliable sources no less)).

17.) Per point #16, a way to save some money: ANDROID phones can also use the HOSTS FILE TO KEEP DOWN BILLABLE TIME ONLINE, via the ADB dev. tool, & mounting ANDROID OS' system mountpoint for system/etc as READ + WRITE/ADMIN-ROOT PERMISSIONS, then copying your new custom HOSTS over the old one using ADB PULL/ADB PUSH to do so (otherwise ANDROID complains of "this file cannot be overwritten on production models of this Operating System", or something very along those lines - this way gets you around that annoyance along with you possibly having to clear some space there yourself if you packed it with things!).

18.) ADBLOCK CAN BE DETECTED FOR: See here on that note -> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars [arstechnica.com] [arstechnica.com]

HOSTS files are NOT BLOCKABLE by websites, as was tried on users by ARSTECHNICA (and it worked, proving HOSTS files are a better solution for this because they cannot be blocked & detected for, in that manner), to that websites' users' dismay:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT FROM ARSTECHNICA THEMSELVES:

----

An experiment gone wrong - By Ken Fisher | Last updated March 6, 2010 11:11 AM

"Starting late Friday afternoon we conducted a 12 hour experiment to see if it would be possible to simply make content disappear for visitors who were using a very popular ad blocking tool. Technologically, it was a success in that it worked. Ad blockers, and only ad blockers, couldn't see our content."

and

"Our experiment is over, and we're glad we did it because it led to us learning that we needed to communicate our point of view every once in a while. Sure, some people told us we deserved to die in a fire. But that's the Internet!"

Thus, as you can see? Well - THAT all "went over like a lead balloon" with their users in other words, because Arstechnica was forced to change it back to the old way where ADBLOCK still could work to do its job (REDDIT however, has not, for example). However/Again - this is proof that HOSTS files can still do the job, blocking potentially malscripted ads (or ads in general because they slow you down) vs. adblockers like ADBLOCK!

----

19.) Even WIKILEAKS "favors" blacklists (because they work, and HOSTS can be a blacklist vs. known BAD sites/servers/domain-host names):

---

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT (from -> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/16/wikileaks_mirror_malware_warning_row/ [theregister.co.uk] [theregister.co.uk] )

"we are in favour of 'Blacklists', be it for mail servers or websites, they have to be compiled with care... Fortunately, more responsible blacklists, like stopbadware.org (which protects the Firefox browser)...

---

20.) AND, LASTLY? SINCE MALWARE GENERALLY HAS TO OPERATE ON WHAT YOU YOURSELF CAN DO (running as limited class/least privlege user, hopefully, OR even as ADMIN/ROOT/SUPERUSER)? HOSTS "LOCK IN" malware too, vs. communicating "back to mama" for orders (provided they have name servers + C&C botnet servers listed in them, blocked off in your HOSTS that is) - you might think they use a hardcoded IP, which IS possible, but generally they do not & RECYCLE domain/host names they own (such as has been seen with the RBN (Russian Business Network) lately though it was considered "dead", other malwares are using its domains/hostnames now, & this? This stops that cold, too - Bonus!)...

* MINOR "CAVEATS/CATCH-22's" - things to be aware of for "layered security" + HOSTS file performance - easily overcome, or not a problem at all:

A.) HOSTS files don't function under PROXY SERVERS - Which is *the "WHY"* of why I state in my "P.S." section below to use both AdBlock type browser addon methods (or even built-in block lists browsers have such as Opera's URLFILTER.INI file, & FireFox has such as list as does IE also) in combination with HOSTS, for the best in "layered security" (alongside .pac files + custom cascading style sheets that can filter off various tags such as scripts or ads etc.) - but proxies, especially "HIGHLY ANONYMOUS" types, generally slow you down to a CRAWL online (& personally, I cannot see using proxies "for the good" typically - as they allow "truly anonymous posting" & have bugs (such as TOR has been shown to have & be "bypassable/traceable" via its "onion routing" methods)).

B.) HOSTS files do NOT protect you vs. javascript (this only holds true IF you don't already have a bad site blocked out in your HOSTS file though, & the list of sites where you can obtain such lists to add to your HOSTS are above (& updated daily in many of them)).

C.) HOSTS files (relatively "largish ones") require you to turn off Windows' native "DNS local client cache service" (which has a problem in that it's designed with a non-redimensionable/resizeable list, array, or queue (DNS data loads into a C/C++ structure actually/afaik, which IS a form of array)) - mvps.org covers that in detail and how to easily do this in Windows (this is NOT a problem in Linux, & it's 1 thing I will give Linux over Windows, hands-down). Relatively "smallish" HOSTS files don't have this problem (mvps.org offers 2 types for this).

D.) HOSTS files, once read/loaded, once GET CACHED, for speed of access/re-access (@ system startup in older MS OS' like 2000, or, upon a users' 1st request that's "Webbound" via say, a webbrowser) gets read into either the DNS local caching client service (noted above), OR, if that's turned off? Into your local diskcache (like ANY file is), so it reads F A S T upon re-reads/subsequent reads (until it's changed in %WinDir%\system32\drivers\etc on Windows, which marks it "Dirty" & then it gets re-read + reloaded into the local diskcache again). This may cause a SMALL lag upon reload though, depending on the size of your HOSTS file.

E.) HOSTS files don't protect vs. BGP exploits - Sorry, once it's out of your hands/machine + past any interior network + routers you have, the packets you send are out there into the ISP/BSP's hands - they're "the Agents" holding all the keys to the doorways at that point (hosts are just a forcefield-filter (for lack of a better description) armor on what can come in mostly, & a bit of what can go out too (per point 18 above on "locking in malware")). Hosts work as a "I can't get burned if I can't go into the kitchen" protection, for you: Not your ISP/BSP. It doesn't extend to them.

Still - It's a GOOD idea to layer in the usage of BOTH browser addons for security like adblock, &/or NoScript (especially this one, as it covers what HOSTS files can't in javascript which is the main deliverer of MOST attacks online & SECUNIA.COM can verify this for anyone really by looking @ the past few years of attacks nowadays), for the concept of "layered security"....

It's just that HOSTS files offer you a LOT MORE gains than Adblock does alone (as hosts do things adblock just plain cannot & on more programs, for more speed, security, and "stealth" to a degree even), and it corrects problems in DNS (as shown above via hardcodes of your favorite sites into your HOSTS file, and more (such as avoiding DNS request logs)).

APK

P.S.=> Some more notes on DNS servers & their problems, very recent + ongoing ones:

BIND vs. what the Chinese are doing to DNS lately? See here:

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/29/1755230/Chinese-DNS-Tampering-a-Real-Threat-To-Outsiders [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]

---

SECUNIA HIT BY DNS REDIRECTION HACK THIS WEEK:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/26/secunia_back_from_dns_hack/ [theregister.co.uk] [theregister.co.uk]

(Yes, even "security pros" are helpless vs. DNS problems in code bugs OR redirect DNS poisoning issues, & they can only try to "set the DNS record straight" & then, they still have to wait for corrected DNS info. to propogate across all subordinate DNS servers too - lagtime in which folks DO get "abused" in mind you!)

