text:
Family Bible Studies
Enthusiastic Ideas
More Enthusiastic Ideas
Diligently Seeking God
Reaching Forward
Christ and the Cross
Free PDF Downloads
Toil and Tears: Now Is the Time (December 9)
"Then I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, 'Write: "Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on."' 'Yes,' says the Spirit, 'that they may rest from their labors and their works follow them'" (Revelation 14:13).
LIFE IN THE PRESENT WORLD IS A MIXTURE OF JOY AND SORROW, AND THAT IS A FACT WE OFTEN RESENT. We wish our joys didn't always have to be ruined by sorrow rearing its ugly head. And in fact, a day is coming, according to the gospel, when complete joy and rest will be given. But that time is not yet. For now, we need to accept the reality of both our toil and our tears.
Toil. Work was not a punishment for sin (for there was work to do in the Garden of Eden), but when sin entered the world, work became onerous. As a result, our lives in this world are characterized by a wearisomeness that we were never meant to experience. What once would have been richly fulfilling is now a burden.
Tears. Just as sin perverted the natural cycle of work and rest, it also perverted the rhythm of human emotion. Gut-wrenching sorrow and grief at the loss of things that, in Eden, we would never have lost break our hearts to pieces. And the more we know of the ways of the world, the harder it is to be anything but sad.
Rest and Joy. Heaven is presented to us as a place where we'll be refreshed from our toil and relieved from our sorrow. "Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord . . . that they may rest from their labors." And oh, how that promise tugs at our hearts, even more than the "pearly gates" and the "streets of gold." This empty, weary world has worn us out, and we long for simple rest and joy.
But what should we do about the un-rest and the un-joy right now? Accept them! In this world, toil and tears are not the exception but the norm. To see that, we need look no further than Jesus' life. He had times of rest, but basically He came here to work. And He went to a wedding feast now and then, but basically He was a Man of Sorrows. He understood that great joy was waiting for Him in heaven, but He also understood that there was work to be done in the meantime. So yes, we will have our toil and tears, but what of that? Now is the time for work. The rest will come later.
"God washes the eyes by tears until they can behold the invisible land where tears shall come no more" (Henry Ward Beecher).
Gary Henry – WordPoints.com
Daily Family Bible Studies
Biblical themes for families to talk about together. Subscribe by email.
Welcome to "Daily Family Bible Studies" -- your subscription will start next Saturday!
Realism (January 20)
A commitment to reality is a good thing. Compared to what we sometimes wish to be real or prefer to be real, what is real is almost always more full of wonder. As Eudora Welty said, "The very greatest mystery is in unsheathed reality itself."
It's a Serious Sin to Discourage Others (January 20)
"No man is so insignificant as to be sure his example can do no harm," wrote Edward Hyde. It's hard enough already for those around us to keep moving ahead. If we make it even harder for them by our example, we should expect God's displeasure.
Each day's page from Diligently Seeking God. Daily motivation to take God more seriously.
Welcome to "Diligently Seeking God" -- your subscription will start tomorrow morning!
About WordPoints Publishing
Gary's Monthly Report
Curmudgeon's Quotations
Log In|Log Out
Gary Henry / WordPoints
1310 Snake Foot Drive, Apt 104


text:
Home / Product / Why Microsoft?
Choose another page Pricing Provance IT Service Management ServiceTeam ITSM Provance IT Asset Management Why Microsoft?
The Microsoft mission is to empower every person and every organization on the planet to achieve more.
Provance® ITSM runs natively in Microsoft Dynamics 365. Consequently, there isn't a sharp line for when Dynamics 365 ends and Provance ITSM begins. As Dynamics 365 evolves and benefits from the investments Microsoft makes in emerging and future technologies, Provance ITSM will and therefore our customers.
Microsoft Investment in the Cloud
Since 1989—when Microsoft sold its first SQL database and built its first data center—Microsoft has invested over $15 Billion on Cloud infrastructure. Now they run over 200 cloud services, spanning a range of end uses from Azure to Xbox. They have one of the most extensive and connected cloud networks in the world with 100 data centers in 54 regions, 70,000 miles of fiber and 130 edge sites. Microsoft offers complete SaaS (Office 365, Dynamics 365 & LinkedIn), PaaS, IaaS and hybrid cloud with over 600 Azure products. More than 95 percent of Fortune 500 companies use Azure, which has over 70 certifications—more than any other cloud service provider. They also spend more than about $1 Billion on cyber security every year.
Microsoft Investment in Artificial Intelligence
Across their complete business, Microsoft spends about $3.977 Billion in R&D quarterly. With over 1,000 award-winning computer scientists, physicists, engineers and mathematicians, the Microsoft researchers are developing Artificial Intelligence (AI) and other innovative technologies. Specifically, Microsoft has now taken the top positions in three important industry competitions hosted by Salesforce, the Allen Institute for AI, and Stanford University.
Since Microsoft introduced their auto-correct spellchecker back in 1993, they have been infusing their products with AI ever since. Here's a short list of some of the ways in which Microsoft Dynamics 365 leverages built-in AI:
Relationship Insights
Cross-Sell/Up-Sel
Knowledge Based Insights
Preemptive Service
Smart Notifications
Predictive Sales and Inventory Forecast
Intent Analysis
Watch Dynamics 365 AI for Sales
Watch Dynamics 365 for Customer Service
Microsoft Investment in Power Platform
The Microsoft Power Platform—Power Apps, Power Automate and Power BI—lets you connect apps, data and devices in the Cloud. Microsoft also has over 200 connectors, including connectors for Salesforce, Twitter, Google Services and more.
Microsoft Investment in Analytics
Power BI is the world's leading business analytics solution with over 5 million subscribers. For 11 consecutive years, Microsoft is positioned in the leaders quadrant in the Gartner Magic Quadrant for Analytics and Business Intelligence.
Find out what you can do with Provance ITSM
Webcasts: TechTalk: How the Power Platform Enables Outstanding IT Service Management
Not all ITSM solutions are created equal. What makes our newest ITSM solution, ServiceTeam® ITSM so easy-to-use? Easy-to-modify? Easy-to-implement? The platform is the secret, the Microsoft Power Platform, that is...

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: Dynamics AX Workflows I have a quastion regarding AX workflows.
I remove an automated task from existing workflow. I saved and versionized corectlly without any erros and finally I activate the saved version with success.
I create some SalesOrders and triger the workflow , then  I can see under the "workflow History form" in "SalesOrders form" that these orders still follow the old workflow and not the new one.
What options I have in order my SalesOrders follow the newest (and already activated ) workflow
*CIL compile or AOS restart is not an option (Prod System)
Thanks,
Nikos

A: I found the solution for this specific problem that at least worked for me.
I delete the individual bach jobs for worflow messaging.
Workflow due date processing,
Workflow line-item notifications,
Workflow message processing,
I open the workflow infostracture configurator....and recreate them.
Now my orders follow the correct workflow.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Most dentists will build a website just for informational purposes. These types of dental websites are great because it give your new dental patients all the information about your dental practice from staff member to what types of insurances you accept in your dental office.... The Devonshire Dental Associates website design is visually appealing in its choice of colors and layout. The maroon pulled from the apple logo compliments the grays used in the top header. The maroon pulled from the apple logo compliments the grays used in the top header.
The Devonshire Dental Associates website design is visually appealing in its choice of colors and layout. The maroon pulled from the apple logo compliments the grays used in the top header. The maroon pulled from the apple logo compliments the grays used in the top header. how to become a certified justice of the peace Drive new patients to your practice. Our dental websites provide a lasting first impression online while putting patients at ease through educational videos, thoughtful content and unique features that sustain engagement and retention.
Establishing business online is almost necessary since thousands of companies are now using the Internet to promote products and services. If you have a dental practice, now is the right time to consider a good dental website to help your clinic maximize its potentials.


FCC reveals that the Moto Z3 Play will be powered by a Snapdragon 636 SoC coupled with 4 GB RAM, and there will be 32 GB and 64 GB storage options. Other specs include a 6.1-inch display, chassis that match the size of all previous Z models for Moto Mod compatibility, plus a 5 MP selfie cam and a dual 12 MP + 8 MP rear cam.
It seems Lenovo and Motorola are almost ready to announce the Moto Z3 mid-range smartphone line as leaked case renders and FCC-approved specs are starting to surface online. First spotted by the NashvilleChatterClass blog, the technical specifications for the Moto Z3 Play have already been approved by the FCC under the IHDT56XE5 ID, and the phone should officially be announced this April.
According to the FCC application file, the Moto Z3 Play will come with a 6.1-inch display and the chassis seem to be the same size as that on the Z2, so all current Moto Mods should work on the Z3, as well. There will be two version powered by the Snapdragon 636 SoC – one with 4 GB RAM + 32 GB storage and a more expensive one with 4 GB RAM + 64 GB storage – both getting a 3,000 mAh battery, dual SIM option and a fingerprint reader somewhere on the back. The imaging hardware includes a 5 MP selfie cam and a dual 12 MP + 8 MP camera on the back.
The Moto Z3 Play will be available in North America through Verizon, as well as in Brazil and other Latin American countries. The FFC file does not reveal any pricing info, but the speculated MSRP is somewhere between US$450-500.


