Re: Configuring Motorola SB4200 on USB to connect on debian
Have you google'd today? :) http://geocities.yahoo.com.br/edersg45/tutoriais/cable-modem/index.htm - it's in portugese - but can be easily understood... The instructions are for redhat 8, but it should be easily converted to Debian. Hetz -- Original Message --- From: "Baruch Shpirer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 09:41:06 +0200 Subject: Configuring Motorola SB4200 on USB to connect on debian > Hi, > Anyone had any luck doing this ? > > Baruch Shpirer > Windows/*nix System & Network Admin. > Mobile +972-67-777167 > Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] > MSN[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > " Beyond redemption and beneath contempt " > -- Don Joe -- --- End of Original Message --- = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SOLVED: Slow Linux response during disk operations (was: Testing on various computers needed)
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003, Yedidyah Bar-David wrote about "Re: SOLVED: Slow Linux response during disk operations (was: Testing on various computers needed)": > On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 10:13:47PM +0300, Nadav Har'El wrote: > > (a while ago I gave on this list, or perhaps hackers-il, an example of > > a nasty but simple fork bomb, and explained how the only way to kill > > it was to stifle it with a friendlier fork-bomb :)). > > Sorry for not reading it (apparently wasn't here, maybe hackers-il, > but google doesn't find it), but what I usually do is kill -STOP > all of them, and only then kill -SOMETHINGTERMINAL. > Unless the user intended to abuse the system, and wrote a signal > handler for STOP, it would work well (and does in practice, with > all the OS course students I have here). Indeed it was hackers-il. See my original message in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hackers-il/message/2181 which shows a really nasty fork bomb in 12 bytes of shell code. and an antidote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hackers-il/message/2187 (please read the last message before you run anything in the first!! and don't run any of those things on a public machine!!) (and for the nitpickers, a few corrections:) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hackers-il/message/2184 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hackers-il/message/2183 As I explained there, the problem is that if you accidentally run this fork-bomb yourself (involving 12 bytes of shell script!) it's hard, or nearly impossible, to kill it (with -STOP or anything else) without killing all your other processes in the meantime. Some people might not find that a problem, but I do (I typically stay logged in, with dozens of open windows, for weeks. I sometimes consider logging out almost as bad as rebooting :)). -- Nadav Har'El| Monday, Jun 16 2003, 16 Sivan 5763 [EMAIL PROTECTED] |- Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |Cat rule #2: Bite the hand that won't http://nadav.harel.org.il |feed you fast enough. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SOLVED: Slow Linux response during disk operations (was: Testingon various computers needed)
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Yedidyah Bar-David wrote: > Sorry for not reading it (apparently wasn't here, maybe hackers-il, > but google doesn't find it), but what I usually do is kill -STOP > all of them, and only then kill -SOMETHINGTERMINAL. > Unless the user intended to abuse the system, and wrote a signal > handler for STOP, it would work well (and does in practice, with > all the OS course students I have here). a user cannot write a signal handler for the 'STOP' signal. this one, and the 'KILL' signal, are un-stopable in a user application. by the way, you forgot to mention that you kill -STOP the process group, rather then the processes directly one by one. i still remember the note regarding this that you (or someone else?) placed in bar ilan university's terminals farm, some 10+ years ago ;) -- guy "For world domination - press 1, or dial 0, and please hold, for the creator." -- nob o. dy = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SOLVED: Slow Linux response during disk operations (was: Testing on various computers needed)
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 11:56:01AM +0300, guy keren wrote:
>
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Yedidyah Bar-David wrote:
>
> > Sorry for not reading it (apparently wasn't here, maybe hackers-il,
> > but google doesn't find it), but what I usually do is kill -STOP
> > all of them, and only then kill -SOMETHINGTERMINAL.
> > Unless the user intended to abuse the system, and wrote a signal
> > handler for STOP, it would work well (and does in practice, with
> > all the OS course students I have here).
>
> a user cannot write a signal handler for the 'STOP' signal. this one, and
> the 'KILL' signal, are un-stopable in a user application.