---

DNS vs. the "Kaminsky DNS flaw", here (and even MORE problems in DNS than just that):

http://www.scmagazineus.com/new-bind-9-dns-flaw-is-worse-than-kaminskys/article/140872/ [scmagazineus.com] [scmagazineus.com]

(Seems others are saying that some NEW "Bind9 flaw" is worse than the Kaminsky flaw ALONE, up there, mind you... probably corrected (hopefully), but it shows yet again, DNS hassles (DNS redirect/DNS poisoning) being exploited!)

---

Moxie Marlinspike's found others (0 hack) as well...

Nope... "layered security" truly IS the "way to go" - hacker/cracker types know it, & they do NOT want the rest of us knowing it too!...

(So until DNSSEC takes "widespread adoption"? HOSTS are your answer vs. such types of attack, because the 1st thing your system refers to, by default, IS your HOSTS file (over say, DNS server usage). There are decent DNS servers though, such as OpenDNS, ScrubIT, or even GOOGLE DNS, & because I cannot "cache the entire internet" in a HOSTS file? I opt to use those, because I have to (& OpenDNS has been noted to "fix immediately", per the Kaminsky flaw, in fact... just as a sort of reference to how WELL they are maintained really!)

---

Then, there is also the words of respected security expert, Mr. Oliver Day, from SECUNIA.COM to "top that all off" as well:

A RETURN TO THE KILLFILE:

http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491 [securityfocus.com] [securityfocus.com]

Some "PERTINENT QUOTES/EXCERPTS" to back up my points with (for starters):

---

"The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long. Accessing the Internet -- particularly browsing the Web -- is actually faster now."

Speed, and security, is the gain... others like Mr. Day note it as well!

---

"From what I have seen in my research, major efforts to share lists of unwanted hosts began gaining serious momentum earlier this decade. The most popular appear to have started as a means to block advertising and as a way to avoid being tracked by sites that use cookies to gather data on the user across Web properties. More recently, projects like Spybot Search and Destroy offer lists of known malicious servers to add a layer of defense against trojans and other forms of malware."

Per my points exactly, no less... & guess who was posting about HOSTS files a 14++ yrs. or more back & Mr. Day was reading & now using? Yours truly (& this is one of the later ones, from 2001 http://www.furtherleft.net/computer.htm [furtherleft.net] [furtherleft.net] (but the example HOSTS file with my initials in it is FAR older, circa 1998 or so) or thereabouts, and referred to later by a pal of mine who moderates NTCompatible.com (where I posted on HOSTS for YEARS (1997 onwards)) -> http://www.ntcompatible.com/thread28597-1.html [ntcompatible.com] [ntcompatible.com] !

---

"Shared host files could be beneficial for other groups as well. Human rights groups have sought after block resistant technologies for quite some time. The GoDaddy debacle with NMap creator Fyodor (corrected) showed a particularly vicious blocking mechanism using DNS registrars. Once a registrar pulls a website from its records, the world ceases to have an effective way to find it. Shared host files could provide a DNS-proof method of reaching sites, not to mention removing an additional vector of detection if anyone were trying to monitor the use of subversive sites. One of the known weaknesses of the Tor system, for example, is direct DNS requests by applications not configured to route such requests through Tor's network."

There you go: AND, it also works vs. the "KAMINSKY DNS FLAW" & DNS poisoning/redirect attacks, for redirectable weaknesses in DNS servers (non DNSSEC type, & set into recursive mode especially) and also in the TOR system as well (that lends itself to anonymous proxy usage weaknesses I noted above also) and, you'll get to sites you want to, even IF a DNS registrar drops said websites from its tables as shown here Beating Censorship By Routing Around DNS ->

Alexander Polock Knucklehead

[/bollocksquote]

Re:Let me get this straight (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42625687)

Poor reaction Jeremiah Cornelius. Disprove those points. FBI? There's no law against hosts files. You should be tracked by them for admittedly stalking others online (calling it trolling doesn't make it any better, that's just word manipulation) http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2238996&cid=36457426 [slashdot.org] as your own profile states about controlling words, along with your buddy webmistressrachel http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3373637&cid=42570685 [slashdot.org] along with you. Give us a break, learn to spell what you did for a job correctly. You might still be doing it if you could actually spell it right.

Re:Let me get this straight (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42626245)

You avoid a direct question: Why'd ya pull yer resume off LinkedIn Jeremiah Cornelius -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3368135&cid=42529887 [slashdot.org] Is it since someone spotted you're not only a "San Fran 'Man'" (a fella is more like it) and that you can't even spell what you allegedly used to do for a job? It's correctly spelled PENETRATION, not "pentration" as you misspelled it there in front of 1,000's no doubt (one would think an anal penetration man from San Fran'd know how THAT is spelled at least, lol). Jeremiah Cornelius likes to troll others -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2238996&cid=36457426 [slashdot.org] , but can't handle it when it's done in return showing he is illiterate, and that much is obvious. You fail troll. How many years did you leave your resume up there with that basic literacy fail on it? Yes you have been trolled. You like? I wager you don't since you removed your faulty resume (on the very thing you took pride in that you can't even spell correctly most likely indicating you weren't any good at it either).

Re:Let me get this straight (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42630751)

You avoid a direct question: Why'd ya pull yer resume off LinkedIn Jeremiah Cornelius -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3368135&cid=42529887 [slashdot.org] Is it since someone spotted you're not only a "San Fran 'Man'" (a fella is more like it) and that you can't even spell what you allegedly used to do for a job? It's correctly spelled PENETRATION, not "pentration" as you misspelled it there in front of 1,000's no doubt (one would think an anal penetration man from San Fran'd know how THAT is spelled at least, lol). Jeremiah Cornelius likes to troll others -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2238996&cid=36457426 [slashdot.org] , but he can't handle it when it's done in return showing he is illiterate, and that much is obvious. You fail troll. How many years did you leave your resume up there with that basic literacy fail on it? Yes you have been trolled. You like? I wager you don't since you removed your faulty resume (on the very thing you took pride in that you can't even spell correctly most likely indicating you weren't any good at it either).

Re:Let me get this straight (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42610081)

Why'd ya pull yer resume off LinkedIn Jeremiah Cornelius -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3368135&cid=42529887 [slashdot.org] Is it since someone spotted you're not only a "San Fran 'Man'" (a fella is more like it) and that you can't even spell what you allegedly used to do for a job? It's correctly spelled PENETRATION, not "pentration" as you misspelled it there in front of 1,000's no doubt (one would think an anal penetration man from San Fran'd know how THAT is spelled at least, lol). Jeremiah Cornelius likes to troll others -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2238996&cid=36457426 [slashdot.org] , but can't handle it when it's done in return showing he is illiterate, and that much is obvious. You fail troll. How many years did you leave your resume up there with that basic literacy fail on it? Yes you have been trolled. You like? I wager you don't since you removed your faulty resume (on the very thing you took pride in that you can't even spell correctly most likely indicating you weren't any good at it either).