Happy the people who know you, Lord, who walk in the radiance of your face.
Elizabeth was awakened by the noise coming from the hall between her apartment and the Goldfarbs. Her bedroom shared a wall with the hall and Beth was, for the first time, aware of this fact. She stirred in bed and then listened intently to the rise in pitch and volume of the voices. Getting out of bed, Beth pulled on her robe, stepped into her slippers and made her way to the door. She wasn't sure if she wanted to open it and instead put her ear to it in hopes of catching enough words to figure out the cause for the commotion.
"Oh my, please, I am sorry Mitzi," Beth said as she left her door ajar and moved towards Mitzi. Mitzi who had been so kind to her just days before, bringing her food and companionship. How ironic that Mitzi, who had so patiently taught Beth how to say the mourner's greeting, was now hearing it issue from Beth's mouth.
Ayala had told Beth earlier in the week that Mitzi's husband had been quite ill for the past few months, congestive heart failure had been the diagnosis. Everyone in the complex knew that his time was limited and yet no one could imagine life without him was what Ayala had said. Again, how ironic it was that Ayala had actually been saying words that would apply to the emptiness her death had left as well. It seemed clear that a friend's death, whether expected or not, left an emptiness that was impossible to fill.
Maybe that was what God intended, Beth thought. That we all have a role to fill, a part in God's divine plan. And when we do what we were brought forth to do, we have affected certain lives in such a way that we continue to live on in the memories of those people. Beth knew for certain that Ayala would always live on in Beth's heart and mind. Beth also knew that her life was richer for having known Ayala for only a few short days. Could the same be said for people who had known Beth? She worried that such a statement could not be said. Was she doing what God called her forth to do?
As she was standing in the hall, Rachel and Sipporah appeared at the top of the stairs. Mitzi's neighbors began speaking in Hebrew, undoubtedly telling Rachel and Sipporah the news of Chaim's death. Hearing his name, which Beth had completely forgotten, made the memory of him delivering the bag of food from Mitzi flood Beth's mind.
"Or you've finally let go of some things that have been on your mind, thus allowing you to sleep," offered Sipporah. Beth knew she was right and gave a silent prayer of gratitude for what the restful sleep undoubtedly did for her emotional and physical well-being.
"Give me twenty minutes and we can start our day," Beth said as she headed towards the bathroom to splash her face with cold water and brush her teeth.
Beth laughed and closed the bathroom door. She was a willing participant in whatever Rachel had on today's agenda. She splashed the cold water on her face, applied a moisturizer that also contained a sunscreen, and added a few strokes of mascara for good measure. Although as soon as she applied the mascara she regretted it, thinking that if the day held any more tears, her face would be a streaked mess. Staring at herself in the mirror she saw a woman whose neck and jowl line were a bit weaker than just a year ago but whose eyes still sparkled with the hopes of what a new day could bring.
Rachel and Sipporah joined her at the door. As they walked out Rachel informed Beth that today they were going to The Wailing Wall, also called The Western Wall, and that they would also venture to Golgotha and the Garden Tomb.
Beth had enjoyed Rachel's discourse before entering The Holy Sepulchre and asked if Rachel would be kind enough to share information about today's sites. Maybe it was the teacher in Beth, but the information ahead of time had made the experience that much more valuable. Rachel agreed and began with information about The Wailing Wall.
Beth was, once again, intrigued by the information that Rachel was sharing. She knew that Rachel must have been a favorite professor at the university. She clearly enjoyed disseminating knowledge in an interesting and comprehensive way. Beth found Rachel's talks to be quite valuable.
Beth thought of the marketplace and the vibrant life that the Arabs brought to it and received from it. She knew that Ayala had fondly thought of the merchants as friends and Beth was glad to have seen the very human side of the difficult co-existence. Ayala and her favorite merchant had died together from assailants still unknown. Two families had been greatly affected by the tragedy: one Arab, the other Jew.
Beth agreed with Sipporah's assessment recalling the popular phrase, You can't see the forest for the trees. So, in this case seeing the forest would have been more heart wrenching for the Jews than just seeing the trees.
By this time they had parked and Rachel suggested that Beth write out a "kvitlich." She said it was a paper that had a prayer, or prayer request, on it and would be inserted into one of the cracks in the wall. Here she was hand delivering her prayers to the wall that God's presence was said to never leave. It was almost too much to bear. Beth's mind flooded with prayers that ran from the purely selfish to the purely selfless. She thought of praying for her children; that Sophia would know how much Beth loved her and felt blessed to have her as a daughter or that one day all her children would find wonderful spouses, or that her own career would flourish, or that the world would know Christ's love and peace.
Her mind was filled with hopes and dreams for herself, her family, her friends, her neighbors, and the world. What to ask? she postulated. Where to begin?
In the end her prayer request was simple. She remembered the story of a peasant who went to pray and but was unable to read from his prayer book. He was an unlearned man, not scholarly, and felt that whatever words he would offer to God would be inadequate. He chose to simply say the alphabet, out loud, and humbly suggested that God use the letters in His own way, for His own purposes. With that in mind, Beth simply wrote on her kvitlich, Thy will be done.
With kvitlich in hand, Beth approached the portion of the wall reserved for women. Interestingly, she had no qualms about the segregation. Nothing could surpass her heightened sense of the divine as she neared the wall.
Beth thought of Pope John Paul's historic trip to the Wailing Wall. She was awed by the realization that millions of people had taken the same trip over the course of hundreds of years. God's presence was surely calling them, just as it was calling her now.
For the second time in as many days, Beth understood the magnificence and splendor of God. She entered into communion with Him and neither heard nor saw anyone else at the wall. Time stood still as Beth rocked and swayed and praised the Creator of all that was, is, and ever shall be. She stood in awe of His glory as she inserted her kvitlich into the wall.
I look fwd to reading this every Tuesday…disappointed that this is the same chapter as last week…already read it last Tuesday. ; ( Can't wait for next week & Chapter 21!!


text:
VIDEO: Lions, Bears Brawl After Matthew Stafford Interception
By Sean Yuille Nov 13, 2011, 7:25pm EST
Share All sharing options for: VIDEO: Lions, Bears Brawl After Matthew Stafford Interception
Sunday's game has been ugly for the Detroit Lions, to say the very least. It got even uglier in the fourth quarter after Matthew Stafford threw yet another interception. On the return, he was being blocked by Chicago Bears cornerback D.J. Moore, who eventually was taken to the ground by Stafford. Stafford had a hold of Moore's helmet and Moore didn't take kindly to this and got up and charged at Stafford, who ducked and took a hit on the ground. This unsurprisingly set off a brawl between the two teams. Take a look after the jump.
After the dust cleared, Moore was the only player penalized and the only player who was ejected from the game. The referees decided his late hit on Stafford, which caused the ensuing fight, was bad enough for an ejection, and I can't disagree. Stafford probably shouldn't have used Moore's helmet to free himself from being blocked, but what did Moore expect to happen when he delivered a hit like that on Stafford?
I think players from both teams will be receiving some FedEx packages with fines for what has gone on in this game.
NFL Fines Matthew Stafford, Rob Sims, Nick Fairley, Kyle Vanden Bosch
NFL Fines: Lions' Nick Fairley Fined $15,000 For Roughing The Passer


text:
No Escaping Medical Copayments, Even in Prison
Stateline Article July 22, 2015
By: Michael Ollove Topics: Health Read time:
Prisoner Copays
Dr. David Mathis examines the ear of an inmate at the California Medical Facility in Vacaville in 2012. California is one of at least 38 states that authorize the collection of medical fees from inmates. (AP)
Even going to prison doesn't spare patients from having to pay medical copays.
In response to the rapidly rising cost of providing health care, states are increasingly authorizing the collection of fees from prisoners for medical services they receive while in state prisons or local jails. At least 38 states now do it, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law and Stateline reporting.
The fees are typically small, $20 or less. And states must waive them when a prisoner is unable to pay but still needs care, in keeping with a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that prisoners have a constitutional right to "adequate" health care.
The rationale for charging copays is the same for prisoners as it is for people not behind bars: to discourage seeking medical care when it is not really needed.
"We do it for the same reason your insurance company does — to eliminate abuse by making the inmates put a little skin the game," said Tommy Thompson, the jail administrator at the Rutherford County Sheriff's Office in Tennessee.
But critics argue charging fees may cause ill inmates to forgo treatment, which can lead to worsening health and higher medical costs down the road as well as the possibility of spreading infections in the close quarters of prison.
"There are ways to deal with high demand other than copays, which are punitive," said Robert Greifinger, the former chief medical officer of the New York Department of Corrections.
A Big Cost for States, Localities
Medical fees, usually for services rendered in the prisons or jails, typically are deducted from a prisoner's commissary fund, which is replenished with money earned in prison jobs or contributions from family members. Prisoners also use their commissary funds to buy snacks, toothpaste, soap and other supplies. Sometimes, according to the Brennan Center, prisoners leave prison with a debt for their medical fees.
Though the fees are slight in most states, there are exceptions. In Texas, for example, the Brennan Center says that a state prison inmate who requests a medical visit can be charged $100, though all health service appointments that inmate makes in the ensuing 12 months are free. In Utah, state prison inmates can be charged up to 10 percent for any hospitalization outside of prison facilities — not to exceed $2,000 in a year.
"It may not seem like a lot of money but, typically, the prisoners are impoverished and, often, so are their families," Greifinger said. "Sometimes, their choices come down to a medical appointment or shampoo."
Health care in prisons and jails is not insurance-based. States and local jurisdictions pay for health care services for inmates. For any state prison system, it is one of the biggest and fastest growing budget items.
A July 2014 analysis by the Pew Charitable Trusts (Pew funds Stateline) found that states spent about $7.7 billion on prison health care in 2011, or about one-fifth of overall prison expenditures. Between 2007 and 2011, states' median growth rate in health spending per inmate was 10 percent.
The inmates' copays don't make much of a dent in the health care budgets of state correctional systems. Pennsylvania, for instance, reports that it collected about $373,000 from inmates in fiscal 2014, while spending $248 million on prisoner health care. Virginia says it collects about $500,000 a year in fees and spends $160 million. California also takes in about half a million in medical fees from prisoners but spends about $2.2 billion on medical care, including dental care and mental health. Michigan says it collects about $190,000 a year with a prison health care budget of $300 million.
The Michigan auditor general earlier this month faulted the state's correctional system for not being aggressive enough in charging inmates copays. It failed to collect fees in 57 percent of inmate health care visits during a two-and-a-half year period starting in October 2011.
Different on the Inside
Chris Gautz, a spokesman for the Michigan department, said charging copays also teaches prisoners lessons about budgeting money, which is useful when they are released.
But Greifinger, the former New York medical officer, said inmates do not have the freedom that everyone else has to easily address their medical needs. For instance, most people who have a severe headache or a bad cut can get quick relief with a trip to a drugstore. Inmates cannot do that. They have to wait for an appointment with a prison doctor or nurse for those situations and, in many places, are charged copays as well.
Steve Rosenberg, president of Community Oriented Correctional Health Services, a nonprofit focused on health care for inmates, said that charging inmates was counter to one of the chief ambitions of health reform under the Affordable Care Act: preventive care, which can forestall worsening medical conditions and costlier treatments in the long run.
"If we have decided preventive care is a good idea, why correction systems would do anything to limit access is a little bit puzzling to me," Rosenberg said.
He said there is a need for studies looking at whether medical fees cut down on health service visits by inmates or the effect they may have on the health of the prison population.
The National Commission on Correctional Health Care, a nonprofit that helps establish professional standards for health care in prisons and jails, opposes any fee-for-service (in which a person is charged for each treatment rendered) or copayment program that restricts prisoners' access to health care.
But recognizing that many states have authorized fees, the commission has issued recommendations that prison systems should follow. Among them: Inmates should only be charged for medical services that they initiate, and they shouldn't be charged for health screening or any required follow-up, emergency care, hospitalizations, perinatal care, in-house lab and diagnostic services, medication, diagnosis and treatment of contagious disease or chronic care.
A few states follow some of the recommendations. Nevada, for instance, only collects medical fees for injuries inmates cause to themselves or which occurred during voluntary recreational activities. Neither Virginia nor California charges for mental health services.
"The point is," said Lauren-Brooke Eisen, senior counsel of the Brennan Center, "you have to be really thoughtful about what you charge for and what you don't." Nobody, she says, wants to see prisoners untreated when they are legitimately sick or injured.
Editor's Picks From Around the Web Gay Marriage Windfall
EXPLORE MORE FROM STATELINE
explore by place Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming
explore by topic Retirement Gambling Immigration Politics and Campaigns Homeland Security Labor Federal Impact Demographics Social Issues Budget Tax Energy and Environment Transportation Economy Education Safety Net Health Justice Business of Government
Stateline Daily
Daily update — original reporting on state policy, plus the day's five top reads from around the web.
About Stateline
Stateline provides daily reporting and analysis on trends in state policy.
Grace Jensen-Moran
Senior Associate, Communications
Sign up for our daily update—original reporting on state policy, plus the day's five top reads from around the Web.


