BlackDog is a PowerPC computer with 64 MB of memory and a 512 MB flash disc in a mini case that you can plug into any PC with Windows or Linux via the USB port. The PowerPC processor then takes over the keyboard, mouse, and screen, and starts its Debian Linux, whose desktop you can then see on the PC.
The device runs solely on USB power and also has additional biometric access control via fingerprint. Wow. A nice little hacker kit for on the go, you just need to find a host computer.
And it is completely open and hackable in terms of architecture - there is even a hacking competition to develop interesting applications for it. Although I already know what I would put on it - all the necessary network tools. I think I need to motivate the boss at the company to take a closer look at what you can do with such a device. I haven't had such a strong desire to have something for a long time.
The rumors about the Canon EOS 5D already sound quite interesting - a full-frame sensor camera for 3500 could certainly tempt me. The previous contenders in the full-frame sector were just outrageously expensive (yes, the 5D is too, but the utopia has come a bit closer).
The Oracle Cluster File System could already be a nice alternative to GFS and Coda - at least if this really happens:
The Linux developer responsible for the Linux Kernel 2.6, Andrew Morton, wants to include the Oracle Cluster File System version 2 in the official Linux Kernel as soon as possible. Linux 2.6.14 could already contain OCFS 2 and would then be the first cluster component in the official Linux Kernel.
The previous cluster file systems suffer from the lack of integration - most of the time you can't use them in every kernel version. What is interesting to me is how independent the nodes really are and whether there is also a single point of failure in the Oracle Cluster File System, as there is e.g. the Locking daemon in OpenGFS. So far, we have not been very successful in evaluating cluster file systems in the company, actually they were all somehow stupid ...
In The Hidden Boot Code of the Xbox the X-Box-Linux programmers explain how the security code of the X-Box is structured and how Microsoft built in 3 errors in 512 bytes of code. Lots of kindergarten security mistakes. - as Bruce Schneier calls it.
Also nice is the conclusion of the article:
So with the first version of the MCPX, Microsoft was too naive and apparently did not understand basic security concepts. After they had learnt their lesson, they designed a pretty good system with the second version of the MCPX - but the implementation still contained at least three security holes (Visor, MIST, TEA). They were too fast releasing a new version of the MCPX, spending a lot of money in trashing tons of already manufactured MCPX chips and manufacturing updated ones, apparently without any further code audit which should have revealed the security holes.
512 bytes is a very small amount of code (it fits on a single sheet of paper!), compared to the megabytes of code contained in software like Windows, Internet Explorer or Internet Information Server. Three bugs within these 512 bytes compromised the security completely - a bunch of hackers found them within days after first looking at the code. Why hasn't Microsoft Corp. been able to do the same? Why?
Exactly. Why doesn't Microsoft get this right? Why does Microsoft repeatedly fail so badly at security? And don't give me the silly excuse that the bugs at Microsoft are found so quickly because it has so many users - this is basic knowledge that would be required. This is just sloppy.