Re:Let me get this straight (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42625865)

Why'd ya pull yer resume off LinkedIn Jeremiah Cornelius -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3368135&cid=42529887 [slashdot.org] Is it since someone spotted you're not only a "San Fran 'Man'" (a fella is more like it) and that you can't even spell what you allegedly used to do for a job? It's correctly spelled PENETRATION, not "pentration" as you misspelled it there in front of 1,000's no doubt (one would think an anal penetration man from San Fran'd know how THAT is spelled at least, lol). Jeremiah Cornelius likes to troll others -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2238996&cid=36457426 [slashdot.org] , but can't handle it when it's done in return showing he is illiterate, and that much is obvious. You fail troll. How many years did you leave your resume up there with that basic literacy fail on it? Yes you have been trolled. You like? I wager you don't since you removed your faulty resume (on the very thing you took pride in that you can't even spell correctly most likely indicating you weren't any good at it either).

Re:Let me get this straight (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42626247)

The FBI has been after him, since he began promoting usage of the Windows hosts file to evade tracking and detection. They have a black mark next to his name and are looking for enough evidence for a "material support of terrorism charge" based on messages like these:

[bollocksquote]

Want to REALLY know what a HOSTS file can do for you, the end user (or corporate environs) & how/why itâ(TM)s BETTER THAN AdBlock &/or DNS servers alone? Take a peek here guys & enjoy -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1913212&cid=34576182 [slashdot.org]

Iâ(TM)ve been using them for BETTER SPEED, BETTER ONLINE LAYERED SECURITY, & to an extent? Even BETTER âoeANONYMITYâ (vs. DNS request logs &/or DNSBL)â¦

Iâ(TM)ve been doing this since 1997 or thereabouts, & itâ(TM)s just like putting a âoeTurboâ onto an engine in a vehicle (w/out the âoeturbo lagâ).

P.S.=> And, yes, they really DO work (something âoeoldâ folks seemed to have forgotten, that lets YOU get âoemore bang for the buckâ in what you pay every month for ISP/BSP online access by also making you NOT download adbanners as well if you like (which have been found w/ malicious code in them MANY TIMES since 2004 (see URL above))⦠& since ISP/BSPâ(TM)s like AT&T & others are moving to a âoepay by bandwith use/bandwith capâ type scenarios?? Blocking out adbanners can see you have a gain there not only speed, or potential security, but also BANDWIDTH CONSERVATION!

IF youâ(TM)re a security pro & a network admin, then what the HELL is stopping you from using login scripts to migrate HOSTS files that are updated across all your network nodes/clients/workstations then?? HOSTS are good for stopping domainname/hostname based links (which IS what the majority of malware makers use, period)

I know â" been populating a HOSTS file this way since 1997, & they use host/domain names, because they are RECYCLABLE, unlike IP addresses that once known as bad, get shut down & turned off⦠whereas a host/domain name means since you own it, you can go to yet another hosting provider & startup a botnet server or maliciously scripted site, in minutes, all over again & with the SAME domain/hosts name â" the RBN (Russian Business Network) was notorious for it⦠(& today, CoreFlood botnet did the same until the FEDS took over their C&C servers)

If youâ(TM)re a âoesecurity proâ as YOU allegedly SAY you are, you didnâ(TM)t seem to note anything I stated, & youâ(TM)d also have noted that LAYERED SECURITY IS THE BEST THING WE HAVE GOING vs. these maliciously scripted threats out there today (& that means using HOSTS files in combination with other tools such as antivirus/antimalware, firewalls, HIPS & more).

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added layered security:

1.) Adblock blocks ads in only 1 browser family (Disclaimer: Opera now has an AdBlock addon (now that Opera has addons above widgets), but I am not certain the same people make it as they do for FF or Chrome etc.).

2.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 4-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html [networkworld.com] [networkworld.com] for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions via NSLOOKUP, PINGS, &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

6.) HOSTS files protect you vs. DNS-poisoning &/or the Kaminsky flaw in DNS servers, and allow you to get to sites reliably vs. things like the Chinese are doing to DNS -> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/29/1755230/Chinese-DNS-Tampering-a-Real-Threat-To-Outsiders [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]

7.) AdBlock doesn't let you block out known bad sites or servers that are known to be maliciously scripted, hosts can and many reputable lists for this exist:

GOOD INFORMATION ON MALWARE BEHAVIOR LISTING BOTNET C&C SERVERS + MORE (AS WELL AS REMOVAL LISTS FOR HOSTS):

http://ddanchev.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com] [blogspot.com]
  http://www.malware.com.br/lists.shtml [malware.com.br] [malware.com.br]
  http://www.stopbadware.org/ [stopbadware.org] [stopbadware.org]
  http://blog.fireeye.com/ [fireeye.com] [fireeye.com]
  http://mtc.sri.com/ [sri.com] [sri.com]
  http://news.netcraft.com/ [netcraft.com] [netcraft.com]
  http://www.shadowserver.org/ [shadowserver.org] [shadowserver.org]

REGULARLY UPDATED HOSTS FILES SITES (reputable/reliable sources):

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm [mvps.org] [mvps.org]
  http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ [someonewhocares.org] [someonewhocares.org]
  http://hostsfile.org/hosts.html [hostsfile.org] [hostsfile.org]
  http://hostsfile.mine.nu/downloads/ [hostsfile.mine.nu] [hostsfile.mine.nu]
  http://hosts-file.net/?s=Download [hosts-file.net] [hosts-file.net]
  https://zeustracker.abuse.ch/monitor.php?filter=online [abuse.ch] [abuse.ch]
Spybot "Search & Destroy" IMMUNIZE feature (fortifies HOSTS files with KNOWN bad servers blocked)

And yes: Even SLASHDOT &/or The Register help!

(Via articles on security (when the source articles they use are "detailed" that is, & list the servers/sites involved in attempting to bushwhack others online that is... not ALL do!)).

2 examples thereof in the past I have used, & noted it there, are/were:

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1898692&cid=34473398 [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]
  http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1896216&cid=34458500 [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]

8.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server & back to you).

9.) AdBlock & DNS servers are programs, and subject to bugs programs can get. Hosts files are merely a filter and not a program, thus not subject to bugs of the nature just discussed.

10.) Hosts files don't eat up CPU cycles like AdBlock does while it parses a webpages' content, nor as much as a DNS server does while it runs.

11.) HOSTS files are EASILY user controlled, obtained (for reliable ones -> http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm [mvps.org] [mvps.org] ) & edited too, via texteditors like Windows notepad.exe or Linux nano (etc.)

12.) With Adblock you had better be able to code javascript to play with its code. With hosts you don't even need source to control it (edit, update, delete, insert of new entries via a text editor).

13.) Hosts files are easily secured via using MAC/ACL &/or Read-Only attributes applied.

14.) Custom HOSTS files also speed you up, unlike anonymous proxy servers systems variations (like TOR, or other "highly anonymous" proxy server list servers typically do, in the severe speed hit they often have a cost in).

15.) HOSTS files usage lets you avoid being charged on some ISP/BSP's (OR phone providers) "pay as you use" policy http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/12/08/2012243/FCC-Approving-Pay-As-You-Go-Internet-Plans [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org] , because you are using less bandwidth (& go faster doing so no less) by NOT hauling in adbanner content and processing it (which can lead to infestation by malware/malicious script, in & of itself -> http://apcmag.com/microsoft_apologises_for_serving_malware.htm [apcmag.com] [apcmag.com] ).