Dear Lafayette Catholic School System families please be aware that students in Kindergarten and12th grade have received a notification of any immunization/s they may need for the 2015-2016 school year. I would like to urge parents of any Kindergartener or 12th grader, to check your child's record for compliance and be reminded any child in these grades found to yet be non-compliant, by September 22, 2015, risk being excluded from school on that date.
Also, parents of 1st and 6th graders should check that your child is up-to-date with state immunization requirements since they will be he next group to be checked for compliance.
All students should be up-to-date on all immunization requirements. Any parents, with an updated record, please turn it in to your child's respective school. If you have any questions regarding this matter, feel free to email Shawn George, Healthy & Safety Coordinator, LCSS, at sgeorge@lcss.org.
I thank you all for your willingness and diligence in helping our school system reach 100% state compliance.


250 moves to open... that means another 250 moves to close again. And that's only if you get them all correct!
Designed by Jean Claude Constantin this puzzle is called Lock 250 because there are 250 moves to open... that means another 250 moves to close again. And that's only if you get them all correct!
The 4 steel sliders on the front move the internal wooden plates of the puzzles and which slider you can move depends on the position of the internal plates. Sliding each one in turn in a particular sequence will unlock and solve the puzzle.
It may not look like it at first but actually, the Lock 250 is in the same family as the Chinese Ring puzzle and others classified as n-ary puzzles. Where the Chinese Ring puzzle is a binary puzzle, moves have 2 states, the Lock 250 has 5 states quinary puzzle.
The puzzle is made from laser-cut plywood and the outside is veneered. This is a natural wood product and so the exact tone of the wood does vary from puzzle to puzzle. I've included a couple of photos of different puzzles to give you an idea of the woods used.
No solution provided. With 250 moves to make... that's 250 of the correct ones! ..... it's not really practical to print a paper solution. How would you know if you were even at the start to begin following the steps?
To read an interesting review that compares this puzzle to its HUGE big brother "Generation Lock" go to Puzzling Times Blog.


As all filters from Aqua Select Plus, this filter has the patented Dry-out protection of the cartridge, so that bacterial growth is avoided.
Hardness and chlorine is reduced. Many heavy metals are removed.
This results in food and drinks with a better aroma. Also the ugly film on the surface of a cup of tea is removed.
The ergonomic shape of the jug and the handle ensures easy handling.
The glass like and optically appealing material (Acryl) makes this design jug also appealing as water or juice container. Without filterholder the contents is about 3 liter.


text:
HomeNew video release
We protect the best things in life – Security for life
New video release in cooperation with Swinkels Family Brewers
1 family. 27 brands. 130 countries. 1800+ employees. 8 million hectolitres of beer a year. Swinkels Family Brewers has a lot to protect over a widespread area and chose AEOS by Nedap to unify access control internationally. Get a sneak preview of our behind-the-scenes video ahead of the full release in two weeks.
https://www.nedapsecurity.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/newsletter-page.mp4
Don't want to miss the full release or any other news?
Subscribe now to our newsletter below!
I want to sign up for the newsletter and agree to the conditions described in the privacy statement


CAMP LIBERTY U.S. MARINE HEADQUARTERS, Iraq—Twelve days into the war against Iraq, commanders say they are pleased with how well soldiers and Marines have done on the battlefield, seizing vital bridges, crossing the Euphrates River and racing toward Baghdad at breakneck speed.
But they also acknowledge that armed resistance has been much bloodier and more determined than expected and that that has meant diverting thousands of troops from the assault on Baghdad to fighting rear-guard actions in the south.
_American ground forces have pushed to within 50 miles of the Iraqi capital in three columns. The Army units are generally staying to the west of the Euphrates River, and Marine units are pushing up two routes through Mesopotamia, the fertile area between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers.


