T-Mobile servers compromised?

by Evil Mushroom Lord » Mon, 08 Jun 2009 07:46:53 GMT


Sponsored Links
  http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/07/2019246/Hackers-Claim-To-Hit-T-Mobile-Hard?art_pos=3& ;art_pos=3

If this is true, it has me extremely concerned-- both because I'm a t-
mobile user, and also because they're the provider offering Android
from the get-go and I don't want to see users scared away. :P


Does anyone know if this is false/true and to what extent?
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~



T-Mobile servers compromised?

by Roman » Wed, 10 Jun 2009 03:47:01 GMT


 Find some more information here

 http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-10259487-83.html 

--
Roman Baumgaertner
Sr. SW Engineer-OSDC
T  Mobile stick together
The views, opinions and statements in this email are those of the
author solely in their individual capacity, and do not necessarily
represent those of T-Mobile USA, Inc.

On Jun 7, 4:46pm, Evil Mushroom Lord <evilmushrooml...@gmail.com>



--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~


Sponsored Links


Other Threads

1. android::Surface::lock() runs much slower on newer versions of Android

I have been writing an emulator for a game console on Android. I had
to use some C code (JNI) in order to gain good performance. I was
e{*filter*}d that it ran at full speed (60 fps) on my G1 (Firmware version:
1.0; Builder number: kila_uk-user 1.0 TC5-RC8 116470). But after I
have updated my G1 to a newer version (Firmware version: 1.5; Builder
number: kila-user 1.5 CRB21 147201), it runs much slower (30 fps).
After digging into the source code, I found out that the function
android::Surface::lock(SurfaceInfo *info, bool blocking) is taking
12-15 milliseconds. But originally, it almost took no time to finish.

Is there any significant change about how surface is locked between
the old and new versions? I was about to publish my app on Android
market, but was very upset about the poor performance on the newer
versions.

Does anyone have any idea about this? Thanks.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~

2. About APN Type design

in Android code, It is a very strange concept to define the APN type
(APN_TYPE_MMS).
The reason are:
1) APN only is an access pointer, it haven't any special attribute
for
MMS or other things.
2) Only Application care the APN name, since different APN will
provide different service from operator. for example, operation may
provide Email/MMS/GPS/.... service on different APN.
3) Android only define one type APN_TYPE_MMS, this will limit other
top application usage.
Any one can answer me why Android design this way?
If google have strong reason for such design, I hope add other user
defined type like
APN_TYPE_USER1
APN_TYPE_USER2
then top application can set his property to use its APN other than
APN_TYPE_MMS
Regards
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~

3. Can SlidingDrawer stop sliding and just stay there with motionevents?

4. For normal applciation to invoke RecoverySystem.rebootAndUpdate()?

5. Dalvik conversion error 2 (not annotations)

6. Error when debugging Android source code

7. Layout gravity - bug in portrait mode?