16.) If/when ISP/BSP's decide to go to -> FCC Approving Pay-As-You-Go Internet Plans: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/12/08/2012243/FCC-Approving-Pay-As-You-Go-Internet-Plans [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org] your internet bill will go DOWN if you use a HOSTS file for blocking adbanners as well as maliciously scripted hacker/cracker malware maker sites too (after all - it's your money & time online downloading adbanner content & processing it)

Plus, your adbanner content? Well, it may also be hijacked with malicious code too mind you:

---

HACKERS USE ADBANNERS ON MAJOR SITES TO HIJACK YOUR SYSTEM: -> http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2007/11/doubleclick [wired.com] [wired.com] [wired.com]

THE NEXT AD YOU CLICK MAY BE A VIRUS: -> http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]

NY TIMES INFECTED WITH MALWARE ADBANNER: -> http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/09/13/2346229 [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]

MICROSOFT HIT BY MALWARES IN ADBANNERS: -> http://apcmag.com/microsoft_apologises_for_serving_malware.htm [apcmag.com] [apcmag.com] [apcmag.com]

ADBANNERS SLOW DOWN THE WEB: -> http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/11/30/166218 [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]

2 MAJOR AD NETWORKS FOUND SERVING MALWARE: -> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/12/13/0128249/Two-Major-Ad-Networks-Found-Serving-Malware [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]

---

As my list "multiple evidences thereof" as to adbanners & viruses + the fact they slow you down & cost you more (from reputable & reliable sources no less)).

17.) Per point #16, a way to save some money: ANDROID phones can also use the HOSTS FILE TO KEEP DOWN BILLABLE TIME ONLINE, via the ADB dev. tool, & mounting ANDROID OS' system mountpoint for system/etc as READ + WRITE/ADMIN-ROOT PERMISSIONS, then copying your new custom HOSTS over the old one using ADB PULL/ADB PUSH to do so (otherwise ANDROID complains of "this file cannot be overwritten on production models of this Operating System", or something very along those lines - this way gets you around that annoyance along with you possibly having to clear some space there yourself if you packed it with things!).

18.) ADBLOCK CAN BE DETECTED FOR: See here on that note -> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars [arstechnica.com] [arstechnica.com]

HOSTS files are NOT BLOCKABLE by websites, as was tried on users by ARSTECHNICA (and it worked, proving HOSTS files are a better solution for this because they cannot be blocked & detected for, in that manner), to that websites' users' dismay:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT FROM ARSTECHNICA THEMSELVES:

----

An experiment gone wrong - By Ken Fisher | Last updated March 6, 2010 11:11 AM

"Starting late Friday afternoon we conducted a 12 hour experiment to see if it would be possible to simply make content disappear for visitors who were using a very popular ad blocking tool. Technologically, it was a success in that it worked. Ad blockers, and only ad blockers, couldn't see our content."

and

"Our experiment is over, and we're glad we did it because it led to us learning that we needed to communicate our point of view every once in a while. Sure, some people told us we deserved to die in a fire. But that's the Internet!"

Thus, as you can see? Well - THAT all "went over like a lead balloon" with their users in other words, because Arstechnica was forced to change it back to the old way where ADBLOCK still could work to do its job (REDDIT however, has not, for example). However/Again - this is proof that HOSTS files can still do the job, blocking potentially malscripted ads (or ads in general because they slow you down) vs. adblockers like ADBLOCK!

----

19.) Even WIKILEAKS "favors" blacklists (because they work, and HOSTS can be a blacklist vs. known BAD sites/servers/domain-host names):

---

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT (from -> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/16/wikileaks_mirror_malware_warning_row/ [theregister.co.uk] [theregister.co.uk] )

"we are in favour of 'Blacklists', be it for mail servers or websites, they have to be compiled with care... Fortunately, more responsible blacklists, like stopbadware.org (which protects the Firefox browser)...

---

20.) AND, LASTLY? SINCE MALWARE GENERALLY HAS TO OPERATE ON WHAT YOU YOURSELF CAN DO (running as limited class/least privlege user, hopefully, OR even as ADMIN/ROOT/SUPERUSER)? HOSTS "LOCK IN" malware too, vs. communicating "back to mama" for orders (provided they have name servers + C&C botnet servers listed in them, blocked off in your HOSTS that is) - you might think they use a hardcoded IP, which IS possible, but generally they do not & RECYCLE domain/host names they own (such as has been seen with the RBN (Russian Business Network) lately though it was considered "dead", other malwares are using its domains/hostnames now, & this? This stops that cold, too - Bonus!)...

* MINOR "CAVEATS/CATCH-22's" - things to be aware of for "layered security" + HOSTS file performance - easily overcome, or not a problem at all:

A.) HOSTS files don't function under PROXY SERVERS - Which is *the "WHY"* of why I state in my "P.S." section below to use both AdBlock type browser addon methods (or even built-in block lists browsers have such as Opera's URLFILTER.INI file, & FireFox has such as list as does IE also) in combination with HOSTS, for the best in "layered security" (alongside .pac files + custom cascading style sheets that can filter off various tags such as scripts or ads etc.) - but proxies, especially "HIGHLY ANONYMOUS" types, generally slow you down to a CRAWL online (& personally, I cannot see using proxies "for the good" typically - as they allow "truly anonymous posting" & have bugs (such as TOR has been shown to have & be "bypassable/traceable" via its "onion routing" methods)).

B.) HOSTS files do NOT protect you vs. javascript (this only holds true IF you don't already have a bad site blocked out in your HOSTS file though, & the list of sites where you can obtain such lists to add to your HOSTS are above (& updated daily in many of them)).

C.) HOSTS files (relatively "largish ones") require you to turn off Windows' native "DNS local client cache service" (which has a problem in that it's designed with a non-redimensionable/resizeable list, array, or queue (DNS data loads into a C/C++ structure actually/afaik, which IS a form of array)) - mvps.org covers that in detail and how to easily do this in Windows (this is NOT a problem in Linux, & it's 1 thing I will give Linux over Windows, hands-down). Relatively "smallish" HOSTS files don't have this problem (mvps.org offers 2 types for this).

D.) HOSTS files, once read/loaded, once GET CACHED, for speed of access/re-access (@ system startup in older MS OS' like 2000, or, upon a users' 1st request that's "Webbound" via say, a webbrowser) gets read into either the DNS local caching client service (noted above), OR, if that's turned off? Into your local diskcache (like ANY file is), so it reads F A S T upon re-reads/subsequent reads (until it's changed in %WinDir%\system32\drivers\etc on Windows, which marks it "Dirty" & then it gets re-read + reloaded into the local diskcache again). This may cause a SMALL lag upon reload though, depending on the size of your HOSTS file.

E.) HOSTS files don't protect vs. BGP exploits - Sorry, once it's out of your hands/machine + past any interior network + routers you have, the packets you send are out there into the ISP/BSP's hands - they're "the Agents" holding all the keys to the doorways at that point (hosts are just a forcefield-filter (for lack of a better description) armor on what can come in mostly, & a bit of what can go out too (per point 18 above on "locking in malware")). Hosts work as a "I can't get burned if I can't go into the kitchen" protection, for you: Not your ISP/BSP. It doesn't extend to them.