text:
HomeNewsletter
Crypto-Gram
by Bruce Schneier
CTO, IBM Resilient
schneier@schneier.com
https://www.schneier.com
A free monthly newsletter providing summaries, analyses, insights, and commentaries on security: computer and otherwise.
For back issues, or to subscribe, visit Crypto-Gram's web page.
These same essays and news items appear in the Schneier on Security blog, along with a lively and intelligent comment section. An RSS feed is available.
Chip Cards Fail to Reduce Credit Card Fraud in the US
Hidden Cameras in Streetlights
Mailing Tech Support a Bomb
Israeli Surveillance Gear
Worst-Case Thinking Breeds Fear and Irrationality
What Happened to Cyber 9/11?
The PCLOB Needs a Director
Information Attacks against Democracies
Using Machine Learning to Create Fake Fingerprints
How Surveillance Inhibits Freedom of Expression
Propaganda and the Weakening of Trust in Government
Distributing Malware By Becoming an Admin on an Open-Source Project
FBI Takes Down a Massive Advertising Fraud Ring
That Bloomberg Supply-Chain-Hack Story
Three-Rotor Enigma Machine Up for Auction Today
Click Here to Kill Everybody News
The DoJ's Secret Legal Arguments to Break Cryptography
Bad Consumer Security Advice
Security Risks of Chatbots
Your Personal Data is Already Stolen
Banks Attacked through Malicious Hardware Connected to the Local Network
Back Issues of the NSA's Cryptolog
2018 Annual Report from AI Now
New Australian Backdoor Law
Marriott Hack Reported as Chinese State-Sponsored
Real-Time Attacks Against Two-Factor Authentication
[2018.11.15] A new study finds that credit card fraud has not declined since the introduction of chip cards in the US. The majority of stolen card information comes from hacked point-of-sale terminals.
The reasons seem to be twofold. One, the US uses chip-and-signature instead of chip-and-PIN, obviating the most critical security benefit of the chip. And two, US merchants still accept magnetic stripe cards, meaning that thieves can steal credentials from a chip card and create a working cloned mag stripe card.
Boing Boing post.
[2018.11.16] Both the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) are hiding surveillance cameras in streetlights.
According to government procurement data, the DEA has paid a Houston, Texas company called Cowboy Streetlight Concealments LLC roughly $22,000 since June 2018 for "video recording and reproducing equipment." ICE paid out about $28,000 to Cowboy Streetlight Concealments over the same period of time.
It's unclear where the DEA and ICE streetlight cameras have been installed, or where the next deployments will take place. ICE offices in Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio have provided funding for recent acquisitions from Cowboy Streetlight Concealments; the DEA's most recent purchases were funded by the agency's Office of Investigative Technology, which is located in Lorton, Virginia.
Fifty thousand dollars doesn't buy a lot of streetlight surveillance cameras, so either this is a pilot program or there are a lot more procurements elsewhere that we don't know about.
[2018.11.16] I understand his frustration, but this is extreme:
When police asked Cryptopay what could have motivated Salonen to send the company a pipe bomb—or, rather, two pipe bombs, which is what investigators found when they picked apart the explosive package—the only thing the company could think of was that it had declined his request for a password change.
In August 2017, Salonen, a customer of Cryptopay, emailed their customer services team to ask for a new password. They refused, given that it was against the company's privacy policy.
A fair point, as it's never a good idea to send a new password in an email. A password-reset link is safer all round, although it's not clear if Cryptopay offered this option to Salonen.
[2018.11.18] The Israeli Defense Force mounted a botched raid in Gaza. They were attempting to install surveillance gear, which they ended up leaving behind. (There are photos—scroll past the video.) Israeli media is claiming that the capture of this gear by Hamas causes major damage to Israeli electronic surveillance capabilities. The Israelis themselves destroyed the vehicle the commandos used to enter Gaza. I'm guessing they did so because there was more gear in it they didn't want falling into the Palestinians' hands.
Can anyone intelligently speculate about what the photos shows? And if there are other photos on the Internet, please post them.
[2018.11.18] Here's a crazy story from the UK. Basically, someone sees a man and a little girl leaving a shopping center. Instead of thinking "it must be a father and daughter, which happens millions of times a day and is perfectly normal," he thinks "this is obviously a case of child abduction and I must alert the authorities immediately." And the police, instead of thinking "why in the world would this be a kidnapping and not a normal parental activity," thinks "oh my god, we must all panic immediately." And they do, scrambling helicopters, searching cars leaving the shopping center, and going door-to-door looking for clues. Seven hours later, the police eventually came to realize that she was safe asleep in bed.
Lenore Skenazy writes further:
Can we agree that something is wrong when we leap to the worst possible conclusion upon seeing something that is actually nice? In an email Furedi added that now, "Some fathers told me that they think and look around before they kiss their kids in public. Society is all too ready to interpret the most innocent of gestures as a prelude to abusing a child."
So our job is to try to push the re-set button.
If you see an adult with a child in plain daylight, it is not irresponsible to assume they are caregiver and child. Remember the stat from David Finkelhor, head of the Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire. He has heard of NO CASE of a child kidnapped from its parents in public and sold into sex trafficking.
We are wired to see "Taken" when we're actually witnessing something far less exciting called Everyday Life. Let's tune in to reality.
This is the problem with the "see something, say something" mentality. As I wrote back in 2007:
If you ask amateurs to act as front-line security personnel, you shouldn't be surprised when you get amateur security.
And the police need to understand the base-rate fallacy better.
[2018.11.19] A recent article in the Atlantic asks why we haven't seen a"cyber 9/11″ in the past fifteen or so years. (I, too, remember the increasingly frantic and fearful warnings of a "cyber Peal Harbor," "cyber Katrina"—when that was a thing—or "cyber 9/11." I made fun of those warnings back then.) The author's answer:
Three main barriers are likely preventing this. For one, cyberattacks can lack the kind of drama and immediate physical carnage that terrorists seek. Identifying the specific perpetrator of a cyberattack can also be difficult, meaning terrorists might have trouble reaping the propaganda benefits of clear attribution. Finally, and most simply, it's possible that they just can't pull it off.
Commenting on the article, Rob Graham adds:
I think there are lots of warning from so-called "experts" who aren't qualified to make such warnings, that the press errs on the side of giving such warnings credibility instead of challenging them.
I think mostly the reason why cyberterrorism doesn't happen is that which motivates violent people is different than what which motivates technical people, pulling apart the groups who would want to commit cyberterrorism from those who can.
These are all good reasons, but I think both authors missed the most important one: there simply aren't a lot of terrorists out there. Let's ask the question more generally: why hasn't there been another 9/11 since 2001? I also remember dire predictions that large-scale terrorism was the new normal, and that we would see 9/11-scale attacks regularly. But since then, nothing. We could credit the fantastic counterterrorism work of the US and other countries, but a more reasonable explanation is that there are very few terrorists and even fewer organized ones. Our fear of terrorism is far greater than the actual risk.
This isn't to say that cyberterrorism can never happen. Of course it will, sooner or later. But I don't foresee it becoming a preferred terrorism method anytime soon. Graham again:
In the end, if your goal is to cause major power blackouts, your best bet is to bomb power lines and distribution centers, rather than hack them.
[2018.11.20] The US Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board is looking for a director. Among other things, this board has some oversight role over the NSA. More precisely, it can examine what any executive-branch agency is doing about counterterrorism. So it can examine the program of TSA watchlists, NSA anti-terrorism surveillance, and FBI counterterrorism activities.
The PCLOB was established in 2004 (when it didn't do much), disappeared from 2007-2012, and reconstituted in 2012. It issued a major report on NSA surveillance in 2014. It has dwindled since then, having as few as one member. Last month, the Senate confirmed three new members, including Ed Felten.
So, potentially an important job if anyone out there is interested.
[2018.11.21] Democracy is an information system.
That's the starting place of our new paper: "Common-Knowledge Attacks on Democracy." In it, we look at democracy through the lens of information security, trying to understand the current waves of Internet disinformation attacks. Specifically, we wanted to explain why the same disinformation campaigns that act as a stabilizing influence in Russia are destabilizing in the United States.
The answer revolves around the different ways autocracies and democracies work as information systems. We start by differentiating between two types of knowledge that societies use in their political systems. The first is common political knowledge, which is the body of information that people in a society broadly agree on. People agree on who the rulers are and what their claim to legitimacy is. People agree broadly on how their government works, even if they don't like it. In a democracy, people agree about how elections work: how districts are created and defined, how candidates are chosen, and that their votes count—even if only roughly and imperfectly.
We contrast this with a very different form of knowledge that we call contested political knowledge, which is, broadly, things that people in society disagree about. Examples are easy to bring to mind: how much of a role the government should play in the economy, what the tax rules should be, what sorts of regulations are beneficial and what sorts are harmful, and so on.
This seems basic, but it gets interesting when we contrast both of these forms of knowledge across autocracies and democracies. These two forms of government have incompatible needs for common and contested political knowledge.
For example, democracies draw upon the disagreements within their population to solve problems. Different political groups have different ideas of how to govern, and those groups vie for political influence by persuading voters. There is also long-term uncertainty about who will be in charge and able to set policy goals. Ideally, this is the mechanism through which a polity can harness the diversity of perspectives of its members to better solve complex policy problems. When no-one knows who is going to be in charge after the next election, different parties and candidates will vie to persuade voters of the benefits of different policy proposals.
But in order for this to work, there needs to be common knowledge both of how government functions and how political leaders are chosen. There also needs to be common knowledge of who the political actors are, what they and their parties stand for, and how they clash with each other. Furthermore, this knowledge is decentralized across a wide variety of actors—an essential element, since ordinary citizens play a significant role in political decision making.
Contrast this with an autocracy. There, common political knowledge about who is in charge over the long term and what their policy goals are is a basic condition of stability. Autocracies do not require common political knowledge about the efficacy and fairness of elections, and strive to maintain a monopoly on other forms of common political knowledge. They actively suppress common political knowledge about potential groupings within their society, their levels of popular support, and how they might form coalitions with each other. On the other hand, they benefit from contested political knowledge about nongovernmental groups and actors in society. If no one really knows which other political parties might form, what they might stand for, and what support they might get, that itself is a significant barrier to those parties ever forming.
This difference has important consequences for security. Authoritarian regimes are vulnerable to information attacks that challenge their monopoly on common political knowledge. They are vulnerable to outside information that demonstrates that the government is manipulating common political knowledge to their own benefit. And they are vulnerable to attacks that turn contested political knowledge—uncertainty about potential adversaries of the ruling regime, their popular levels of support and their ability to form coalitions—into common political knowledge. As such, they are vulnerable to tools that allow people to communicate and organize more easily, as well as tools that provide citizens with outside information and perspectives.
For example, before the first stirrings of the Arab Spring, the Tunisian government had extensive control over common knowledge. It required everyone to publicly support the regime, making it hard for citizens to know how many other people hated it, and it prevented potential anti-regime coalitions from organizing. However, it didn't pay attention in time to Facebook, which allowed citizens to talk more easily about how much they detested their rulers, and, when an initial incident sparked a protest, to rapidly organize mass demonstrations against the regime. The Arab Spring faltered in many countries, but it is no surprise that countries like Russia see the Internet openness agenda as a knife at their throats.
Democracies, in contrast, are vulnerable to information attacks that turn common political knowledge into contested political knowledge. If people disagree on the results of an election, or whether a census process is accurate, then democracy suffers. Similarly, if people lose any sense of what the other perspectives in society are, who is real and who is not real, then the debate and argument that democracy thrives on will be degraded. This is what seems to be Russia's aims in their information campaigns against the US: to weaken our collective trust in the institutions and systems that hold our country together. This is also the situation that writers like Adrien Chen and Peter Pomerantsev describe in today's Russia, where no one knows which parties or voices are genuine, and which are puppets of the regime, creating general paranoia and despair.
This difference explains how the same policy measure can increase the stability of one form of regime and decrease the stability of the other. We have already seen that open information flows have benefited democracies while at the same time threatening autocracies. In our language, they transform regime-supporting contested political knowledge into regime-undermining common political knowledge. And much more recently, we have seen other uses of the same information flows undermining democracies by turning regime-supported common political knowledge into regime-undermining contested political knowledge.
In other words, the same fake news techniques that benefit autocracies by making everyone unsure about political alternatives undermine democracies by making people question the common political systems that bind their society.
This framework not only helps us understand how different political systems are vulnerable and how they can be attacked, but also how to bolster security in democracies. First, we need to better defend the common political knowledge that democracies need to function. That is, we need to bolster public confidence in the institutions and systems that maintain a democracy. Second, we need to make it harder for outside political groups to cooperate with inside political groups and organize disinformation attacks, through measures like transparency in political funding and spending. And finally, we need to treat attacks on common political knowledge by insiders as being just as threatening as the same attacks by foreigners.
There's a lot more in the paper.
This essay was co-authored by Henry Farrell, and previously appeared on Lawfare.com.
[2018.11.23] Researchers are able to create fake fingerprints that result in a 20% false-positive rate.
The problem is that these sensors obtain only partial images of users' fingerprints—at the points where they make contact with the scanner. The paper noted that since partial prints are not as distinctive as complete prints, the chances of one partial print getting matched with another is high.
The artificially generated prints, dubbed DeepMasterPrints by the researchers, capitalize on the aforementioned vulnerability to accurately imitate one in five fingerprints in a database. The database was originally supposed to have only an error rate of one in a thousand.
Another vulnerability exploited by the researchers was the high prevalence of some natural fingerprint features such as loops and whorls, compared to others. With this understanding, the team generated some prints that contain several of these common features. They found that these artificial prints were more likely to match with other prints than would be normally possible.
If this result is robust—and I assume it will be improved upon over the coming years—it will make the current generation of fingerprint readers obsolete as secure biometrics. It also opens a new chapter in the arms race between biometric authentication systems and fake biometrics that can fool them.
More interestingly, I wonder if similar techniques can be brought to bear against other biometrics are well.
Research paper.
Slashdot thread
[2018.11.26] In my book Data and Goliath , I write about the value of privacy. I talk about how it is essential for political liberty and justice, and for commercial fairness and equality. I talk about how it increases personal freedom and individual autonomy, and how the lack of it makes us all less secure. But this is probably the most important argument as to why society as a whole must protect privacy: it allows society to progress.
We know that surveillance has a chilling effect on freedom. People change their behavior when they live their lives under surveillance. They are less likely to speak freely and act individually. They self-censor. They become conformist. This is obviously true for government surveillance, but is true for corporate surveillance as well. We simply aren't as willing to be our individual selves when others are watching.
Let's take an example: hearing that parents and children are being separated as they cross the US border, you want to learn more. You visit the website of an international immigrants' rights group, a fact that is available to the government through mass Internet surveillance. You sign up for the group's mailing list, another fact that is potentially available to the government. The group then calls or e-mails to invite you to a local meeting. Same. Your license plates can be collected as you drive to the meeting; your face can be scanned and identified as you walk into and out of the meeting. If, instead of visiting the website, you visit the group's Facebook page, Facebook knows that you did and that feeds into its profile of you, available to advertisers and political activists alike. Ditto if you like their page, share a link with your friends, or just post about the issue.
Maybe you are an immigrant yourself, documented or not. Or maybe some of your family is. Or maybe you have friends or coworkers who are. How likely are you to get involved if you know that your interest and concern can be gathered and used by government and corporate actors? What if the issue you are interested in is pro- or anti-gun control, anti-police violence or in support of the police? Does that make a difference?
Maybe the issue doesn't matter, and you would never be afraid to be identified and tracked based on your political or social interests. But even if you are so fearless, you probably know someone who has more to lose, and thus more to fear, from their personal, sexual, or political beliefs being exposed.
This isn't just hypothetical. In the months and years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, many of us censored what we spoke about on social media or what we searched on the Internet. We know from a 2013 PEN study that writers in the United States self-censored their browsing habits out of fear the government was watching. And this isn't exclusively an American event; Internet self-censorship is prevalent across the globe, China being a prime example.
Ultimately, this fear stagnates society in two ways. The first is that the presence of surveillance means society cannot experiment with new things without fear of reprisal, and that means those experiments—if found to be inoffensive or even essential to society—cannot slowly become commonplace, moral, and then legal. If surveillance nips that process in the bud, change never happens. All social progress—from ending slavery to fighting for women's rights—began as ideas that were, quite literally, dangerous to assert. Yet without the ability to safely develop, discuss, and eventually act on those assertions, our society would not have been able to further its democratic values in the way that it has.
Consider the decades-long fight for gay rights around the world. Within our lifetimes we have made enormous strides to combat homophobia and increase acceptance of queer folks' right to marry. Queer relationships slowly progressed from being viewed as immoral and illegal, to being viewed as somewhat moral and tolerated, to finally being accepted as moral and legal.
In the end, it was the public nature of those activities that eventually slayed the bigoted beast, but the ability to act in private was essential in the beginning for the early experimentation, community building, and organizing.
Marijuana legalization is going through the same process: it's currently sitting between somewhat moral, and—depending on the state or country in question—tolerated and legal. But, again, for this to have happened, someone decades ago had to try pot and realize that it wasn't really harmful, either to themselves or to those around them. Then it had to become a counterculture, and finally a social and political movement. If pervasive surveillance meant that those early pot smokers would have been arrested for doing something illegal, the movement would have been squashed before inception. Of course the story is more complicated than that, but the ability for members of society to privately smoke weed was essential for putting it on the path to legalization.
We don't yet know which subversive ideas and illegal acts of today will become political causes and positive social change tomorrow, but they're around. And they require privacy to germinate. Take away that privacy, and we'll have a much harder time breaking down our inherited moral assumptions.
The second way surveillance hurts our democratic values is that it encourages society to make more things illegal. Consider the things you do—the different things each of us does—that portions of society find immoral. Not just recreational drugs and gay sex, but gambling, dancing, public displays of affection. All of us do things that are deemed immoral by some groups, but are not illegal because they don't harm anyone. But it's important that these things can be done out of the disapproving gaze of those who would otherwise rally against such practices.
If there is no privacy, there will be pressure to change. Some people will recognize that their morality isn't necessarily the morality of everyone—and that that's okay. But others will start demanding legislative change, or using less legal and more violent means, to force others to match their idea of morality.
It's easy to imagine the more conservative (in the small-c sense, not in the sense of the named political party) among us getting enough power to make illegal what they would otherwise be forced to witness. In this way, privacy helps protect the rights of the minority from the tyranny of the majority.
This is how we got Prohibition in the 1920s, and if we had had today's surveillance capabilities in the 1920s, it would have been far more effectively enforced. Recipes for making your own spirits would have been much harder to distribute. Speakeasies would have been impossible to keep secret. The criminal trade in illegal alcohol would also have been more effectively suppressed. There would have been less discussion about the harms of Prohibition, less "what if we didn't?" thinking. Political organizing might have been difficult. In that world, the law might have stuck to this day.
China serves as a cautionary tale. The country has long been a world leader in the ubiquitous surveillance of its citizens, with the goal not of crime prevention but of social control. They are about to further enhance their system, giving every citizen a "social credit" rating. The details are yet unclear, but the general concept is that people will be rated based on their activities, both online and off. Their political comments, their friends and associates, and everything else will be assessed and scored. Those who are conforming, obedient, and apolitical will be given high scores. People without those scores will be denied privileges like access to certain schools and foreign travel. If the program is half as far-reaching as early reports indicate, the subsequent pressure to conform will be enormous. This social surveillance system is precisely the sort of surveillance designed to maintain the status quo.
For social norms to change, people need to deviate from these inherited norms. People need the space to try alternate ways of living without risking arrest or social ostracization. People need to be able to read critiques of those norms without anyone's knowledge, discuss them without their opinions being recorded, and write about their experiences without their names attached to their words. People need to be able to do things that others find distasteful, or even immoral. The minority needs protection from the tyranny of the majority.
