RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
Jeremy Brooking said: On Fri, 2003-03-14 at 16:58, Mad Scientist wrote: Not always the case though, for example you can route traffic on a 48i. Guess it all comes down to what layer the switch is. Doesn't that really make it a router/switch? It depends on configuration. Like a 486 isn't a router, until you load the router software, then it becomes a router. 48i not a 486 :) That's right. A 486 is a general purpose computer. And a 48i is a 48 port 10/100 switch. Neither one is a router in its default configuration. Both can be made into routers. That's the point I was making. -Mad ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
On Tue, 2003-03-18 at 12:43, Mad Scientist wrote: 48i not a 486 :) That's right. A 486 is a general purpose computer. And a 48i is a 48 port 10/100 switch. Neither one is a router in its default configuration. Both can be made into routers. That's the point I was making. a 48i wont even switch in its 'default' config so I dont really get your point. Layer 3 switching is not routing? ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
Mad Scientist wrote: And most firewall are routers too (let's get the firewall definition guy started again :P) Just for the record: no, they are not. Some are, but not most of them. :) Florian. -- Want to produce professional emails and Usenet postings? http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
Hmm, really? All the firewalls I've installed lately are routers also... If the firewall not is a router at the same time it must work transparently, that is 2NIC's that is bridged togheter and with the firewall that sits between and filtering all the stuff. This is somehow not that good as if you also use it as a router, because you will need 2NIC's for every network you want to protect. If you use it as a router also you only need 1NIC to the gateway and 1NIC for each of the net behind the firewall... /Oscar Florian Zschocke wrote: Mad Scientist wrote: And most firewall are routers too (let's get the firewall definition guy started again :P) Just for the record: no, they are not. Some are, but not most of them. :) Florian. -- Want to produce professional emails and Usenet postings? http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
--Original Message- -From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Oscar N aka -'Dreadful' -Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 4:44 AM -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - -Hmm, really? All the firewalls I've installed lately are routers also... -If the firewall not is a router at the same time it must work -transparently, that is 2NIC's that is bridged togheter and with the -firewall that sits between and filtering all the stuff. -This is somehow not that good as if you also use it as a router, because -you will need 2NIC's for every network you want to protect. If you use -it as a router also you only need 1NIC to the gateway and 1NIC for each -of the net behind the firewall... Its the right tool, for the right job thing. There are reasons and situations to go either way. Really no point in arguing about it. kev ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
Hmm, really? All the firewalls I've installed lately are routers also... Guys, since this seems to be a recent affliction on this site: Please remember that your own experience doesn't not necessarily translate to global truth. -- Eric (the Deacon remix) ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
If you would only go look up the definition you would see but you won't. You will simply hold to your incorrect thoughts. Go read a book. Nuff said. On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 18:04, Me wrote: Just because you've done something for a long time doesn't mean you've been doing it right. Not that I'm saying you are doing it wrong, I've never seen your work. Just saying that's no proof. Oh of course not, im sure you know far more than I. Hence why you regard ZoneAlarm as a firewall. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
Oh of course not, im sure you know far more than I. Hence why you regard ZoneAlarm as a firewall. Of course, I still see people referring to home NAT devices as routers, too, so... -- Eric (the Deacon remix) ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
A home NAT box is a router. It is routing packets between your local network and your DSL connection (and performing NAT on the packets). A router routes packets :) Eric (Deacon) wrote: Oh of course not, im sure you know far more than I. Hence why you regard ZoneAlarm as a firewall. Of course, I still see people referring to home NAT devices as routers, too, so... ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
Deacon said: Oh of course not, im sure you know far more than I. Hence why you regard ZoneAlarm as a firewall. Of course, I still see people referring to home NAT devices as routers, too, so... A NAT device is a router... it has different subnets on each interface, doesn't it? And ZoneAlarm is also a firewall... just a very simple one. Firewalls can include everything from a simple host-based packet filter to a multi-level stateful packet filter/NAT/proxy all on different devices and platforms across several subnets. -Mad ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