Still - It's a GOOD idea to layer in the usage of BOTH browser addons for security like adblock, &/or NoScript (especially this one, as it covers what HOSTS files can't in javascript which is the main deliverer of MOST attacks online & SECUNIA.COM can verify this for anyone really by looking @ the past few years of attacks nowadays), for the concept of "layered security"....

It's just that HOSTS files offer you a LOT MORE gains than Adblock does alone (as hosts do things adblock just plain cannot & on more programs, for more speed, security, and "stealth" to a degree even), and it corrects problems in DNS (as shown above via hardcodes of your favorite sites into your HOSTS file, and more (such as avoiding DNS request logs)).

APK

P.S.=> Some more notes on DNS servers & their problems, very recent + ongoing ones:

BIND vs. what the Chinese are doing to DNS lately? See here:

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/29/1755230/Chinese-DNS-Tampering-a-Real-Threat-To-Outsiders [slashdot.org] [slashdot.org]

---

SECUNIA HIT BY DNS REDIRECTION HACK THIS WEEK:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/26/secunia_back_from_dns_hack/ [theregister.co.uk] [theregister.co.uk]

(Yes, even "security pros" are helpless vs. DNS problems in code bugs OR redirect DNS poisoning issues, & they can only try to "set the DNS record straight" & then, they still have to wait for corrected DNS info. to propogate across all subordinate DNS servers too - lagtime in which folks DO get "abused" in mind you!)

---

DNS vs. the "Kaminsky DNS flaw", here (and even MORE problems in DNS than just that):

http://www.scmagazineus.com/new-bind-9-dns-flaw-is-worse-than-kaminskys/article/140872/ [scmagazineus.com] [scmagazineus.com]

(Seems others are saying that some NEW "Bind9 flaw" is worse than the Kaminsky flaw ALONE, up there, mind you... probably corrected (hopefully), but it shows yet again, DNS hassles (DNS redirect/DNS poisoning) being exploited!)

---

Moxie Marlinspike's found others (0 hack) as well...

Nope... "layered security" truly IS the "way to go" - hacker/cracker types know it, & they do NOT want the rest of us knowing it too!...

(So until DNSSEC takes "widespread adoption"? HOSTS are your answer vs. such types of attack, because the 1st thing your system refers to, by default, IS your HOSTS file (over say, DNS server usage). There are decent DNS servers though, such as OpenDNS, ScrubIT, or even GOOGLE DNS, & because I cannot "cache the entire internet" in a HOSTS file? I opt to use those, because I have to (& OpenDNS has been noted to "fix immediately", per the Kaminsky flaw, in fact... just as a sort of reference to how WELL they are maintained really!)

---

Then, there is also the words of respected security expert, Mr. Oliver Day, from SECUNIA.COM to "top that all off" as well:

A RETURN TO THE KILLFILE:

http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491 [securityfocus.com] [securityfocus.com]

Some "PERTINENT QUOTES/EXCERPTS" to back up my points with (for starters):

---

"The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long. Accessing the Internet -- particularly browsing the Web -- is actually faster now."

Speed, and security, is the gain... others like Mr. Day note it as well!

---

"From what I have seen in my research, major efforts to share lists of unwanted hosts began gaining serious momentum earlier this decade. The most popular appear to have started as a means to block advertising and as a way to avoid being tracked by sites that use cookies to gather data on the user across Web properties. More recently, projects like Spybot Search and Destroy offer lists of known malicious servers to add a layer of defense against trojans and other forms of malware."

Per my points exactly, no less... & guess who was posting about HOSTS files a 14++ yrs. or more back & Mr. Day was reading & now using? Yours truly (& this is one of the later ones, from 2001 http://www.furtherleft.net/computer.htm [furtherleft.net] [furtherleft.net] (but the example HOSTS file with my initials in it is FAR older, circa 1998 or so) or thereabouts, and referred to later by a pal of mine who moderates NTCompatible.com (where I posted on HOSTS for YEARS (1997 onwards)) -> http://www.ntcompatible.com/thread28597-1.html [ntcompatible.com] [ntcompatible.com] !

---

"Shared host files could be beneficial for other groups as well. Human rights groups have sought after block resistant technologies for quite some time. The GoDaddy debacle with NMap creator Fyodor (corrected) showed a particularly vicious blocking mechanism using DNS registrars. Once a registrar pulls a website from its records, the world ceases to have an effective way to find it. Shared host files could provide a DNS-proof method of reaching sites, not to mention removing an additional vector of detection if anyone were trying to monitor the use of subversive sites. One of the known weaknesses of the Tor system, for example, is direct DNS requests by applications not configured to route such requests through Tor's network."

There you go: AND, it also works vs. the "KAMINSKY DNS FLAW" & DNS poisoning/redirect attacks, for redirectable weaknesses in DNS servers (non DNSSEC type, & set into recursive mode especially) and also in the TOR system as well (that lends itself to anonymous proxy usage weaknesses I noted above also) and, you'll get to sites you want to, even IF a DNS registrar drops said websites from its tables as shown here Beating Censorship By Routing Around DNS ->

Alexander Polock Knucklehead

[/bollocksquote]

Re:Let me get this straight (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42631561)

Posting as AC now Jeremiah Cornelius? You didn't here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3384873&cid=42622385 [slashdot.org] You are welcome to disprove the points on hosts files use which isn't illegal by any means. So much for your "FBI" crap. You also avoid a direct question put to you here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3384873&cid=42626347 [slashdot.org] also which points out you're quite illiterate and unable to properly spell that which you claimed to have done for a career there (which I doubt you did since you can't even spell it properly). You like stalking others by your own admission http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2238996&cid=36457426 [slashdot.org] along with your friend webmistressrachel http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3373637&cid=42570685 [slashdot.org] so if anybody merits being the target of the FBI, it is yourself, for online stalking.

Re:Let me get this straight (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42638511)

You avoid a direct question: Why'd ya pull yer resume off LinkedIn Jeremiah Cornelius -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3368135&cid=42529887 [slashdot.org] Is it since someone spotted you're not only a "San Fran 'Man'" (a fella is more like it) and that you can't even spell what you allegedly used to do for a job? It's correctly spelled PENETRATION, not "pentration" as you misspelled it there in front of 1,000's no doubt (one would think an anal penetration man from San Fran'd know how THAT is spelled at least, lol). Jeremiah Cornelius likes to troll others -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2238996&cid=36457426 [slashdot.org] , but he can't handle it when it's done in return showing he is illiterate, and that much is obvious. You fail troll. How many years did you leave your resume up there with that basic literacy fail on it? Yes you have been trolled. You like? I wager you don't since you removed your faulty resume (on the very thing you took pride in that you can't even spell correctly most likely indicating you weren't any good at it either).b

Re:Let me get this straight (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42638515)

Posting as AC now Jeremiah Cornelius? You didn't here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3384873&cid=42622385 [slashdot.org] You are welcome to disprove the points on hosts files use which isn't illegal by any means. So much for your "FBI" crap. You also avoid a direct question put to you here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3384873&cid=42626347 [slashdot.org] also which points out you're quite illiterate and unable to properly spell that which you claimed to have done for a career there (which I doubt you did since you can't even spell it properly). You like stalking others by your own admission http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2238996&cid=36457426 [slashdot.org] along with your friend webmistressrachel http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3373637&cid=42570685 [slashdot.org] so if anybody merits being the target of the FBI, it is yourself, for online stalking.