Privacy makes all of this possible. Privacy encourages social progress by giving the few room to experiment free from the watchful eye of the many. Even if you are not personally chilled by ubiquitous surveillance, the society you live in is, and the personal costs are unequivocal.
This essay originally appeared in McSweeney's issue #54: "The End of Trust." It was reprinted on Wired.com.
[2018.11.27] On November 4, 2016, the hacker "Guccifer 2.0," a front for Russia's military intelligence service, claimed in a blogpost that the Democrats were likely to use vulnerabilities to hack the presidential elections. On November 9, 2018, President Donald Trump started tweeting about the senatorial elections in Florida and Arizona. Without any evidence whatsoever, he said that Democrats were trying to steal the election through "FRAUD."
Cybersecurity experts would say that posts like Guccifer 2.0's are intended to undermine public confidence in voting: a cyber-attack against the US democratic system. Yet Donald Trump's actions are doing far more damage to democracy. So far, his tweets on the topic have been retweeted over 270,000 times, eroding confidence far more effectively than any foreign influence campaign.
We need new ideas to explain how public statements on the Internet can weaken American democracy. Cybersecurity today is not only about computer systems. It's also about the ways attackers can use computer systems to manipulate and undermine public expectations about democracy. Not only do we need to rethink attacks against democracy; we also need to rethink the attackers as well.
This is one key reason why we wrote a new research paper which uses ideas from computer security to understand the relationship between democracy and information. These ideas help us understand attacks which destabilize confidence in democratic institutions or debate.
Our research implies that insider attacks from within American politics can be more pernicious than attacks from other countries. They are more sophisticated, employ tools that are harder to defend against, and lead to harsh political tradeoffs. The US can threaten charges or impose sanctions when Russian trolling agencies attack its democratic system. But what punishments can it use when the attacker is the US president?
People who think about cybersecurity build on ideas about confrontations between states during the Cold War. Intellectuals such as Thomas Schelling developed deterrence theory, which explained how the US and USSR could maneuver to limit each other's options without ever actually going to war. Deterrence theory, and related concepts about the relative ease of attack and defense, seemed to explain the tradeoffs that the US and rival states faced, as they started to use cyber techniques to probe and compromise each others' information networks.
However, these ideas fail to acknowledge one key differences between the Cold War and today. Nearly all states—whether democratic or authoritarian—are entangled on the Internet. This creates both new tensions and new opportunities. The US assumed that the internet would help spread American liberal values, and that this was a good and uncontroversial thing. Illiberal states like Russia and China feared that Internet freedom was a direct threat to their own systems of rule. Opponents of the regime might use social media and online communication to coordinate among themselves, and appeal to the broader public, perhaps toppling their governments, as happened in Tunisia during the Arab Spring.
This led illiberal states to develop new domestic defenses against open information flows. As scholars like Molly Roberts have shown, states like China and Russia discovered how they could "flood" internet discussion with online nonsense and distraction, making it impossible for their opponents to talk to each other, or even to distinguish between truth and falsehood. These flooding techniques stabilized authoritarian regimes, because they demoralized and confused the regime's opponents. Libertarians often argue that the best antidote to bad speech is more speech. What Vladimir Putin discovered was that the best antidote to more speech was bad speech.
Russia saw the Arab Spring and efforts to encourage democracy in its neighborhood as direct threats, and began experimenting with counter-offensive techniques. When a Russia-friendly government in Ukraine collapsed due to popular protests, Russia tried to destabilize new, democratic elections by hacking the system through which the election results would be announced. The clear intention was to discredit the election results by announcing fake voting numbers that would throw public discussion into disarray.
This attack on public confidence in election results was thwarted at the last moment. Even so, it provided the model for a new kind of attack. Hackers don't have to secretly alter people's votes to affect elections. All they need to do is to damage public confidence that the votes were counted fairly. As researchers have argued, "simply put, the attacker might not care who wins; the losing side believing that the election was stolen from them may be equally, if not more, valuable."
These two kinds of attacks—"flooding" attacks aimed at destabilizing public discourse, and "confidence" attacks aimed at undermining public belief in elections—were weaponized against the US in 2016. Russian social media trolls, hired by the "Internet Research Agency," flooded online political discussions with rumors and counter-rumors in order to create confusion and political division. Peter Pomerantsev describes how in Russia, "one moment [Putin's media wizard] Surkov would fund civic forums and human rights NGOs, the next he would quietly support nationalist movements that accuse the NGOs of being tools of the West." Similarly, Russian trolls tried to get Black Lives Matter protesters and anti-Black Lives Matter protesters to march at the same time and place, to create conflict and the appearance of chaos. Guccifer 2.0's blog post was surely intended to undermine confidence in the vote, preparing the ground for a wider destabilization campaign after Hillary Clinton won the election. Neither Putin nor anyone else anticipated that Trump would win, ushering in chaos on a vastly greater scale.
We do not know how successful these attacks were. A new book by John Sides, Michael Tesler and Lynn Vavreck suggests that Russian efforts had no measurable long-term consequences. Detailed research on the flow of news articles through social media by Yochai Benker, Robert Farris, and Hal Roberts agrees, showing that Fox News was far more influential in the spread of false news stories than any Russian effort.
However, global adversaries like the Russians aren't the only actors who can use flooding and confidence attacks. US actors can use just the same techniques. Indeed, they can arguably use them better, since they have a better understanding of US politics, more resources, and are far more difficult for the government to counter without raising First Amendment issues.
For example, when the Federal Communication Commission asked for comments on its proposal to get rid of "net neutrality," it was flooded by fake comments supporting the proposal. Nearly every real person who commented was in favor of net neutrality, but their arguments were drowned out by a flood of spurious comments purportedly made by identities stolen from porn sites, by people whose names and email addresses had been harvested without their permission, and, in some cases, from dead people. This was done not just to generate fake support for the FCC's controversial proposal. It was to devalue public comments in general, making the general public's support for net neutrality politically irrelevant. FCC decision making on issues like net neutrality used to be dominated by industry insiders, and many would like to go back to the old regime.
Trump's efforts to undermine confidence in the Florida and Arizona votes work on a much larger scale. There are clear short-term benefits to asserting fraud where no fraud exists. This may sway judges or other public officials to make concessions to the Republicans to preserve their legitimacy. Yet they also destabilize American democracy in the long term. If Republicans are convinced that Democrats win by cheating, they will feel that their own manipulation of the system (by purging voter rolls, making voting more difficult and so on) are legitimate, and very probably cheat even more flagrantly in the future. This will trash collective institutions and leave everyone worse off.
It is notable that some Arizonan Republicans—including Martha McSally—have so far stayed firm against pressure from the White House and the Republican National Committee to claim that cheating is happening. They presumably see more long term value from preserving existing institutions than undermining them. Very plausibly, Donald Trump has exactly the opposite incentives. By weakening public confidence in the vote today, he makes it easier to claim fraud and perhaps plunge American politics into chaos if he is defeated in 2020.
If experts who see Russian flooding and confidence measures as cyberattacks on US democracy are right, then these attacks are just as dangerous—and perhaps more dangerous—when they are used by domestic actors. The risk is that over time they will destabilize American democracy so that it comes closer to Russia's managed democracy—where nothing is real any more, and ordinary people feel a mixture of paranoia, helplessness and disgust when they think about politics. Paradoxically, Russian interference is far too ineffectual to get us there—but domestically mounted attacks by all-American political actors might.
To protect against that possibility, we need to start thinking more systematically about the relationship between democracy and information. Our paper provides one way to do this, highlighting the vulnerabilities of democracy against certain kinds of information attack. More generally, we need to build levees against flooding while shoring up public confidence in voting and other public information systems that are necessary to democracy.
The first may require radical changes in how we regulate social media companies. Modernization of government commenting platforms to make them robust against flooding is only a very minimal first step. Up until very recently, companies like Twitter have won market advantage from bot infestations—even when it couldn't make a profit, it seemed that user numbers were growing. CEOs like Mark Zuckerberg have begun to worry about democracy, but their worries will likely only go so far. It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his business model depends on not understanding it. Sharp—and legally enforceable—limits on automated accounts are a first step. Radical redesign of networks and of trending indicators so that flooding attacks are less effective may be a second.
The second requires general standards for voting at the federal level, and a constitutional guarantee of the right to vote. Technical experts nearly universally favor robust voting systems that would combine paper records with random post-election auditing, to prevent fraud and secure public confidence in voting. Other steps to ensure proper ballot design, and standardize vote counting and reporting will take more time and discussion—yet the record of other countries show that they are not impossible.
The US is nearly unique among major democracies in the persistent flaws of its election machinery. Yet voting is not the only important form of democratic information. Apparent efforts to deliberately skew the US census against counting undocumented immigrants show the need for a more general audit of the political information systems that we need if democracy is to function properly.
It's easier to respond to Russian hackers through sanctions, counter-attacks and the like than to domestic political attacks that undermine US democracy. To preserve the basic political freedoms of democracy requires recognizing that these freedoms are sometimes going to be abused by politicians such as Donald Trump. The best that we can do is to minimize the possibilities of abuse up to the point where they encroach on basic freedoms and harden the general institutions that secure democratic information against attacks intended to undermine them.
This essay was co-authored with Henry Farrell, and previously appeared on Motherboard, with a terrible headline that I was unable to get changed.
[2018.11.28] The module "event-stream" was infected with malware by an anonymous someone who became an admin on the project.
Cory Doctorow points out that this is a clever new attack vector:
Many open source projects attain a level of "maturity" where no one really needs any new features and there aren't a lot of new bugs being found, and the contributors to these projects dwindle, often to a single maintainer who is generally grateful for developers who take an interest in these older projects and offer to share the choresome, intermittent work of keeping the projects alive.
Ironically, these are often projects with millions of users, who trust them specifically because of their stolid, unexciting maturity.
This presents a scary social-engineering vector for malware: A malicious person volunteers to help maintain the project, makes some small, positive contributions, gets commit access to the project, and releases a malicious patch, infecting millions of users and apps.
[2018.11.29] The FBI announced that it dismantled a large Internet advertising fraud network, and arrested eight people:
A 13-count indictment was unsealed today in federal court in Brooklyn charging Aleksandr Zhukov, Boris Timokhin, Mikhail Andreev, Denis Avdeev, Dmitry Novikov, Sergey Ovsyannikov, Aleksandr Isaev and Yevgeniy Timchenko with criminal violations for their involvement in perpetrating widespread digital advertising fraud. The charges include wire fraud, computer intrusion, aggravated identity theft and money laundering. Ovsyannikov was arrested last month in Malaysia; Zhukov was arrested earlier this month in Bulgaria; and Timchenko was arrested earlier this month in Estonia, all pursuant to provisional arrest warrants issued at the request of the United States. They await extradition. The remaining defendants are at large.
It looks like an impressive piece of police work.
Details of the forensics that led to the arrests.
[2018.11.30] Back in October, Bloomberg reported that China has managed to install backdoors into server equipment that ended up in networks belonging to—among others—Apple and Amazon. Pretty much everybody has denied it (including the US DHS and the UK NCSC). Bloomberg has stood by its story—and is still standing by it.
I don't think it's real. Yes, it's plausible. But first of all, if someone actually surreptitiously put malicious chips onto motherboards en masse, we would have seen a photo of the alleged chip already. And second, there are easier, more effective, and less obvious ways of adding backdoors to networking equipment.
[2018.11.30] Sotheby's is auctioning off a (working, I think) three-rotor Enigma machine today. They're expecting it to sell for about $200K.
I have an Enigma, but it's missing the rotors.
[2018.11.30] My latest book is doing well. And I've been giving lots of talks and interviews about it. (I can recommend three interviews: the Cyberlaw podcast with Stewart Baker, the Lawfare podcast with Ben Wittes, and Le Show with Harry Shearer.) My book talk at Google is also available.
The Audible version was delayed for reasons that were never adequately explained to me, but it's finally out.
I still have signed copies available. Be aware that this is both slower and more expensive than online bookstores.
[2018.12.03] Earlier this year, the US Department of Justice made a series of legal arguments as to why Facebook should be forced to help the government wiretap Facebook Messenger. Those arguments are still sealed. The ACLU is suing to make them public.
[2018.12.04] There are lots of articles about there telling people how to better secure their computers and online accounts. While I agree with some of it, this article contains some particularly bad advice:
1. Never, ever, ever use public (unsecured) Wi-Fi such as the Wi-Fi in a café, hotel or airport. To remain anonymous and secure on the Internet, invest in a Virtual Private Network account, but remember, the bad guys are very smart, so by the time this column runs, they may have figured out a way to hack into a VPN.
I get that unsecured Wi-Fi is a risk, but does anyone actually follow this advice? I think twice about accessing my online bank account from a pubic Wi-Fi network, and I do use a VPN regularly. But I can't imagine offering this as advice to the general public.
2. If you or someone you know is 18 or older, you need to create a Social Security online account. Today! Go to www.SSA.gov.
This is actually good advice. Brian Krebs calls it planting a flag, and it's basically claiming your own identity before some fraudster does it for you. But why limit it to the Social Security Administration? Do it for the IRS and the USPS. And while you're at it, do it for your mobile phone provider and your Internet service provider.
3. Add multifactor verifications to ALL online accounts offering this additional layer of protection, including mobile and cable accounts. (Note: Have the codes sent to your email, as SIM card "swapping" is becoming a huge, and thus far unstoppable, security problem.)
Yes. Two-factor authentication is important, and I use it on some of my more important online accounts. But I don't have it installed on everything. And I'm not sure why having the codes sent to your e-mail helps defend against SIM-card swapping; I'm sure you get your e-mail on your phone like everyone else. (Here's some better advice about that.)
4. Create hard-to-crack 12-character passwords. NOT your mother's maiden name, not the last four digits of your Social Security number, not your birthday and not your address. Whenever possible, use a "pass-phrase" as your answer to account security questions—such as "Youllneverguessmybrotherinlawsmiddlename."
I'm a big fan of random impossible-to-remember passwords, and nonsense answers to secret questions. It would be great if she suggested a password manager to remember them all.
5. Avoid the temptation to use the same user name and password for every account. Whenever possible, change your passwords every six months.
Yes to the first part. No, no no—a thousand times no—to the second.
6. To prevent "new account fraud" (i.e., someone trying to open an account using your date of birth and Social Security number), place a security freeze on all three national credit bureaus (Equifax, Experian and TransUnion). There is no charge for this service.
I am a fan of security freezes.
7. Never plug your devices (mobile phone, tablet and/or laptop) into an electrical outlet in an airport. Doing so will make you more susceptible to being hacked. Instead, travel with an external battery charger to keep your devices charged.
Seriously? Yes, I've read the articles about hacked charging stations, but I wouldn't think twice about using a wall jack at an airport. If you're really worried, buy a USB condom.
[2018.12.05] Good essay on the security risks—to democratic discourse—of chatbots.
[2018.12.06] In an excellent blog post, Brian Krebs makes clear something I have been saying for a while:
Likewise for individuals, it pays to accept two unfortunate and harsh realities:
Reality #1: Bad guys already have access to personal data points that you may believe should be secret but which nevertheless aren't, including your credit card information, Social Security number, mother's maiden name, date of birth, address, previous addresses, phone number, and yes—even your credit file.
Reality #2: Any data point you share with a company will in all likelihood eventually be hacked, lost, leaked, stolen or sold—usually through no fault of your own. And if you're an American, it means (at least for the time being) your recourse to do anything about that when it does happen is limited or nil.
Once you've owned both of these realities, you realize that expecting another company to safeguard your security is a fool's errand, and that it makes far more sense to focus instead on doing everything you can to proactively prevent identity thieves, malicious hackers or other ne'er-do-wells from abusing access to said data.
His advice is good.
[2018.12.07] Kaspersky is reporting on a series of bank hacks—called DarkVishnya—perpetrated through malicious hardware being surreptitiously installed into the target network:
In 2017-2018, Kaspersky Lab specialists were invited to research a series of cybertheft incidents. Each attack had a common springboard: an unknown device directly connected to the company's local network. In some cases, it was the central office, in others a regional office, sometimes located in another country. At least eight banks in Eastern Europe were the targets of the attacks (collectively nicknamed DarkVishnya), which caused damage estimated in the tens of millions of dollars.
Each attack can be divided into several identical stages. At the first stage, a cybercriminal entered the organization's building under the guise of a courier, job seeker, etc., and connected a device to the local network, for example, in one of the meeting rooms. Where possible, the device was hidden or blended into the surroundings, so as not to arouse suspicion.
The devices used in the DarkVishnya attacks varied in accordance with the cybercriminals' abilities and personal preferences. In the cases we researched, it was one of three tools:
netbook or inexpensive laptop
Raspberry Pi computer
Bash Bunny, a special tool for carrying out USB attacks
Inside the local network, the device appeared as an unknown computer, an external flash drive, or even a keyboard. Combined with the fact that Bash Bunny is comparable in size to a USB flash drive, this seriously complicated the search for the entry point. Remote access to the planted device was via a built-in or USB-connected GPRS/3G/LTE modem.
Slashdot thread.
[2018.12.07] Five years ago, the NSA published 23 years of its internal magazine, Cryptolog. There were lots of redactions, of course.
What's new is a nice user interface for the issues, noting highlights and levels of redaction.
[2018.12.10] The research group AI Now just published its annual report. It's an excellent summary of today's AI security challenges, as well as a policy agenda to address them.
This is related, and also worth reading.
[2018.12.12] Last week, Australia passed a law giving the government the ability to demand backdoors in computers and communications systems. Details are still to be defined, but it's really bad.
Note: Many people e-mailed me to ask why I haven't blogged this yet. One, I was busy with other things. And two, there's nothing I can say that I haven't said many times before.
If there are more good links or commentary, please post them in the comments.
EDITED TO ADD (12/13): The Australian government response is kind of embarrassing.
[2018.12.13] The New York Times and Reuters are reporting that China was behind the recent hack of Marriott Hotels. Note that this is still uncomfirmed, but interesting if it is true.
Private investigators looking into the breach have found hacking tools, techniques and procedures previously used in attacks attributed to Chinese hackers, said three sources who were not authorized to discuss the company's private probe into the attack.
That suggests that Chinese hackers may have been behind a campaign designed to collect information for use in Beijing's espionage efforts and not for financial gain, two of the sources said.
While China has emerged as the lead suspect in the case, the sources cautioned it was possible somebody else was behind the hack because other parties had access to the same hacking tools, some of which have previously been posted online.
Identifying the culprit is further complicated by the fact that investigators suspect multiple hacking groups may have simultaneously been inside Starwood's computer networks since 2014, said one of the sources.
I used to have opinions about whether these attributions are true or not. These days, I tend to wait and see.
[2018.12.14] Attackers are targeting two-factor authentication systems:
Attackers working on behalf of the Iranian government collected detailed information on targets and used that knowledge to write spear-phishing emails that were tailored to the targets' level of operational security, researchers with security firm Certfa Lab said in a blog post. The emails contained a hidden image that alerted the attackers in real time when targets viewed the messages. When targets entered passwords into a fake Gmail or Yahoo security page, the attackers would almost simultaneously enter the credentials into a real login page. In the event targets' accounts were protected by 2fa, the attackers redirected targets to a new page that requested a one-time password.
This isn't new. I wrote about this exact attack in 2005 and 2009.
Since 1998, CRYPTO-GRAM has been a free monthly newsletter providing summaries, analyses, insights, and commentaries on security technology. To subscribe, or to read back issues, see Crypto-Gram's web page.
You can also read these articles on my blog, Schneier on Security.
Please feel free to forward CRYPTO-GRAM, in whole or in part, to colleagues and friends who will find it valuable. Permission is also granted to reprint CRYPTO-GRAM, as long as it is reprinted in its entirety.
Bruce Schneier is an internationally renowned security technologist, called a security guru by the Economist . He is the author of 14 books—including the New York Times best-seller Data and Goliath: The Hidden Battles to Collect Your Data and Control Your World —as well as hundreds of articles, essays, and academic papers. His newsletter and blog are read by over 250,000 people. Schneier is a fellow at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University; a Lecturer in Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School; a board member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, AccessNow, and the Tor Project; and an advisory board member of EPIC and VerifiedVoting.org. He is also a special advisor to IBM Security and the CTO of IBM Resilient.
Crypto-Gram is a personal newsletter. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of IBM, IBM Security, or IBM Resilient.
Copyright © 2018 by Bruce Schneier.
← November 15, 2018 January 15, 2019 →
Crypto-gram Archives
Archive by Year