Yes, forgot that :-(
>
> by the way, you forgot to mention that you kill -STOP the process group,
Actually, I do something like
ps auxww | awk '/^didi/ {print $2}' | xargs kill -STOP
> rather then the processes directly one by one. i still remember the note
> regarding this that you (or someone else?) placed in bar ilan university's
> terminals farm, some 10+ years ago ;)
Not me - I have never been there. I both studied and work here (at tau).
>
> --
> guy
>
> "For world domination - press 1,
> or dial 0, and please hold, for the creator." -- nob o. dy
--
Didi
=
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
traceroute and network timeouts to/from israel?
shalom :) i use bezeqint.net to connect to the net, using their little blue samsung ethernet adsl modem... attached to my linux slackware 8.1 server. yesterday i tried to traceroute: sucksads.lonex.org and lonex.org which is where we keep some files for remote hosting ... i timed out after about 20 hops ... but i noticed the first big lag was inside bezeqint.net itself! so my questions are: how can the timeouts be annihilated? is there another ISP that we should be using? any worthy recommendations are appreciated :) note: these errors are replicable from all the places we have checked via bezeqint.net's network. we are losing thousands of visitors a day to our sites/servers here in israel, because they keep timing out with network delays when they try to reach our sites... ie: www.schoolsucks.com cheers, yasha harari [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Configuring Motorola SB4200 on USB to connect on debian
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 09:41:06AM +0200, Baruch Shpirer wrote: > Hi, > Anyone had any luck doing this ? http://ibiblio.org/gferg/ldp/SB-4XXX-Cable-Modem.html = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Configuring Motorola SB4200 on USB to connect on debian
I'm not sure what's the problem... I've got a SB4101 modem connected to my Firewall using a network card and I use the pptp for Linux in-order to connect to the ISP (netvision) You might try using a network card to connect to the modem instead of the slower (And the CPU hugging) USB. -- Take care, Gilboa Davara XML - Systems Israel. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 972 - 054 968 909 On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 09:41:06AM +0200, Baruch Shpirer wrote: > Hi, > Anyone had any luck doing this ? = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: traceroute and network timeouts to/from israel?
Yasha Harari wrote: shalom :) i use bezeqint.net to connect to the net, using their little blue samsung ethernet adsl modem... attached to my linux slackware 8.1 server. yesterday i tried to traceroute: sucksads.lonex.org and lonex.org which is where we keep some files for remote hosting ... i timed out after about 20 hops ... but i noticed the first big lag was inside bezeqint.net itself! Yasha, While I have no reason to assume that the problem is not within bezreq int. networks please be advised that it is possible the fault lies with Bezeq which runs the ADSL/ATM lines used to connect to the provider and your connection runs encapsulated within. Thus, the delay apears, IP wise, to be inside the bezeq int. network but can be actually be caused in Bezeq facilities - or it might now. One thing you can try is to connect via ADSL to some other provider (there used to be pay per use guest account to some providers) and see if you see the same behaviour. Good luck, Gilad. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The SCO saga continues...
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10013 -- Miki Shapiro Unixophilic Software Developer - Tel: +972-(56)-322433 ICQ: 3EE853 - If at first you don't succeed... .. SkyDiving is probbably not for you. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Installng Hebrew on a brand new server
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 07:51:53AM +0300, Shlomo Yona wrote: > Hello, > > I need to install GNU/Linux on a brand new server which will be located at the > Technion. Disk space is not a problem. > > I need to be able to specify packages names, and configuration tips for > installing a proper setup of Hebrew support > [...] > > Since the server is installed from scratch and since there is no disk > limitation, I'd rather install more stuff than less stuff, as future > availability of system support will be probably slow. > This was posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED] My post is NOT an answer to what the original poster has asked about. In addition, what I am referring to is more appropriate for linux-il. Assuming that the server is in the Technion and that the developer is Shlomo Yona and he is in the somewhat remote haifa.ac.il, wouldn't it be worth it to install a dedicated phone line for the server and have the server use a serial console in addition to ssh? I can see the desire to install and forget (as much as possible). However wouldn't it be better to make the server more manageable then less? Management can always instruct not to use the serial console capability or even drop it all together at some point in the future. -- Shaul Karl, [EMAIL PROTECTED] e t = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care.
