1 day ago
#803303 Quote
Yxov A victorious GOP would shape the Senate s H-1B debate
Were now hearing that the notorious, flawed IE roll <a href=https://www.stanleycup.com.es>stanley es</a> up was re-released without notification on April 22  Aprilrsquo  Black Tuesday included an IE patch rollup MS15-032/KB 3038314 that had two known problems.First, on some machines, the installer failed with error 80092004. Second, if you got the patch installed, it prevented you from installing alternate search providers in IE. If you started out with Bing as your only search provider  the default , therersquo  no way to add, say, Google, much less make it the default search engine.Microsoft updated the TechNet listing for MS15-032 with this little notice: V2.0  April 30, 2015 : Updated bulletin to inform customers running Internet Explorer on Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2 that the 3038314 update on the Microsoft Download Center was updated on April 22, 2015. Microsoft recommends that customers who installed the 3038314 update prior to April 22 should reinstall the update to be fully protected  <a href=https://www.stanleycup.at>stanley becher</a> from the vulnerabilities discussed in this bulletin.That came as news to me. I canrsquo;t find any notification anywhere that the patch was updated more than a week ago. Therersquo  certainly no notification on the official Windows Update list KB 894199.We have yet another stealthy update mdash; one that went out the automatic update chute without any warning or notification, before or after the event.But wait. It gets worse. T <a href=https://www.owala-water-bottle.ca>owala</a> he KB article, KB 3038314, is now up to version 5. It was last updated on April 29. I canrsquo;t f Bxgt Email Sender Reputation at all, David
Shutdown of whistle-blower site violates First Amendment, they say  A growing number of privacy and civil rights advocates are calling on a federal court to reconsider its decision two weeks ago ordering the controversial Wikileaks.org whistle-blower  <a href=https://www.stanley-cup.pl>stanley termos</a> Web site to be disabled.In a motion filed yesterday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the Electronic Frontier Foundation  EFF , the American Civil Liberties Union, the Project on Government Oversight and a Wikileaks user asked the court for permission to intervene in the case. In a 20-page brief, the groups asked the court to dissolve its permanent injunction disabling the Wikileaks.org Web site. They claimed that the courtrsquo  action violated their First Amendment right to access the contents of the Wikileaks Web site.  The First Amendment encompasses the right to receive information and ideas, the groups said in the brief. The documents and materials posted on the Wikileaks website concern matters of great public interest that each of the parties filing the mo <a href=https://www.polene-italy.it>polene borsa</a> tion had regularly accessed, they said.Expressing similar support was Harvard Law Schoolrsqu <a href=https://www.owalas.com.de>owala</a> o  Berkman Center for Internet  Societyrsquo  Citizen Media Law Project  CMLP . Yesterday, the center filed a brief opposing the courtrsquo  injunctions against Wikileaks and its domain registrar Dynadot LLC. The amici curiae  friend of the court  brief, which was developed in collaboration with several med
0