text:
Timothy R. Peshick
Timothy R. Peshick, 68 Timothy R. Peshick, US Army (ret), conservative patriot, and lover of old westerns, died on Tuesday, October 20, 2020. He never lost his courage, nor his sense of humor. Tim was a loving father to Timothy…
Timothy R. Peshick, 68
Timothy R. Peshick, US Army (ret), conservative patriot, and lover of old westerns, died on Tuesday, October 20, 2020. He never lost his courage, nor his sense of humor. Tim was a loving father to Timothy R. Peshick II and…
Reynolds Daniel Pignone
Reynolds Daniel Pignone, age 79, of Somerville, Massachusetts, passed away Tuesday morning May 5,2020 from a long three-week battle of Covid-19 along with the battle of Parkinson's disease. Born April 29, 1941, in Somerville, Massachusetts, he was the son of…
Richard L. Cecchinelli
Richard L. Cecchinelli, 68, of Saugus, passed away comfortably on July 26 after a courageous 15 year battle with cancer. Devoted to his family, career and the game of golf, Richard was a caring, honorable man with a love for…
Christine (Clark) Walmsley of Revere Mass died peacefully surrounded by family at home on October 2, 2016. Born and raised in Dorchester Mass, she was the daughter of George and Teresa Clark. She was the life Partner of Leroy Tibbs….