Re:Let me get this straight (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42630743)

You avoid a direct question: Why'd ya pull yer resume off LinkedIn Jeremiah Cornelius -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3368135&cid=42529887 [slashdot.org] Is it since someone spotted you're not only a "San Fran 'Man'" (a fella is more like it) and that you can't even spell what you allegedly used to do for a job? It's correctly spelled PENETRATION, not "pentration" as you misspelled it there in front of 1,000's no doubt (one would think an anal penetration man from San Fran'd know how THAT is spelled at least, lol). Jeremiah Cornelius likes to troll others -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2238996&cid=36457426 [slashdot.org] , but he can't handle it when it's done in return showing he is illiterate, and that much is obvious. You fail troll. How many years did you leave your resume up there with that basic literacy fail on it? Yes you have been trolled. You like? I wager you don't since you removed your faulty resume (on the very thing you took pride in that you can't even spell correctly most likely indicating you weren't any good at it either).

Does this mean... (2)

Virtucon (127420) | about 2 years ago | (#42604949)

That Ricky and Bubba will be bidding on the storage units if the government doesn't pay the rent?

Re:Does this mean... (2)

fotoflojoe (982885) | about 2 years ago | (#42605539)

Yuuup!

Re:Does this mean... (1)

azadrozny (576352) | about 2 years ago | (#42606617)

Only if TLC gets to plant stuff in them first.

my first thought was underwater raid (1)

Megor1 (621918) | about 2 years ago | (#42604951)

Since this Slashdot the title should really be storage containers as the obvious assumption is a storage unit stores data!

Re:my first thought was underwater raid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42605133)

I, too, am an unabashed pedant!

Re:my first thought was underwater raid (2)

circletimessquare (444983) | about 2 years ago | (#42605287)

you should write underwater RAID

because an underwater raid of a different sort is also an issue with this concept

Re:my first thought was underwater raid (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42605687)

well, instead of storing all your data in the cloud, you can now store it in the drink too.

Re:my first thought was underwater raid (3, Informative)

icebike (68054) | about 2 years ago | (#42607199)

Since this Slashdot the title should really be storage containers as the obvious assumption is a storage unit stores data!

RAID: Reconnaissance Assets Invisibly Drowned?

This is old news, the story was posted on slashdot last week [slashdot.org] . Same story, same request, same misinterpretation of what is actually sought.

The request is for pre-positioned military assets (non lethal) for surveillance and intelligence which remain inert on the sea floor until needed, and then become buoyant, rise to the surface and release aerial surveillance equipment, (short life drones or balloons), or merely float and gather signal intelligence.
These could be used for search and rescue as well as intelligence gathering in trouble spots.

This avoids having to find some way to fly a plane or a manned drone to some remote location in a hurry. Since its not a munition, its not considered an aggressive act to seed the ocean floor (4000 feet down, in international waters) with something that you can later instruct to become active.

It is thought that being down 4000 feet would be enough protection to make them unlikely to be messed with. (Wishful thinking if you ask me, once you abandon anything on the ocean bottom without support of international treaty, its pretty much fair game for salvage or state sponsored retrieval via ROVs.).

half there already (1)

Thud457 (234763) | about 2 years ago | (#42608337)

Prior Art [mbari.org] , just need to work on the sinking, rising on command part.

All this effort (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42604953)

All this effort just so a dysfunctional, rag-tag group of strangers can find the armament they need to outfit the rebel military and take back Tampa in 2027.

Why do they explicitly mention non-lethal assets? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42604959)

I guess the system would work exactly the same no matter whether the stored assets are lethal or not. So what is the point of explicitly mentioning non-lethal assets?

Re:Why do they explicitly mention non-lethal asset (3, Informative)

Baloroth (2370816) | about 2 years ago | (#42605043)

From TFA:

Because of the difficulty of retrieving the capsules, DARPA is concentrating on non-lethal assets, so there’s no conflict with treaties involving munitions and their disposal.

I think DARPA is concerned about the politics of potentially leaving dangerous weapons just lying around. They obviously could be used for anything that can be stored for long period of time, if they manage to get them working.

Re:Why do they explicitly mention non-lethal asset (2)

Pseudonym Authority (1591027) | about 2 years ago | (#42605069)

Because some people might think it a bad idea to leave storage units full of the latest and greatest instruments of death lying around unguarded on the ocean floor. Those people might not have a problem with a bunch of helmets and first-aid kits being treated that way though.

Re:Why do they explicitly mention non-lethal asset (2)

vlm (69642) | about 2 years ago | (#42605311)

At least theoretically, if they put a giant red cross on a submarine full of band-aids, other nations wouldn't depth charge it?

Although "obviously" if the US were about to invade a country they'd be out there trying to blow up the storage boxes, wasting time and ammo?

Non-lethal = when a fishing trawler hauls it off the seabed they can't claim insurance costs etc for their ship blowing up? Also if "everyone knows" subsea storage is all non-lethal (yeah like thats gonna happen long term) then the US is somewhat less liable for EOD costs. Hauling up a net of fish, lobsters... and a mine... is kinda scary to the crew.

So the CIA will trade arms to the afgahani's for heroin, who will sell it to the italians for cash to pay for black ops or wtf the CIA does with all its money. So, "obviously" if you accidentally capture a container and its full of AK47s, we "never" put lethal arms in one, so it was all a plant to make the USA look bad, or all a fake. In other words practically all of them are going to be full of non-domestic arms with the serial numbers filed off or whatever, but we'll pretend none are.

dup (4, Insightful)

stoolpigeon (454276) | about 2 years ago | (#42604983)

if you need karma go back to when this ran 4 days ago and grab some high rated comments.

tagging a story dup in the 'mysterious future' should flag it for review so this doesn't happen.

WTF DARPA? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42607555)

I don't get it.

http://www.benthos.com/undersea-acoustic-release-modem-SMART-SM75.asp

The article must be glossing over what makes this unique. Do they want a factor of 10 reduction in price? I've been working on the problem of cheap deep water electronics for nearly a decade so this is relevant to my interests(honestly who in the field of oceanography hasn't? Nobody wants to pay a ship to go un-fuck a $100 science project and mass production of gizmos is not the core competency of scientists in most cases).

DARPA is essentially throwing up their hands at the problem of locomotion and saying it's cheaper from an energy standpoint to just pepper the ocean with lots of sensors than to transport a single sensor over lots of territory pushing water out of the way of its course. "Sensors" is a pretty broad catch-all for payload and can vary in price significantly, impacting the truth of that assertion.

Changing batteries isn't cheap so disposable is desirable. Why not just embed a cell phone in a block of epoxy or polyurethane? It is cheaper to drop ballast than it is to displace 100ATM of water, so they might as well settle on a solenoid fired shear pin or electric door strike type mechanism. Syntactic foam and you can do the whole thing with a cheap prepaid, a pic processor, and a solar cell. Battery life scales with price so that is a matter of mission endurance priorities.

Re:WTF DARPA? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42608095)

The problem with reposting this comment is that now someone has to respond to half a dozen comments like "cell phones don't work underwater" and "that's stupid, how will the solar cells work at the bottom of the ocean".