Is this not a thread about starting a new machine, not upgrading ? I am refering to a new build, not having to upgrade/cvsup at all. My bad if this is an upgrading topic. - Original Message - From: Kevin J. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 11:36 AM Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] I realise that fully. Have you not read the switching to 5.0 articles/warnings on freebsd.org? --Original Message- -From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Drew -Broadley -Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 5:31 PM -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - -FreeBSD 5.0 is offically a RELEASE. -http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.0R/announce.html -and going back to 4.8 defy's the point in using 5.0 as I was -refering to its -new SMP enhancements. - - -- Original Message - -From: Kevin J. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 11:21 AM -Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - - a word of warning, 5.0 still has a shitload of debugging stuff -enabled by - default, which slows down its performance enough that you might as well - stick w/ the 4.8 release. - - although I heard you can comment out some kernel options to take that - debugging out, bringing the performance back. I havent looked -into it all - that much. (been using gentoo primarily, also very secure by default) - - kev - - --Original Message- - -From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Drew - -Broadley - -Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 3:41 PM - -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - - - - -FreeBSD 5.0 has had its SMP section reworked, and could be a - -viable option. - -See Here: -http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.0R/relnotes-i386.html#AEN401 - - - -Security has always been a high point of the *BSD distro's and - -when you do a - -clean - -install of a system you will find limited ports being opened, unlike -many - -linux distros where - -you spend a fair amount of time locking down. - - - -I will be using FreeBSD 5.0 for my Dual MP 2000+ system, I am just -waiting - -on some Gig - -ECC RAM sticks and then I will have it up next week, if -anyone wants me -to - -keep them posted - -on the performance and give some benchmark results as such -just gimme a - -yell. - - - -Hopefully the FreeBSD linux_base (linux emulation) has gotten -rid of the - -HLTV IP binding bug, - -I should get onto informing someone of that... so much to do, -so little - -time! - - - --Drewpy - - - -- Original Message - - -From: Me [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 9:49 AM - -Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - - - - - Oh I agree 100%. Security is very important. It's really hard - -to get my - - clients to realize how important. To them, it's just a server - -reinstall. - - They refuse to grasp the true amount of damage that can be -done with a - - compromised system... sigh - - - - Me said: - - I know of a good number of production servers still running the -2.2.x - - kernel line. lol. - - - - 2.2.x is still maintained. Security patches are still being -published. - - - - - - All that said, your suggestion is a good one, just not feasable -under - - some situations. - - - - True enough. In general, tracking the kernel just to be - -current is not a - - good idea, and is more likely to introduce even more - -problems. However, - - a keen watch for security related patches is important. - - - - Did you know that the iptables code was patched last year? Without -the - - patch, it may be possible for a remote user to bypass -your firewall. - - This is a kernel patch that will require a reboot. But if the - -box is not - - a firewall, then no worries... it all depends on the use. My - -suggestion - - is merely to know what has been released, and if a security - -patch is not - - applied, there should be a reason. - - - - Sorry for always harping on security issues, but we all share the - - Internet. When people use sloppy security and become -zombies in some - - kiddie's DoS army, it affects all of us. A higher security - -awareness for - - everyone is a good thing. - - - - -Mad - - - - - - ___ - - To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list -archives, - - please visit: - -http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux - - - - - - - - ___ - - To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the -list archives, - -please visit: - - http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux - - - - - -___ - -To unsubscribe, edit your list
RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
What I was talking about, could be applied either or... http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.0R/early-adopter.html They say there that they pretty much reccommend that people wait for the 5.x stable. Or is that out yet? Anyways, like I said, I havent used 5.0 personally, as I moved most of my systems to gentoo. I am just going by that page, and by what other current freebsd gurus have told me. do what you want to do, just trying to help. ; ) kev --Original Message- -From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Drew -Broadley -Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 5:50 PM -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - -Is this not a thread about starting a new machine, not upgrading ? -I am refering to a new build, not having to upgrade/cvsup at all. - -My bad if this is an upgrading topic. - -- Original Message - -From: Kevin J. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 11:36 AM -Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - - I realise that fully. Have you not read the switching to 5.0 - articles/warnings on freebsd.org? - - --Original Message- - -From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Drew - -Broadley - -Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 5:31 PM - -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - - - - -FreeBSD 5.0 is offically a RELEASE. - -http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.0R/announce.html - -and going back to 4.8 defy's the point in using 5.0 as I was - -refering to its - -new SMP enhancements. - - - - - -- Original Message - - -From: Kevin J. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 11:21 AM - -Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - - - - - a word of warning, 5.0 still has a shitload of debugging stuff - -enabled by - - default, which slows down its performance enough that you might as -well - - stick w/ the 4.8 release. - - - - although I heard you can comment out some kernel options to -take that - - debugging out, bringing the performance back. I havent looked - -into it all - - that much. (been using gentoo primarily, also very secure -by default) - - - - kev - - - - --Original Message- - - -From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - -[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Drew - - -Broadley - - -Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 3:41 PM - - -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - -Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - - - - - - - -FreeBSD 5.0 has had its SMP section reworked, and could be a - - -viable option. - - -See Here: - -http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.0R/relnotes-i386.html#AEN401 - - - - - -Security has always been a high point of the *BSD distro's and - - -when you do a - - -clean - - -install of a system you will find limited ports being -opened, unlike - -many - - -linux distros where - - -you spend a fair amount of time locking down. - - - - - -I will be using FreeBSD 5.0 for my Dual MP 2000+ system, I am just - -waiting - - -on some Gig - - -ECC RAM sticks and then I will have it up next week, if - -anyone wants me - -to - - -keep them posted - - -on the performance and give some benchmark results as such - -just gimme a - - -yell. - - - - - -Hopefully the FreeBSD linux_base (linux emulation) has gotten - -rid of the - - -HLTV IP binding bug, - - -I should get onto informing someone of that... so much to do, - -so little - - -time! - - - - - --Drewpy - - - - - -- Original Message - - - -From: Me [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - -Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 9:49 AM - - -Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - - - - - - - - Oh I agree 100%. Security is very important. It's really hard - - -to get my - - - clients to realize how important. To them, it's just a server - - -reinstall. - - - They refuse to grasp the true amount of damage that can be - -done with a - - - compromised system... sigh - - - - - - Me said: - - - I know of a good number of production servers still -running the - -2.2.x - - - kernel line. lol. - - - - - - 2.2.x is still maintained. Security patches are still being - -published. - - - - - - - - - All that said, your suggestion is a good one, just -not feasable - -under - - - some situations. - - - - - - True enough. In general, tracking the kernel just to be - - -current is not a - - - good idea, and is more likely to introduce even more - - -problems. However, - - - a keen watch for security related patches is important. - - - - - - Did you know that the iptables code was patched last year? -Without - -the - - - patch, it may be possible for a remote user to bypass - -your firewall. - - - This is a kernel patch that will require a reboot. But if the - - -box is not - - - a firewall, then no worries... it all depends on the use. My - - -suggestion - - - is merely to know what has been released, and if a security - - -patch is not - - - applied, there should be a reason
Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
Haha, sorry I didn't mean to make an aggressive impression. I appreciate the suggestions and I even re-read everything just incase something had changed :) I was just offering a healthy alternative especially since 5.0 is focused on SMP like the Linux 2.4.x kernel had networking revamped. - Original Message - From: Kevin J. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 12:30 PM Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] What I was talking about, could be applied either or... http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.0R/early-adopter.html They say there that they pretty much reccommend that people wait for the 5.x stable. Or is that out yet? Anyways, like I said, I havent used 5.0 personally, as I moved most of my systems to gentoo. I am just going by that page, and by what other current freebsd gurus have told me. do what you want to do, just trying to help. ; ) kev --Original Message- -From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Drew -Broadley -Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 5:50 PM -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - -Is this not a thread about starting a new machine, not upgrading ? -I am refering to a new build, not having to upgrade/cvsup at all. - -My bad if this is an upgrading topic. - -- Original Message - -From: Kevin J. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 11:36 AM -Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - - I realise that fully. Have you not read the switching to 5.0 - articles/warnings on freebsd.org? - - --Original Message- - -From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Drew - -Broadley - -Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 5:31 PM - -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - - - - -FreeBSD 5.0 is offically a RELEASE. - -http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.0R/announce.html - -and going back to 4.8 defy's the point in using 5.0 as I was - -refering to its - -new SMP enhancements. - - - - - -- Original Message - - -From: Kevin J. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 11:21 AM - -Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - - - - - a word of warning, 5.0 still has a shitload of debugging stuff - -enabled by - - default, which slows down its performance enough that you might as -well - - stick w/ the 4.8 release. - - - - although I heard you can comment out some kernel options to -take that - - debugging out, bringing the performance back. I havent looked - -into it all - - that much. (been using gentoo primarily, also very secure -by default) - - - - kev - - - - --Original Message- - - -From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - -[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Drew - - -Broadley - - -Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 3:41 PM - - -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - -Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - - - - - - - -FreeBSD 5.0 has had its SMP section