> -Original Message- > From: Stiven Andre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [long rant snipped] > that 5-10 people worldwide get when trying to connect. I doubt that > company i work for will use internet zahav in next 24 hours. There is an Israeli site, which was made for exactly these kinds of rants: http://www.service-report.co.il I am not affiliated with it, but it seems nice. Works only with Explorer (oh no) but it is supposed to hold people's positive and negative opinion about service providers (not just Internet). -- Arik ** This email and attachments have been scanned for potential proprietary or sensitive information leakage. Vidius, Inc. Protecting Your Information from the Inside Out. www.vidius.com ** To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Installng Hebrew on a brand new server
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003, Shaul Karl wrote about "Re: Installng Hebrew on a brand new server": > Assuming that the server is in the Technion and that the developer is > Shlomo Yona and he is in the somewhat remote haifa.ac.il, wouldn't it > be worth it to install a dedicated phone line for the server and have > the server use a serial console in addition to ssh? I can see the desire According to my experience, this is not worth the hassle. Ssh will work in every case except (the reasons I can think of off the top of my head): 1. When the computer locks up or the kernel is misinstalled. 2. Hardware trouble. 3. Ssh is incorrectly installed. 4. The network isn't working In cases #1, #2, a serial console would not be of any help. In case #4, he wouldn't care about the problem anyway (if the network isn't working, the server is useless). Issue #3 is valid, but is very rarely an issue except in bizarre situations (like a broken glibc upgrade that Redhat release a few months ago...). I doubt the trip to the Technion is so complicated that he'll ned to worry about this case. -- Nadav Har'El| Monday, Jun 16 2003, 16 Sivan 5763 [EMAIL PROTECTED] |- Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |Corduroy pillows - they're making http://nadav.harel.org.il |headlines! = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care.
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003, Arik Baratz wrote about "RE: [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care.": > There is an Israeli site, which was made for exactly these kinds of rants: > > http://www.service-report.co.il > > I am not affiliated with it, but it seems nice. Works only with Explorer (oh no) but > it is supposed to hold people's positive and negative opinion about service > providers (not just Internet). Not only does the site work only in Explorer, these guys are spammers, spamming once (evidence available on request) on February 19, 2003. Now you decide if you want to grace their site with your presence... P.S. If you're curious, the answer is yes: I do keep each and every piece of spam that I have ever received. 19,076 spams and counting. Caveat spamtor, repent, or face my wrath :) -- Nadav Har'El| Monday, Jun 16 2003, 16 Sivan 5763 [EMAIL PROTECTED] |- Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |Sorry, but my karma just ran over your http://nadav.harel.org.il |dogma. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Installng Hebrew on a brand new server
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Nadav Har'El wrote: > On Mon, Jun 16, 2003, Shaul Karl wrote about "Re: Installng Hebrew on a brand new > server": > > Assuming that the server is in the Technion and that the developer is > > Shlomo Yona and he is in the somewhat remote haifa.ac.il, wouldn't it > > be worth it to install a dedicated phone line for the server and have > > the server use a serial console in addition to ssh? I can see the desire > > According to my experience, this is not worth the hassle. Ssh will work in > every case except (the reasons I can think of off the top of my head): > > 1. When the computer locks up or the kernel is misinstalled. > 2. Hardware trouble. > 3. Ssh is incorrectly installed. > 4. The network isn't working > > In cases #1, #2, a serial console would not be of any help. In case #4, > he wouldn't care about the problem anyway (if the network isn't working, > the server is useless). Issue #3 is valid, but is very rarely an issue > except in bizarre situations (like a broken glibc upgrade that Redhat > release a few months ago...). I doubt the trip to the Technion is so > complicated that he'll ned to worry about this case. #4 is relevant as the Technion network is known for many crashes when the outside connection is down, while the internal network works OK. In these cases, a serial console is very useful. Also, the network could be down due to misconfiguration of the network settings on the server. In that case, a serial console is of great help as well. Alon -- This message was sent by Alon Altman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ICQ:1366540 GPG public key at http://alon.wox.org/pubkey.txt Key fingerprint = A670 6C81 19D3 3773 3627 DE14 B44A 50A3 FE06 7F24 -- -=[ Random Fortune ]=- You're a card which will have to be dealt with. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care.