Re:WTF DARPA? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42609139)

The problem with reposting this comment,,,

Not only that, but even following the grandparent's advice user 666s karma is still going to be sunk to the bottom of the karma ocean! Not exactly a revelation though.

Meanwhile, 25 years from now... (4, Funny)

Press2ToContinue (2424598) | about 2 years ago | (#42604985)

When the current cryotograghic algorithms which secure these cracker-jack prizes become easily crackable by script-kiddies, and with future long-range private drones weilding live HD cams, I see a new form of geocaching game on the horizon.

I'll look forward to watching the reruns on Youtube.

Thanks US Military!

Re:Meanwhile, 25 years from now... (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | about 2 years ago | (#42605087)

Yup, this will be so cool. Imagine your own personal armoury. Finally a modern version of the battleships game.

Re:Meanwhile, 25 years from now... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42605277)

Good luck finding it in the benthic muck. Of course, the navy is going to have the same challenge. I suspect that it's going to be something that sleeps very deeply until pinged by the right combination of frequencies, at which point it wakes up a little and looks for a message from a one time pad. Call me crazy, but accoustic systems have pretty low bit rates, which makes this pretty hard to brute force, particularly if it only responds by surfacing. I suspect that it'll be full of food and batteries, not ammunition or weapons, given DoD regulations. My real question is how they're going to make it strong enough to unstick itself.

Re:Meanwhile, 25 years from now... (4, Interesting)

icebike (68054) | about 2 years ago | (#42607355)

My real question is how they're going to make it strong enough to unstick itself.

Easily done with burn-wires dropping weights, or compressed air cylinders de-flooding chambers or inflating sacks. All of this technology already exists in the commercial market place. The navy already has deep sea (slow speed) com systems to submarines.

The intent is to store surveillance assets (drones, balloons or sonobuoys) that can be called into action from 4000 feet down after long term storage on the bottom. .

Re:Meanwhile, 25 years from now... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42612853)

Sounds like "Long term storage" in bobbles in "Marooned in Realtime". You store resources you need in various levels of stasis, and call them up as you can/need.

Re:Meanwhile, 25 years from now... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42605607)

yeah, want to buy 50 tons of surplus cheese and peanut butter ?

jr

Re:Meanwhile, 25 years from now... (1)

mjr167 (2477430) | about 2 years ago | (#42605783)

Don't we do this with stuff from WWII out in the desert already?

Slashdot leads the way (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42605027)

I recommend they look into Slashdot's Upward Falling Stories [slashdot.org] , which tend to drop off the front page and then float back up again as a repost.

Proof of time travel (1)

presspass (1770650) | about 2 years ago | (#42605037)

If this isn't proof that time traveling aliens are running the government, I don't know what is.

Re:Proof of time travel (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42607259)

Silly, why would we want to run your government? We already own the consciences of your corporations. Oh, except for that media outfit with the mouse. Yikes - how did you people come up with that one?

Wrong specs, project bound to fail... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42605121)

DARPA is trying to build " Upward Falling Payloads". In this earth, everything falls downwards, not upwards. This is true whether we talk of shit or payloads.

If you are trying to build something to fly in the air, the spec should resemble that of an airplane.

Something that stays under water for long should be a submarine.

DARPA seems to be designing a submarine that flies, or an airplane that sinks. The whole project stinks.

foundation east (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42605151)

foundation west...

foundation Mariana Trench

It's a good idea since the middle east bastards are about to start WWIII....

Meanwhile, 12,000 years from now... (4, Interesting)

Press2ToContinue (2424598) | about 2 years ago | (#42605161)

Ocean explorers recover a remarkably well-preserved, ancient artifact from the deep mud of the ocean floor.

"What the hell is it??"

"I don't really know. It must be newer than the geological data indicate. We have no record of any prior advanced civilizations."

obsolete (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about 2 years ago | (#42605269)

"deployed years later" .. isn't there a risk that the equipment would be obsolete? Field equipment is changing rather rapidly in this day and age, especially electronics.

Re:obsolete (2)

vlm (69642) | about 2 years ago | (#42605397)

"deployed years later" .. isn't there a risk that the equipment would be obsolete? Field equipment is changing rather rapidly in this day and age, especially electronics.

Clearly not been in .mil. Some high tech stuff, lots thats not...

Sterile bags of saline solution, IV stuff, band aids, field dressings, pioneer tools, food...

Re:obsolete (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about 2 years ago | (#42607567)

"deployed years later" .. isn't there a risk that the equipment would be obsolete? Field equipment is changing rather rapidly in this day and age, especially electronics.

Clearly not been in .mil. Some high tech stuff, lots thats not...

Sterile bags of saline solution, IV stuff, band aids, field dressings, pioneer tools, food...

Oh, but I have. Military contractor, seven years, electronics. And yes, a lot of the stuff still in use is of elderly pedegree, but just recently there's been some decent advances (probably spurred by new types of warfare, necessity being the mother etc.) and more on the way. More than any other time since *I* was involved, existing gear can be mooted by new countermeasures. So as someone else said, the value appears to be staples like food, clothing. *maybe* small arms ammunition, although there's been some changes recently in that area as well. (five-seven, P90 etc starting to supplant older NATO weapons and rounds) and even medical supplies are undergoing changes (CLEOX, etc).

I'm not saying that at some future time supplies from several years ago would be of *no* value, but it seems like choice of supplies and strategic usage might be tricky. For instance, if small arms ammunition, I'd want to be included something to shoot it with, as that particular round may not be in general use anymore.

But hey, this just begs to be used in a dystopian near-future story, maybe the second sequel to Palmer's Emergence. (If he ever gets around to publishing.)

Re:obsolete (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 2 years ago | (#42605757)

We are resting on a pretty solid plateau right now. Solar power(PV) is reaching an apex, we have cheap, powerful and plentiful SoCs for plenty of grunt work. What we lack mostly is the legion of programmers we are going to need to tie all this stuff together.

Re:obsolete (2)

tlhIngan (30335) | about 2 years ago | (#42605857)

"deployed years later" .. isn't there a risk that the equipment would be obsolete? Field equipment is changing rather rapidly in this day and age, especially electronics.

Depends. It could be stuff like supplies (fuel/oil/grease, food, ammo) which while having a shelf life, can be stored for a bit and unlikely to be obsoleted quickly. This is the most likely case as having pre-positioned supplies at the ready gives you a strong advantage out of the gate by being able to resupply without having a nearby resupply vessel.

Less likely are general equipment - since it often depends on the mission and can be obsolete.

Supplies generally are the most desirable to preposition - after all, cutitng off supply lines is a very common military tactic, and battles have been lost (or won, depending on which side) when a cut off group runs out of supplies.

Re:obsolete (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42609523)

BACON - never goes out of style.

Really? (3, Funny)

NEDHead (1651195) | about 2 years ago | (#42605447)

Just how long can a Marine Division wait on the ocean floor and still be effective?

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42605707)

Depends on how much food they bring and the half-life of their nuclear reactor.

This is overkill... (1)

Microsift (223381) | about 2 years ago | (#42605459)

Shaggy Man's body is indestrucible.

non-lethal military assets (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42605585)

Do I understand right that DARPA is basically going to preventively infest the world with some kind of bombs or other weaponry so that they can use them faster once needed?