reworked, and could be a - - -viable option. - - -See Here: - -http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.0R/relnotes-i386.html#AEN401 - - - - - -Security has always been a high point of the *BSD distro's and - - -when you do a - - -clean - - -install of a system you will find limited ports being -opened, unlike - -many - - -linux distros where - - -you spend a fair amount of time locking down. - - - - - -I will be using FreeBSD 5.0 for my Dual MP 2000+ system, I am just - -waiting - - -on some Gig - - -ECC RAM sticks and then I will have it up next week, if - -anyone wants me - -to - - -keep them posted - - -on the performance and give some benchmark results as such - -just gimme a - - -yell. - - - - - -Hopefully the FreeBSD linux_base (linux emulation) has gotten - -rid of the - - -HLTV IP binding bug, - - -I should get onto informing someone of that... so much to do, - -so little - - -time! - - - - - --Drewpy - - - - - -- Original Message - - - -From: Me [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - -To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - -Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 9:49 AM - - -Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] - - - - - - - - - Oh I agree 100%. Security is very important. It's really hard - - -to get my - - - clients to realize how important. To them, it's just a server - - -reinstall. - - - They refuse to grasp the true amount of damage that can be - -done with a - - - compromised system... sigh - - - - - - Me said: - - - I know of a good number of production servers still -running the - -2.2.x - - - kernel line. lol. - - - - - - 2.2.x is still maintained. Security patches are still being - -published. - - - - - - - - - All that said, your suggestion is a good one, just -not feasable - -under - - - some situations. - - - - - - True enough. In general, tracking the kernel just to be - - -current
Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
a word of warning, 5.0 still has a shitload of debugging stuff enabled by default, which slows down its performance enough that you might as well stick w/ the 4.8 release. Drew Broadley said: FreeBSD 5.0 is offically a RELEASE. It may be a RELEASE but it's not a STABLE. There is still debugging code and it is still slow. From the early adopter notes: A certain amount of debugging and diagnostic code is still in place to help track down problems in FreeBSD 5.0's new features. This may cause FreeBSD 5.0 to perform more slowly than 4-STABLE. -Mad ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
It's always a trade-off. Increased security always means decreased usability. On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 09:49, Me wrote: Oh I agree 100%. Security is very important. It's really hard to get my clients to realize how important. To them, it's just a server reinstall. They refuse to grasp the true amount of damage that can be done with a compromised system... sigh And then you have those 'packet paranoid' people who just go too far. Blocking all ICMP? Theres a middle ground that needs to be found. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
It's always a trade-off. Increased security always means decreased usability. On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 09:49, Me wrote: Oh I agree 100%. Security is very important. It's really hard to get my clients to realize how important. To them, it's just a server reinstall. They refuse to grasp the true amount of damage that can be done with a compromised system... sigh And then you have those 'packet paranoid' people who just go too far. Blocking all ICMP? Theres a middle ground that needs to be found. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 13:53, Me wrote: It's always a trade-off. Increased security always means decreased usability. No, theres no increased security, just increased stupidity. Breaking PMTU does not increase security, only decreases usability. No trade off there. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
FreeBSD 4.6.2 / 4.7 are only classed as RELEASE aswel, there is CURRENT which is the development of 5.0 which soon will become 5.1-RELEASE a word of warning, 5.0 still has a shitload of debugging stuff enabled by default, which slows down its performance enough that you might as well stick w/ the 4.8 release. Drew Broadley said: FreeBSD 5.0 is offically a RELEASE. It may be a RELEASE but it's not a STABLE. There is still debugging code and it is still slow. From the early adopter notes: A certain amount of debugging and diagnostic code is still in place to help track down problems in FreeBSD 5.0's new features. This may cause FreeBSD 5.0 to perform more slowly than 4-STABLE. -Mad ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 14:59, Me wrote: Security should never impact usability of something. If it does, then something is not doing what it was designed to do. That's just plain wrong. I guess I just need to give you an example our you just can't see it. Let's say you are sitting behind a firewall that has all ports blocked that you are not using. Now let's say you want to put up a game server. You will have to open up ports so that the game server can accept connections from the Internet. So your security will have to change to reflect your new uses for your computer. Now, let's say you have a personal firewall like Zonealarm loaded on your PC. You download a new MMPG. The new game of course tries to access the Internet but Zonealarm stops it. Now Zone Alarm really makes it easy to change your security model but it does require a change. That's usability. Now you could configure Zone Alarm to allow any program to access the internet. Thus decreasing your level of security but increasing your usability. All the above examples show situations where the security measure was in your control. What if the firwall was at your ISP and they didn't allow modifications. You would have to switch ISPs or forget about the game. That is usability. See now. I said I wasn't gonna do it and I went and done it anyway. lol First off, all above points are made in regard to client, not server applications. Follow the thread you will see we were talking about server security. Next ZoneAlarm is not a firewall (packetfilter != firewall). Look at it this way. you have a CS server with no firewall. You add a firewall that blocks all traffic other than CS related traffic, and change the user running cs to a non privilaged one. You have now added security, without forsaking any usability. As for giving me lessons regarding security. When implimenting security measures they should never impact the service itself, if it does, chances are the service was being used/setup wrong in the first place. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
FreeBSD 5.0 is offically a RELEASE. Does that differ, then, from STABLE? RELEASE == STABLE CURRENT == DEV Afaik, that has been the practise I have been following (and have been taught) and had no problems of hitting development kernels or any addition/debugging output. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
Jeremy Brooking said: When implimenting security measures they should never impact the service itself, if it does, chances are the service was being used/setup wrong in the first place. For the most part, this is true. However, security measures such as multi-factor authentication add difficulty to the user while increasing security, so they can slow down or otherwise annoy the user. But the user can still perform their tasks as required. So security can impede use but not prohibit it where required, thus not reducing functionality. Therefore, the axiom more security = less usability does not hold in all cases. -Mad ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 15:10, Mad Scientist wrote: Jeremy Brooking said: When implimenting security measures they should never impact the service itself, if it does, chances are the service was being used/setup wrong in the first place. For the most part, this is true. However, security measures such as multi-factor authentication add difficulty to the user while increasing security, so they can slow down or otherwise annoy the user. But the user can still perform their tasks as required. So security can impede use but not prohibit it where required, thus not reducing functionality. Therefore, the axiom more security = less usability does not hold in all cases. Agreed, the user has to go through a greater length of 'security' to get the SAME amount of 'usability' out of it :) But the functionality/usability remains. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
Drew Broadley said: RELEASE == STABLE CURRENT == DEV Negative. For 4.x, RELEASE == STABLE; CURRENT == DEV. For 5.0, RELEASE == CURRENT == DEV. STABLE != EXISTS. It's in the release notes... ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
Yes, I am. Excuse me for using Microsoft software, I'm such an idiot. I just don't see the point in changing the subject line in a thread that's already begun. - Tyler [TASF]Overkill Schwend Semper facere bonum, an a amare odium, vita mors. --- Server operator of [LCGA]Telefragged: Counter-Strike: telefragged.lynchburg.edu:27015 http://schwend-t.web.lynchburg.edu ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
On Wed, 2003-03-12 at 14:18, Tyler Overkill Schwend wrote: Yes, I am. Excuse me for using Microsoft software, I'm such an idiot. I just don't see the point in changing the subject line in a thread that's already begun. If A: your client cant handle that, then its thats your problem. Check your mail source and you will see... your message and id: From: Tyler \Overkill\ Schwend [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] simons reply: Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Simon Garner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Notice how he creates a new ID and then sets your message ID as the Reference header? This is how threading is done (as well as the In-Reply-To header in some cases) If your client does thread on this, then it is breaking a commonly practised standard. and B: He was setting it [OT] As it had gone Off Topic, he was doing this for the benifit of those who filter OT messages. C: Simon is also using MS software for his mail. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
On Wednesday, March 12, 2003 2:18 PM [GMT+1200=NZT], Tyler Overkill Schwend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, I am. Excuse me for using Microsoft software, I'm such an idiot. I just don't see the point in changing the subject line in a thread that's already begun. Lemme see... maybe so that those who filter out [OT] messages can have subsequent messages in the thread filtered out? Also I don't know what MS software you're using, but the versions of OE and Outlook I've seen do threading by message ID, not by subject. Threading by subject would be utterly braindead... -Simon ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
I'm sorry, I'm PMSing right now. I'm going to go take some Beano. - Tyler [TASF]Overkill Schwend Semper facere bonum, an a amare odium, vita mors. --- Server operator of [LCGA]Telefragged: Counter-Strike: telefragged.lynchburg.edu:27015 http://schwend-t.web.lynchburg.edu ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
On Wed, 2003-03-12 at 14:28, Jeremy Brooking wrote: This is how threading is done (as well as the In-Reply-To header in some cases) If your client does thread on this, then it is breaking a commonly practised standard. That should be 'does not thread on this' sorry. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Dualie Athlons? [OT]
I'm running Outlook 2000 Threaded view, and it certainly seems to do threading by subject Maybe it's just trying to piss me off. /me damns everything. - Tyler [TASF]Overkill Schwend Semper facere bonum, an a amare odium, vita mors. --- Server operator of [LCGA]Telefragged: Counter-Strike: telefragged.lynchburg.edu:27015 http://schwend-t.web.lynchburg.edu ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