> -Original Message- > From: Nadav Har'El [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [snip] > > http://www.service-report.co.il > > > > I am not affiliated with it, but it seems nice. Works only > with Explorer (oh no) but it is supposed to hold people's > positive and negative opinion about service providers (not > just Internet). > > Not only does the site work only in Explorer, these guys are spammers, > spamming once (evidence available on request) on February 19, 2003. Believe it or not, some people think spam is a legit way to do business. How was your address harvested? I'd like to see the sample. -- Arik ** This email and attachments have been scanned for potential proprietary or sensitive information leakage. Vidius, Inc. Protecting Your Information from the Inside Out. www.vidius.com ** To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care.
On Monday 16 June 2003 16:30, Arik Baratz wrote: > > Believe it or not, some people think spam is a legit way to do business. > Yes, and they are called "SPAMMERS" :-) Other people think robbing 7/11 stores is a legit way to make a living. They are called "ROBBERS". And the list goes on... -- - Aviram = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care.
On Monday 16 June 2003 03:45, Stiven Andre wrote: > May be the post is OT but some weeks ago i wrote a latter about problems > connecting to rh8 httpd server that was connected by > internet zahav ADSL service. The problem was that some people simply > unable to get any response from the server. After calling the > technician support and explaining the problem they replied "We are can't > hold responsibility of your services" and told me that the user is not > offline by now with a nice "Just press a connect button when you will > get to your office tomorrow". It took about 20 minutes to proof that the > user is on line. When I asked to ping the server(ping blocked by > firewall) and support guy didn't got any response he said "if ping > doesn't get through then the machine is offline and you of course can't > connect". > I spent other 15 minutes asking him to copy/paste the IP address into > his explorer address field and try to connect to httpd. Then was a 2-3 > minutes silent and then "yep, I can connect to the service ummm...". > Neither of this helped me to get anyone who can help me with the problem > or at least tell me the email so i could send the traceroute response > that 5-10 people worldwide get when trying to connect. I doubt that > company i work for will use internet zahav in next 24 hours. > You are correct. The morons use a misconfigured transparent proxy (something they've been scolded for repeatedly), which [I believe] [in this particular case] is also on very unfriendly terms with the closest DNS server. Been there, done that. IMO netvision is less half-assed than the rest. Lately though it looks like the entire Israeli 'net is having issues. > Best Regards. > S.A. > > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > This mail was checked for viruses by Romat email server -- Mix Sella (well, not really but hey) This mail was checked for viruses by Romat email server = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care)
> -Original Message- > From: Aviram Jenik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [snip] > > Believe it or not, some people think spam is a legit way to > do business. > > > Yes, and they are called "SPAMMERS" :-) > > Other people think robbing 7/11 stores is a legit way to make > a living. They > are called "ROBBERS". I beg to differ. Robbers know that what they are doing is not legit. Otherwise they would not be running away from the police, but rather try to sue the alarm system maker for alerting the police, the police force for arresting them and the shop owner for instructing their shop-keepers to try and prevent robberies, installing panic buttons and security cameras. The shop keepers will argue that installing security cameras, panic buttons and other security implements is they own fscking right, and done on their property, and they have a right to defend themselves from robbers, but the robbers will keep saying that robbing is a legit business practice, shop owners should accept them as part of life, and encourage other customers who happen to be there at the time of the robberies to hand out their wallets as well. They would then proceed to claim that the police force is an organized group of bullies, trying to stifle free enterprise and any person's right to rob and be robbed, and attempt to shut it down and outlaw it. -- Arik ** This email and attachments have been scanned for potential proprietary or sensitive information leakage. Vidius, Inc. Protecting Your Information from the Inside Out. www.vidius.com ** To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SOLVED: Slow Linux response during disk operations (was: Testingon various computers needed)