I, on the other hand... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42605595)

...only want a pink unicorn, which is much cheaper to produce (e.g. by spray-painting a pony and gluing a plastic horn to its head) and overall more useful than deep sea storage units. But guess who will get once more what they want...

"trouble areas" (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#42605609)

If we can't find any, we'll create some...

sonic transudcer (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42605919)

I had an idea like that a while back, as a way to stash personal stuff out of sight for long periods. Seal (e.g. weld) the stuff in a box with a microphone, piezo beeper, low powered microprocessor, and lithium battery pack inside. There are lithium chloride batteries (e.g. Tadiran) that can supply small amounts of current for decades, and an 8-bit CMOS processor uses just a few microamps at low speed (think of digital watches). The box would just sit quietly on the bottom listening for a certain 128-bit series of beeps. When it heard the beeps it would start beeping itself, making it easy to find with scuba gear (sound carries well under water). You'd get within a few hundred yards of it using GPS or a sextant, start sending out the secret beep code til it started chirping back at you, then retrieve it.

I never seriously tried to build such a thing (too James Bondish and I don't have anything warranting such measures) but it seemed like a cute idea at the time. I might as well write about it now.

ELF (1)

dcw3 (649211) | about 2 years ago | (#42605941)

Possible side benefit: they need to research communications systems reliable enough to command the deep sea capsules when needed.

The navy has had this ability for quite some time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremely_low_frequency [wikipedia.org]

war of the worlds (1)

The-Blue-Clown (1261404) | about 2 years ago | (#42605955)

isn't this how the aliens "invaded" in the latest 'War of the Worlds' movie with Tom Cruise?

Dear America, (2)

dave69 (2786111) | about 2 years ago | (#42606055)

Dear America, Please don't mine the entire ocean with giant non-robotic sea mines, just because you can, signed, the rest of the world. Also, didn't we have this conversation last week?

Cosmoline (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42606665)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmoline

Throw in some time-capsule stuff (3, Funny)

mbstone (457308) | about 2 years ago | (#42606737)

Like buying presents for children, there's really no way of knowing whether the DoD will in the future be able to make use of whatever they stash away, or whether it will still be edible, nonobsolete, or even free of rust and bilgewater.

So along with the Great Northern beans and networking nodes with 10,000-day vulnerabilities, let's add some historical memorabilia. Copies of current Navy regulations and 12 year old scotch for example.

Another possibility is that DARPA could plant stuff designed to be found by the enemy. Trick black soap. Bogus ciphers that will cause the enemy to spend years or decades fruitlessly attempting to decode. Bogus mine-defusing instructions that will make them go boom.

Pods (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 2 years ago | (#42606777)

As a long-time RTS fan, I love this idea. Ok, grudgingly, no guns in it.

Still, "if you find yourself in a fair fight, you haven't done your homework." Given history, I'm fine with the US spending as much as the next 20 nations combined. It's freaking cheap compared to a real war.

Meanwhile, on the beach in Pakistan: (1)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | about 2 years ago | (#42606993)

Police officer: Kareem, where did you get that RPG and the bazooka?

Fisherman: Sir, I found them just floating in the water, sir

Police officer: Kareem, you know me. Don't make me break your jaw bone. Tell me did you get them from the ashram-e-talbi group?

Fisherman: Sir, no sir. I was just fishing sir. My net got trapped in something on the seabed sir. I jumped down and dived in, and saw it was caught in some kind of handle sir. I twisted the handle, released the net, came up for air, I was floating in the middle of so many bazookas and rifles and RPGs etc etc, Sir, Honest sir. That is what happened sir.

Police officer: Not even asham group is going to coach this story. It is too dumb. You must be getting it from the stupid zulficar-e-islami group. They are the really weird ones. Now have a nice conversation with my billy club and after you pick your teeth from the floor, you will tell me exactly where you got it all from. OK?

Fisherman: Sir, no sir, yes sir, no sir. it is the truth sir.

In Other Words (1)

Tirian (166224) | about 2 years ago | (#42607059)

In other words:

"We are famously over-stocked on items that we are not actually using because of huge budget allocations. We don't want to lose those budget numbers and the goverment is saying we need to buy their defense contractor friends' goods. The plan is to just purchase a billion dollars of equipment and just sink it never to be seen again. Everybody wins, except maybe the taxpayers."

--Tirian

The Darpa Initiative! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42607299)

That explains all the mysterious food drops on the island.

Namaste!

Um, tell me again.... (1)

gestalt_n_pepper (991155) | about 2 years ago | (#42607443)

what "assets" won't be obsolete in 10 years maybe, and definitely 20? Gloves? Shoes? Certainly not weapons or electronics. Sounds like the military needs a reason to bury something on a regular basis, but it's not equipment.

Re:Um, tell me again.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42614403)

Einstein once said the fourth world war would be fought with sticks. Perhaps the military is preparing for that.

The chances of anything coming from Mars (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42607823)

are a million to one he said. The chances of anything coming from Mars are a million to one - but still they
come!

Use A Plane... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42608931)

I had to check my calendar when I read this - is it April already? The one datum missing from the OP was the intended size of the capsules... so I presume that if they are "too" big, then they may not be portable by aircraft.

However... Anyone with sidescan sonar [and it's not *that* expensive] should not have too much difficulty in locating these caches, no matter where the US Navy chose to drop them. Moreover, there are plenty of other governments - to say nothing of a growing number of oceanic treasure hunters - with the means, motive an opportunity to release such chambers from their resting place, just to get at the contents. Yes, they could be protected with booby-traps, but this brings a risk to legitimate users if the goal is truly long-term storage. Stroll over the top with your military-spec side-scan... Send in a spy sub with a thermal lance to cut the restraints, tow the thing away...

but here's the rub... It's implicit that any deep-sea storage system that involves buoyant containers that rise to the surface on receipt of a signal are going to have to float. [Well, duh]. But if they float, why not just chuck a few of 'em in C17 transporters, wait until you need them, and just fly them out to where your ships are? Subtle? Well, OK, no, I'll concede that... Question: when was the last time you saw a subtle US Navy Task Force? More importantly, having a rapid-response solution backed by air-drop-to-sea-pickup gives you a level of flexibility that long-term storage just can't match.

And the US Military want to spend taxpayer money on this, when just days ago the political talk was all about the "Fiscal Cliff" and dire events if agreements were not reached? Belts are tight. We get that. Numerous western nations [much of Europe as well as the US] are struggling with budget deficits. Yet here we are, discussing the fact that the Navy wants to play bob-the-apple with deep-sea supply canisters.

To quote Mark (Dr. Bruce Banner) Ruffalo: "That's about as crazy as a bag of cats..."

Deep Sea Storage Urchins (1)

tdelaney (458893) | about 2 years ago | (#42609029)

Haven't fully woken up yet, waiting for caffeine to kick in. Read the title as "Deep Sea Storage Urchins" ...

I'm stoked (1)

RivenAleem (1590553) | about 2 years ago | (#42615309)

When can we put Bruce Willis into storage?

Falling Upward? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42616253)

sed -i '' -e 's/fall/float/g'

FTFY

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?