Just as the title of a book gives the reader an indication of what the work is about, Title tags tell search engines what Web pages are about. For that reason, you need to create unique titles for every important page on your site.
In addition to the title tags, every important page on your site should also have a unique, keyword optimized meta description. It should also include a call to action. Meta descriptions are what appear beneath the titles in search results and are the equivalent of your :30 elevator pitch. If you fail to provide meta descriptions, search engines will pull copy from your pages based on what they determine to be the most relevant copy for the particular query. In most cases, this doesn't make for compelling sales pitches.
While we're on the topic of meta data, let's talk a little about meta keywords. At one time search engines placed a great deal of importance on them, but that's no longer the case. There's nothing wrong with including meta keywords, but remember to make them relevant to the page and don't "keyword stuff" your tags by including everything you hope to rank for. Since search engines no longer place any value on meta keywords doing this won't hurt anything, but it certainly won't help either.
Have questions about SEO best practices? Give us a call at 817-545-1188 or post a comment below.


text:
Things That Go Straight to the Top of the To-Read Pile This Morning
Hilary Bok Joins Those Seeking Impeachment
Dana Milbank Is Bored...
In his latest "Washington Sketch," he finds no news in Bush's latest Iraq speech. (And why can I never find Dana Milbank's "Washington Sketch" on the washingtonpost.com home page?)
Repetitious, Yes, but They Didn't Cut and Run: Lawmakers, diplomats and assorted military types settled into their seats... to watch President Bush's fourth speech on Iraq in a fortnight.... In the end, everybody agreed: They had seen this movie before.For the 22nd time in a speech as president, Bush said we would not "cut and run" in Iraq. For the 28th time, he said Iraq was "the central front" in the war on terrorism. And, for the 100th time, Bush promised that "we will prevail" against the terrorists.
The lack of new material in Bush's speech complicated the second act in yesterday's double feature. Jack Murtha (Pa.), the Democratic congressman who has been rebutting each of the four Iraq speeches, had little to work with. "He keeps saying the same thing over and over," Murtha protested during his regular televised rebuttal.... Murtha opted to rebut the location of Bush's speech. "Let me take a few minutes to remark about the irony of President Bush speaking today in the Ronald Reagan Building," he said. Given "the sorry state of our Army, the erosion of the U.S. credibility in the world, and the deficits far as the eye can see, you've got to believe President Reagan is turning over in his grave."...
After four engagements, the Bush-Murtha act was getting stale. When Murtha, a hawkish retired Marine, first called for a pullout from Iraq last month, it was standing-room only. Yesterday, only six reporters showed up to see Murtha, who arrived early and stood, silently, at the lectern. Behind him in the House television gallery, titles on a bookshelf were visible: "A History of the American People," "Constitutional Law," and, appropriately for the dyspeptic Murtha, "Diseases of the Stomach."
By contrast, Bush's setting left nothing to chance: 24 flags behind him, four poinsettias in front, and top Cabinet members and supportive lawmakers planted in the audience. Yet... the president's delivery was muted.... His four Iraq speeches... were full of numbing repetition. Washingtonpost.com's Adrian Holovaty did a computer analysis of the four Iraq speeches and found dozens of phrases repeated in all four. Bush invoked "democracy" 83 times, "freedom" 68 times and "security" 75 times....
Even the White House was not pretending to cover new ground..... John Roberts asked White House spokesman Scott McClellan about Bush's statement that "I'm responsible for the decision to go into Iraq."
"I don't think that's new," the press secretary cautioned. Not much was...
December 15, 2005 at 14:18 | Permalink | Comments (7)