Nadav Har'El wrote on 2003-06-16: > Indeed it was hackers-il. See my original message in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hackers-il/message/2181 > which shows a really nasty fork bomb in 12 bytes of shell code. > Hmm, nasty indeed :-( > and an antidote in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hackers-il/message/2187 Elegant! > (please read the last message before you run anything in the first!! Too late :-( > and don't run any of those things on a public machine!!) > Don't worry, it's my personal machine at home ;-). > (and for the nitpickers, a few corrections:) > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hackers-il/message/2184 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hackers-il/message/2183 > > As I explained there, the problem is that if you accidentally run this > fork-bomb yourself (involving 12 bytes of shell script!) it's hard, or > nearly impossible, to kill it (with -STOP or anything else) without killing > all your other processes in the meantime. Some people might not find that > a problem, but I do (I typically stay logged in, with dozens of open > windows, for weeks. I sometimes consider logging out almost as bad as > rebooting :)). > Indeed, I counldn't (== wasn't patient enough to) get a shell. SSH from adjacent machine times out. (Is there a way to give SSH high priority so that it can be used if the system is otherwise stuck?) Ctrl-Alt-Backspace had its effect after a few minutes... -- Beni Cherniavsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care)
> From: Arik Baratz > I beg to differ. Robbers know that what they are doing is not When was the last time you got a spam from the true address? Why would they do that unless they wanted to try to cover their tracks. > They would then proceed to claim that the police force is an > organized group of bullies [rest of line snipped...] well, I'd subscribe to such a claim...:-) (not that I'm against law and order, it's just that my encounters with the Israeli police led me to the conclusion that they aren't helping the cause). --Amos PS The most rediculous spam I got a couple of times over that last week is a spam about "Clean you mailbox from spam"! = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care)
Regarding spam, One has the right for privacy, including his e-mail address. One who gains an e-mail address against the will, or without the knowing, of the owner is breaking the law. (I'm not a lawyer, I just felt like putting it out that way :) On Monday 16 June 2003 17:15, you wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Aviram Jenik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [snip] > > > > Believe it or not, some people think spam is a legit way to > > > > do business. > > > > Yes, and they are called "SPAMMERS" :-) > > > > Other people think robbing 7/11 stores is a legit way to make > > a living. They > > are called "ROBBERS". > > I beg to differ. Robbers know that what they are doing is not legit. > Otherwise they would not be running away from the police, but rather try to > sue the alarm system maker for alerting the police, the police force for > arresting them and the shop owner for instructing their shop-keepers to try > and prevent robberies, installing panic buttons and security cameras. > > The shop keepers will argue that installing security cameras, panic buttons > and other security implements is they own fscking right, and done on their > property, and they have a right to defend themselves from robbers, but the > robbers will keep saying that robbing is a legit business practice, shop > owners should accept them as part of life, and encourage other customers > who happen to be there at the time of the robberies to hand out their > wallets as well. > > They would then proceed to claim that the police force is an organized > group of bullies, trying to stifle free enterprise and any person's right > to rob and be robbed, and attempt to shut it down and outlaw it. > > -- Arik > ** > This email and attachments have been scanned for > potential proprietary or sensitive information leakage. > Vidius, Inc. Protecting Your Information from the Inside Out. > www.vidius.com > ** > > To unsubscribe, send mail to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message > body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Itay 'z9u2K' Duvdevani, GNU/Linux Kinneret. Public GPG Key: ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/kinneret/z9u2k.asc = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care)
