hrbrmstr

it works fine in system bash for me

What in the name of $DEITY is that map projection?

These "noise storms" are becoming more common than in previous years and are generally tied to global "major" events.

This: https://observablehq.com/@greynoise/noise-storms has some explanation but I'd be glad to elaborate more if needed.

100% ^^this^^

Well, when you force users to login at least 1/month to keep their handle/account, you're 100% going to get an inorganic and non-truthful MAU metric, especially if you define that "A" to be <=20 seconds.

I realize the study was unable to or just did not perform “follow-ups” with the individuals they are positing “no longer work”. But, what exactly are these malcontents doing instead, then?

Living with parents? (Why would a parent enable this juvenile behavior)?

Relying on their spouse's income to survive (and, if so, is there any real harm/issue with this)?

Going “off the books” and just being part of the underground economy (in which case, this 'not working' posit is partly a falsehood).

Even woefully entitled dudes have to eat, no?

It's accessible: https://rud.is/b/2019/10/28/spelunking-macos-screentime-app-...

That particular page appears to have been created with "Unbounce" (https://preview.unbounce.com/) (the "lp-*" strings give that away). If you look for said "lp-" strings on the web there are more than a few pages using them. Unbounce is primarily designed for creating HTML email that won't break and won't get auto-rejected and it's likely easier for the builder program to stick in hardcoded values in-tag than to rely on complex CSS, especially with the varied capabilities of mail clients.

I'm not sure why this particular CVE is [re-]surfacing now, but the January 1, 2019 Rapid7 Sonar HTTP port 80 scan found ~5,000 vulnerable servers and the list of vulnerable versions is larger than what's on the CheckPoint page: https://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2002-0392/?q=CVE-2002-039...

According to https://trends.builtwith.com/framework/Google-Web-Toolkit ~43K sites use it.

Yep. If you move around in google faster than "normal" humans it's flagging that behaviour more lately. I suspect some malicious (i.e. made by content thieves) web scraping instrumentation frameworks have added more natural human behaviours to their capabilities but still operate at a higher-than-"normal human" rate and those of us who are highly adept at legitimately utilizing google now fit into that new classifier slot. It's been super annoying.

Properly constructed information security questionnaires enable a business partner to conduct a high-level, non-intrusive assessment of your organization. You have a right to be concerned about the sensitivity of the data, but if you distrust your business partner that much, then don't do business with them. Your org is not a special snowflake and this is a very common practice by organizations of all shapes and sizes with organizations of all shapes and sizes. They are not the be-all/end-all of information sources (orgs regularly fib on these forms) and you do have a similar right to ask the inquisitors how they will protect your form data (that will also partoy show them you at least give lip-service to data security). It's also far more likely that your organization is going to get pwnd via phishing that is completely unrelated to the potential loss of confidentiality of this document. I say that as someone who has formally studied cybersecurity breaches for years.

Also, as cyberinsurance increasingly becomes "a thing", you're going to see this questionnaire situation increase in frequency. Your org should consider creating a pre-composed (and regularly updated) SSAE 16 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSAE_16) to avoid having to fill out unique assessment questionnaires for every request that comes in. It'll save you time and — unless you "go N/A crazy" on the SSAE 16 — should be accepted by any firm worth doing business with.

Congrats to the team for launching something in 2018 on macOS without it being signed! Great way to encourage good security & safety practices for data folks on macOS! Signing is super hard, too. Totally not baked in to any workflows.

how many times are you going to submit this?

Rather than emoticon-ing away your responsibility in a potential site DoS, perhaps read up on responsible crawling - https://webarchive.jira.com/wiki/display/Heritrix/Responsibl... + http://blog.mischel.com/2011/12/20/writing-a-web-crawler-pol... . You had no need for either unlimited or even 50 parallel crawl tasks. And, if your intent is anything but personal use, you shld prbly (re)read https://www.brewtoad.com/legal since you just got their attention in a pretty big way.