Brenz

What you have written in the comments of the code are not tests. They are what you think will happen. You actually need to write some test cases and assert that the program produces the expected result.

Before the clients can do anything the host has to split up the rendering task into small chunks and then send this unrendered data to multiple clients. This will require a lot of upload bandwidth. The client then needs the bandwidth to download this data, process it and then upload it again where the host can then download it. Realistically when looking at the average broadband speeds anywhere they are nowhere near enough to support this idea and as file sizes continue to rise with more and more 4k and 360 footage it's not going to get any faster any time soon

iAd isn't shutting down. Just a part that allows devs to advertise their own apps using iAd. http://www.engadget.com/2016/01/15/apple-iad-shutdown-june-30th/

Well you don't because The Verge got the story from Engadget who initially got it wrong. Their article has since been updated to clarify its only the iAd App Network which allows devs to advertise their apps using iAd. http://www.engadget.com/2016/01/15/apple-iad-shutdown-june-30th/

It's a nice idea and certainly not an impossible task for an experienced software engineer but the massive limitation here is the internet. Folding and mining work well because the amount of bandwidth required is tiny. Your program would require a lot of bandwidth on both ends to be able to match the likely processing power anyone making videos is likely to already have especially if they are at a point where they have enough viewers that were willing to help with rendering to even make using your app worth it.

No they haven't. They are stopping apps from advertising themselves using iAd

It's not unreasonable to expect that anyone buying the latest hardware would also want to run the latest OS on it to get the best performance. Plus Windows 7 was made EOL over a year ago, expecting continued support for hardware that is released 7 years after the OS is idiotic.

Photoshop out the furniture, empty rooms always look bigger or add a window

By allowing the front-end to pass the calculated totalcost to the back-end unless you recalculate and verify the value you are trusting that whatever was on that form was correct. This means I could easily mock this form up myself and submit it to the back-end or intercept the POST with something like Burp Suite. Now I could order 10x of an item and put the price through as 1. If you calculate the cost on the back-end even if the user submits the form a different way or intercepts the request the cost being calculated is still for the items the data received says the user wants and therefore will always reflect the true cost of the items the back-end received

Unless OP has used preventDefault() to stop their click on the submit button from continuing and just not shown it here the form is still going to submit in the original window. Really any sensitive logic such as calculating a price should be done in the back-end where the user is unable to intercept the data and modify it. Adding the totalcost as a form element would still enable me to submit the form another way with my own price in place of a real one.

Yes they are trying to pass a variable into PHP but you completely ignored the fact they are already sending a lot of data another way at the same time and your solution misuses Session variables and has security flaws. Not exactly the best thing to be suggesting on a website where people are here to learn.

Still don't know what account was compromised first but either way mistakes happen and at some point if you can answer enough questions then it's very hard to tell if its the actual person or not. Its the same when you apply for any bank account or contract. A lot of the questions are used to verify your identity but with enough research its not difficult to find that information especially with social networking

As I said earlier, People. I know MS allows the use of security questions and they have telephone support. Collect some information on a target, give them a call with a made-up story and see how it goes. If the person says no, call back later. Most likely someone will be willing to reset an account over the phone if you can prove your fake identity enough.

No online account could ever be totally secure unless you managed to completely disable the ability to reset the password. Phishing attacks are other popular way of stealing accounts and they are becoming more advanced all the time. You could even fall victim to insecure public wifi although thats less common and not normally targeted.

Practically any case where an individual gets 'hacked' its via social engineering or phishing attacks. Many websites will have systems to protect against brute-force attacks and detect automated scripts before they get anywhere near an account. The biggest weakness in any system is people. We are trusting and a lot of the information needed to reset a password can be found if you look hard enough especially with people in the public eye who most likely will have articles all over the internet about their childhood, education, family, pets, etc. Heck some websites will even give you passwords in plain-text when you reset them. The vulnerability here was unlikely to be Google but another website that wasn't so careful with their account controls.

Its social engineering. There is no scripts, hacking, brute forcing or anything like that. Every website has a way to reset a password be it email based, security questions, customer support phone line or whatever. It's just a case of using these services to gain access to accounts. You might not get in to someone's YouTube account straight away but as you control more of their accounts you can access more of their information which then helps access further websites. Take this example here http://www.wired.com/2015/10/hacker-who-broke-into-cia-director-john-brennan-email-tells-how-he-did-it/ A 'hacker' used a Verizon employee to give up some details about the CIA Directors account which they then used with AOL to reset the password to that account.

Except these people have probably never looked at a line of code or a terminal in their life and don't know a thing about actual hacking

It's not hacking it's social engineering. Not exactly the most difficult thing to pull off especially on a public target

What exactly are you thinking about powering here? Your whole house?

What are you studying at Uni? There really isn't any industry in such a niche market. You have small town shops and the few bigger brands like PC Specialist

Glad you got it sorted, if you are serious about further development you might want to consider using a VM to run a web server such as Apache on Ubuntu or use a cloud service like DigitalOcean to host a server. That is an AWFUL way to pass data from JS to PHP. OP is already submitting a form full of data so why would they want to send the totalcost separately? Also its totally insecure. An attacker could easily call jstosession.php themselves and pass their own total price into the backend and now they have a free order.

CES like most trade shows is for trade and press/media only. Tickets are not available to the general public and considering they sell out anyway they couldn't let the public in if they wanted

The problem is you are trying to use POST and GET two different ways at the same time: <form class="getRooms" action="lastPage.php" method="post" accept-charset="UTF-8"> This is saying the form data will be sent as a POST to lastPage.php. And this: window.open("lastPage.php" + "?totalcost=" + totalCost "", "Confirm Your Book", "toolbar=no,width=450,height=400"); Is going to load lastPage.php with the totalcost GET value passed through. You cannot do both of these at the same time like this and if you are going to use this totalcost value later on it certainly shouldn't be a GET anyway, if anything it should be calculated once the form is submitted in PHP.

A domain doesn't require a server

That's an array in JSON. Most likely something went wrong with Facebook's Javascript and it was unable to process it correctly which would explain the eventual browser crash. If everything is back to normal I wouldn't worry about it