Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | h4ckerle's commentslogin

Don't forget Stuxnet which crossed the airgap via infecting USB Devices.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet


Not forgotten at all, deliberately unmentioned as I focused on crossing the air gap by means other than:

  The only way to move data to and from them is for someone to walk across the gap with physical media.
Stuxnet was walked across via physical media (USB drives).


WTF? Thanks for the notice.


From what I've seen, Austria also does this pretty well, with everything being on xyz.gov.at. The problem I see for germany is that the principle of subsidiarity is taken very seriously here. Everything is decided at the lowest sensible level of government. Consequently, there are many very tiny local authorities that have to manage things independently and lack IT admins.


Well there is no nobel price in economics[1] so probably a nobel peace price for ending trade wars.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sveriges_riksbanks_pris_i_ekon...


As a european I again find it crazy what kinds of insecure stuff the banking industry in the US does. Chip+PIN arrived long after they did here, SMS Tan is still a thing while EU Payment Services Directive 2 (PSD2) forbid this in 2018, 7 years ago. Many transactions are still authenticated via signatures on paper cheques, you can use your credit card without a second factor (also regulated by PSD2). I just can't understand why they continue doing this, when I'd assume fixing this would cost less than what fraud must be costing them today.


> I'd assume fixing this would cost less than what fraud must be costing them today.

You'd be wrong there but not for obvious reasons.

Ultimately the cost of fraud is passed on to consumers. Banks pass the costs on to merchants, who in turn increase prices.

As a merchant increasing friction in the checkout process to reduce fraud does not improve profitability (broadly speaking).

So no they had no actual financial incentive to even implement chip and pin, that only happened because it was required by law.


In the case of credit card payments this is true, but for checks and other P2P payments, there is no merchant to pass on costs to.

For these, it's usually the banks absorbing the losses themselves (or their customers, if they aren't legally required to, but in many cases they are).


Check fraud is a relatively small percentage of all fraud.

It's also pretty much a solved problem, it's expensive to cash a check anywhere but into a checking account in your name. If you write too many bad checks or try to deposit them you'll get banned from... the entire banking sector.


Yeah – because the US, until recently, didn't have push P2P payments via banks. The only thing you used to be able to do in your online banking was checking your account balance or maybe initiating wires (which are so expensive that manual review is probably not an issue).

Zelle is changing that and is, expectedly, running into a wall of fraud since banks don't have the authentication infrastructure/know-how to actually support it.


This works very well here. Just visit the website of thing you want canceled, scroll to the footer, click vertrag kündigen and you get a form to cancel, I have done it a few times now and it's 1000x better than searching in some customer portal or even worse calling. Good for the US.


Yes. The court voided privacy shield in a ruling known as Schrems-II. The commission then created the Data Privacy Framework which is esentially the same as privacy shield against the will of the parliament, re-enabling transatlantic data transfer.


As always with laws this is very location specific. In germany there is a very clear clause about patents not applying to "Actions carried out in the private sphere for non-commercial purposes" (§11 PatG, own translation)


Also the patents in question are probably software patents which, in theory, are not granted in Europe.


"I'm in Europe so I don't have to care because software patents are not enforceable here" isn't the solution. Yes, patent law doesn't apply - but copyright law does, and they very much can take down content that references the spec just based on copyright law alone.


In a lot of european countries there's specific legislation allowing computing interop that overrides copyright. Eg https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/computer-...

(Also I'd think copyright in EU doesn't normally apply to implementing protocols as it's supposed to grant monopolies of creative expression? but IANAL)


OT but I didn't realise until now the Hunsrück was a real place... I always assumed it was invented for Werwölfe von Düsterwald!


A general strike has a lot of power. Which is why they are banned in many countries.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: