Compression of video data is known to cause loss. It is an art to maintain the integrity of the original source — to cook a compression recipe. These two samples show atypical results, both with high amounts of loss yet beautiful results.
The company claimed in a series of ads that the phone was incapable of any injury owing to its strong design. One of the ads showed someone dropping the device on the dance floor and another showed the device submerged in the pool.
The ads contained words like “dance floor proof”, “splash proof” and “life proof”. The ASA however, believes otherwise.
The regulator said that it was reacting to complaints made by three device owners who claimed that the screen of their Android based Defy handset cracked after they dropped it.
The ASA ruled that the ads were ‘misleading’ and should be banned.
Only three failures? Out of how many units in the field? I mean at least they did not claim the phone hacker proof, malware proof…
Davi Ottenheimer describes the various security components, mixes and measures of new methods, even in large multi-tenant, multi-layered security situations that still are able to meet regulatory requirements and achieve compliance.
There is a nice summary and introduction to VXLAN on BORGcube. Note the system responsible for encapsulation as that is always a focus area of manipulation. Can a guest probe ARP information on another host, for example, beyond what the local host is meant to reveal?
…you can think of VXLAN as a tunneling scheme with the ESX hosts making up the VXLAN Tunnel End Points (VTEP). The VTEPs are responsible for encapsulating the virtual machine traffic in a VXLAN header as well as stripping it off and presenting the destination virtual machine with the original L2 packet.
a blog about the poetry of information security, since 1995