How do I invest in Italian stocks?
The easiest way to invest in the Italian stock market is to invest in a broad market index. This can be done at low cost by using ETFs.
On the Italian stock market you find 2 indices, which are tracked by ETFs.
Besides ETFs on Italy, there are no regional ETFs available with significant weight of Italian stocks. Even the European indices only hold less than 10% in Italy.
0.25% p.a. - 0.33% p.a.
For an investment in the Italian stock market, 2 indices tracked by 4 ETFs are available. On the FTSE MIB index there are 2 ETFs. On the MSCI Italy index there are 2 ETFs. The total expense ratio (TER) of ETFs on these indices is between 0.25% p.a. and 0.33% p.a..
The FTSE MIB (total return) index tracks the 40 largest Italian companies (real time).
(31.03.19) The MSCI Italy index tracks the leading Italian stocks.
Source: justETF.com; As of 31.03.19; Calculations in EUR based on the largest ETF of the respective index.
1 Amundi ETF MSCI Italy UCITS ETF - EUR (C) 0.25% p.a.
2 ComStage MSCI Italy TRN UCITS ETF 0.25% p.a.
3 Xtrackers FTSE MIB UCITS ETF 1D 0.30% p.a.


Perhaps the toughest of all exotics bets is the Superfecta, run via the NSW T.A.B. It's a game and optimistic punter who has a lash at the daunting task of trying to pick, in the correct order, the first 6 placegetters in a chosen race.
In a field of 20 runners there are more than 27 million combinations by which the first 6 positions can be filled. If we assume that each runner has an equal chance (which they won't) the odds against selecting a superfecta are some 28 million to one.
Still feel like having a bash? Don't even think about the odds confronting you when a maximum field of 24 faces the starter!
What this means is that if you are intent on trying to beat the superfecta you have to plan your attack like an army general in a war. Careful strategy can cut down the fearful odds lined up against you.
The people you have to outwit are your fellow punters. They'll mostly be shooting for the favorites and second favorites to fill 1st and 2nd spots. If you can steer past these overbacked runners, you are on the way to hauling in the bet.
2ND FAV-3RD FAV-LST FAV-4TH FAV-5TH FAV-6TH FAV. Then a second bet is taken with the 3rd favorite to win and the 2nd favorite to finish 2nd.
But this is a simplistic approach. My own method is to try a combination bet that, admittedly, does cost a bit of money. My favorite one entails taking a banker selection to fill first placing, two other horses to finish 2nd and 3rd, three others to fill 4th and 5th, and then these three plus any other runners to fill 6th.
This assumes that the field comprises 15 runners. If the field is smaller then the bet, naturally, will be smaller. I do not bet in races where the field exceeds 15 runners.
As you will realise, each additional horse to fill the 6th placing costs another $12. For $36 you have 5 horses for 6th place, but these include the three you chose for 4th and 5th as well. So, in fact, you have added another 3 for the 6th placing. In the $48 example, 6 horses are there to fill 6th place and in the $60 example there are 7. And so on it goes until you reach my 'ideal' bet of $120 with 12 horses for 6th place.
As for the First 4 (which is becoming a highly popular bet on the Queensland TAB), my favorite strategy is to find a banker runner which you are confident is going to fill one of the first 4 placings.
You then link this banker with 5 other runners. Firstly, you take your banker to win and then the other 5 horses to run 2nd, 3rd and 4th. The next bet is to take your banker to run 2nd, with the other 5 taken to win and run 3rd and 4th.
The third bet is to take your banker to finish 3rd, and the other 5 to run 1st, 2nd and 4th. Finally, you take your banker to run 4th and the other 5 to finish 1st, 2nd and 3rd.
Thus, if your banker gets into a placing in the first four, and three of your other 5 horses fill the other placings, then you have landed the First 4.
The cost, at $1 per unit, for this bet is $240, but you can take it for 50c units, which reduces it to a manageable $120. Assuming you take one First 4 a week, on Saturdays, the annual cost will be 52 x $120 which equals $6240.
So you will need to strike one First 4 paying that amount for a half unit in order to break square for the year. One First 4 out of 52? Doesn't seem too tough a task, does it? But, of course, it's harder than it appears at first glance.
Getting that banker horse right is the main point. Once you are confident the horse you have chosen can deliver, then you can go about carefully selecting the 5 horses you feel can fill the other three placings. This is also a difficult assignment.
Invariably, you will find you have seven or eight runners that fit the bill, and you'll have the onerous task of having to axe two or three of them! There's always the risk you will eliminate one that gets up and makes a fool of you. But this has to be accepted. You are always going to make mistakes. The key is to try to limit them as much as possible.


Visiting Hours: Thursday, August 30th, 7-9:30 p.m. and Friday, August 31st, 2-4:30 & 7-9:30 p.m. at our West Sayville funeral home.
Funeral Mass: Saturday, September 1st, 9:45 a.m. at St. John Nepomucene RC Church, Bohemia.
Geneva L. Foster, 96, of Bayport, LI, died on August 28, 2018. A resident of Bayport since 1988, Mrs. Foster was in Oceanside for many years prior.
Mrs. Foster is survived by her five children, Elizabeth Gantz and her husband Donald of Virginia, Raymond and his wife Vicki of Sayville, George of Freeport, Ann Marie Loesch and her husband Gary of Sayville and Robert and his wife JoAnn of Pennsylvania, as well as her 24 grandchildren and 27 great-grandchildren and many wonderful nieces and nephews. Geneva was predeceased by her husband of fifty years, Francis.


When you're trying to lose weight (or simply maintain the weight you've lost), food prep is the key! Learn how to 'prep like a pro' with our easy-to-handle, never-go-hungry-again techniques. All it takes is a few hours on a Sunday, and you've got all your meals for the week ahead!
If you're going to go through the trouble of meal planning (it does require some effort and preparation), why not do it in a way that will truly satisfy your appetite—so you can lose weight, or maintain the weight you've lost? Your body requires an adequate amount of protein, fats, and carbs to feel full and to function at an optimal level. Start by making three lists for easy planning: one that lays out healthy, complex carbs (potatoes, beans, vegetables, fruits and rice); another list that lays out healthy fats (olive oil, avocado, peanut butter, bacon, etc.); and a third list that lays out healthy protein sources (turkey meat, skinless, boneless chicken breasts, eggs, lean beef, etc.) Once you have your lists, now you can make your grocery list for the store. The key to smart, healthy food planning is making sure you have everything you need for easy grabbing in the fridge and pantry!
• Next, cook your potatoes, rice (or other starch/carbs) and meat. Brown your turkey meat and season it for a delicious turkey bowl (after it's done, simply mix it up with corn, black beans, and quinoa). Cook your chicken breasts or beef, then add it with broccoli, zucchini, bell peppers and onion along with some rice for a healthy stir-fry. Portion them out in Tupperware, and you've got your lunch for the whole week.
The fact is, meal planning keeps you on point. It keeps you healthy. And best of all, it keeps your energy high all day long. With a little practice, a little effort and a little bit of creativity, you'll become a food prep 'pro' in no time at all!