Active Topics
-
Is there a section to talk about Java ME? Apps, etc. (6)
to General by Kalatti - 5 days, 8 hrs ago - more...
|
2009-11-09
, 15:16
|
|
Posts: 3,841 |
Thanked: 1,079 times |
Joined on Nov 2006
|
#22
|
Originally Posted by luca
Ok - if that's a solution then I missed it in the threads. I'll test it out.
No, it doesn't.
Just remember to restart wlancond
__________________
N800/OS2007|N900/Maemo5
-- Metalayer-crawler delenda est.
-- Current state: Fed up with everything MeeGo.
N800/OS2007|N900/Maemo5
-- Metalayer-crawler delenda est.
-- Current state: Fed up with everything MeeGo.
 |
|
2009-11-09
, 15:35
|
|
Posts: 1,217 |
Thanked: 446 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Bedfordshire, UK
|
#23
|
Originally Posted by daperl
Well the N900 is a GSM device so at the risk of appearing pedant: N900 thread, device might reasonably be expected to refer to a subset of the thread. (Scoping/Encapsulation rules anyone?)
..........
|
|
2009-11-09
, 15:41
|
|
Posts: 1,217 |
Thanked: 446 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Bedfordshire, UK
|
#24
|
Originally Posted by ewan
Well I'm not entirely sure that it is at odds with the users freedom to be honest - there are various reasons for wanting to identify a device.
That's a whole other thing though. You were originally talking about: which is pretty clearly an action entirely at odds with the users software freedom in principle, and wouldn't work in practice due to the user having the freedom to have dbus, the kernel, or whatever part of the stack they like, feed your app whatever value is going to make it happy.
Also I wasn't originally talking about any specific reason - I merely chipped in a suggestion on using IMEI.
 |
|
2009-11-09
, 15:53
|
|
Posts: 2,869 |
Thanked: 1,784 times |
Joined on Feb 2007
@ Po' Bo'. PA
|
#25
|
Originally Posted by ewan
The first layer of security I would use is a software app that locates and initiates contact with the service I am providing.
That's a whole other thing though. You were originally talking about: which is pretty clearly an action entirely at odds with the users software freedom in principle, and wouldn't work in practice due to the user having the freedom to have dbus, the kernel, or whatever part of the stack they like, feed your app whatever value is going to make it happy.
How is that at odds with anything. Plenty of FOS developed software use check sums to verify integrity and to limit distribution.
FOSS doesn't mean free freakin' beer.
Right now some people are moaning about this feature or that not being available on the N900 and at the same time ready to rise up in arms if anyone mentions restricting app distribution because it is open source.
That kind of thinking kind of turns FOSS into a black hole of time suckage...
If you want a feature or service that is not popular or intrinsically motivating for those with the knowledge to develop and provide, you will need to take the time to gain the knowledge and develop it yourself. Once you invested the time and resources in its development and production, you must make it available for free to all those who may have wanted it but did nothing to make it happen.
Good luck with that.
***
And now for a statement that I'm sure will be acceptable to most...
Free beer for everyone!
 |
|
2009-11-09
, 16:59
|
|
Posts: 2,427 |
Thanked: 2,986 times |
Joined on Dec 2007
|
#26
|
Originally Posted by Fargus
You are a pedant; you should work on that. No where in my post did I say how unique or robust my solution was. In fact, I called it a hack. The OP mentioned Python and MAC address; I gave him one possible solution from a similar device. Then you inaccurately responded and I corrected you. And now you're making excuses for your inaccuracies with bad, pedantic scoping rules humor. You'll do well here.
Well the N900 is a GSM device so at the risk of appearing pedant: N900 thread, device might reasonably be expected to refer to a subset of the thread. (Scoping/Encapsulation rules anyone?)
Welcome to talk.maemo.org!
__________________
N9: Go white or go home
N9: Go white or go home
 |
|
2009-11-09
, 19:08
|
|
Posts: 900 |
Thanked: 273 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Fresno CA USA
|
#27
|
The MAC address by definition is unique and does identify a particular port network wide. Comcast in the US blocks connections to their modem of a single MAC address of the port connected to the cable modem when the the service was registered. To use a wireless router it was necessary to clone that ports MAC address into the modem. The only purpose of changing a MAC address is to appear to be a different to be a different network user, not to uniquely identify yourself.
__________________
George Fragos
Internet Coach & Writer
Maemo Mapper HowTo
Personal Blog -- 3 Joe's Blog
N810 -- 5.2010.33-1
George Fragos
Internet Coach & Writer
Maemo Mapper HowTo
Personal Blog -- 3 Joe's Blog
N810 -- 5.2010.33-1
|
|
2009-11-09
, 19:40
|
|
Posts: 1,217 |
Thanked: 446 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Bedfordshire, UK
|
#28
|
Originally Posted by daperl
Actually I wasn't referring to that post at all - I was referring to the one where you inserted the word GSM in the middle of the post I had made regarding identification of a device. Now, we can argue semantics all month if you wish but I would have thought that made your original posting pedant too.
You are a pedant; you should work on that. No where in my post did I say how unique or robust my solution was. In fact, I called it a hack. The OP mentioned Python and MAC address; I gave him one possible solution from a similar device. Then you inaccurately responded and I corrected you. And now you're making excuses for your inaccuracies with bad, pedantic scoping rules humor. You'll do well here.
Welcome to talk.maemo.org!
talk about off the plot!
Original Post by you:
daperl 6th Nov 2009 , 09:47 PM
Posts: 988 | Thanked: 563 times | Joined on Dec 2007 Report This | #6
Originally Posted by Fargus
Should therefore work as unique number for any GSM device.
Last edited by Fargus; 2009-11-09 at 19:42.
 |
|
2009-11-09
, 19:44
|
|
Posts: 445 |
Thanked: 572 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Oxford
|
#29
|
Originally Posted by YoDude
You can't limit the distribution of Free software "The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor" is one of the four fundamental freedoms that define what Free software is. If you can't redistribute something, it's not Free.
How is that at odds with anything. Plenty of FOS developed software use check sums to verify integrity and to limit distribution.
|
|
2009-11-09
, 19:47
|
|
Posts: 1,217 |
Thanked: 446 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Bedfordshire, UK
|
#30
|
Originally Posted by YoDude
I was responding to a specific post - please reread the posting I made and it should make more sense!
I'm sure it is...
However it is loaded and potentially edited may require a completely different means of connection to the device as well...
I didn't think that editing this identifier was the what the OP was after. I could be wrong though.
Schemes to reasonably identify who is accessing a server or service for what ever reason is not a bad thing and has nothing to do with FOSS.
Just remember to restart wlancond