> -Original Message- > From: Itay 'z9u2K' Duvdevani [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 5:32 PM [snip] > Regarding spam, > One has the right for privacy, including his e-mail address. > One who gains an e-mail address against the will, or without > the knowing, of > the owner is breaking the law. I again beg to differ. Let's try the real-world example of you posting your address on a buletin board for, say, giving private lessons. Someone reads it and emails you for help in Algebra. That's fine. What's not fine is someone taking this address (which you put in the public domain) and using it to cause you damage (i.e. spam you, make you pay for the bandwidth). If you want to get legal, there's section 30-aleph of Israel's Bezeq's law, saying that if you want to send a fax message to someone, you have to get their consent. The rational behind this law is that a fax owner pays for the reception of the fax message (paper, fax toner). It can be argued that the same may apply for spam - because the recipient pays for the bandwidth (even if the payment is flat-rate). Take a look at: http://www.law.co.il/showarticles.php?d=h&cat=33&abtd=1 Some very nice articles about world-wide spam with the Israeli POV. -- Arik ** This email and attachments have been scanned for potential proprietary or sensitive information leakage. Vidius, Inc. Protecting Your Information from the Inside Out. www.vidius.com ** To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customercare)
Itay 'z9u2K' Duvdevani wrote on 2003-06-16: > Regarding spam, > One has the right for privacy, including his e-mail address. > One who gains an e-mail address against the will, or without the knowing, of > the owner is breaking the law. > > (I'm not a lawyer, I just felt like putting it out that way :) > Well, I have just obtained your email address. I won't write it won't or ever spam you but by your definition I border on breaking the law by reading your mail. I beg to differ. Obtaining email addresses is not evil in itself, it's misusing them or passing them to bad hands. -- Beni Cherniavsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If I don't hack on it, who will? And if I don't GPL it, what am I? And why not now? = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care)
Quoting Arik Baratz, from the post of Mon, 16 Jun: > > I again beg to differ. please stop splitting infinitives and stop this silly thread. it's very off topic. -- Smiting fools with clue-by-four since 1817 Ira Abramov http://ira.abramov.org/email/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care)
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 05:32:56PM +0300, Itay 'z9u2K' Duvdevani wrote: > Regarding spam, > One has the right for privacy, including his e-mail address. > One who gains an e-mail address against the will, or without the knowing, of > the owner is breaking the law. > > (I'm not a lawyer, I just felt like putting it out that way :) Are you sure this applies to you? http://www.google.com/search?q=z9u2K+email You posted your email in public. You can no longer hide it. Gaining a large number of addresses and mailing them without their explicit concent is what separates spam from legitimate mail. -- Tzafrir Cohen +---+ http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir/ |vim is a mutt's best friend| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] +---+ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customercare)
Itay 'z9u2K' Duvdevani wrote on 2003-06-16: > On Monday 16 June 2003 17:52, you wrote: > > Itay 'z9u2K' Duvdevani wrote on 2003-06-16: > > > Regarding spam, > > > One has the right for privacy, including his e-mail address. > > > One who gains an e-mail address against the will, or without the knowing, > > > of the owner is breaking the law. > > > > > > (I'm not a lawyer, I just felt like putting it out that way :) > > > > Well, I have just obtained your email address. I won't write it won't > > or ever spam you but by your definition I border on breaking the law > > by reading your mail. > > > > I beg to differ. Obtaining email addresses is not evil in itself, > > it's misusing them or passing them to bad hands. > > I have willingly committed my e-mail address to both BerliOS and linux-il... > I don't see your point... > linux-il has public archives, so you have committed it the whole net. Someone reading there some of your posts might mail you privately about it. You would probably not object to that (depending on the details). Yet he has obtained your address without your knowing. -- Beni Cherniavsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If I don't hack on it, who will? And if I don't GPL it, what am I? And why not now? = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care)
I have willingly committed my e-mail address to both BerliOS and linux-il... I don't see your point... On Monday 16 June 2003 17:52, you wrote: > Itay 'z9u2K' Duvdevani wrote on 2003-06-16: > > Regarding spam, > > One has the right for privacy, including his e-mail address. > > One who gains an e-mail address against the will, or without the knowing, > > of the owner is breaking the law. > > > > (I'm not a lawyer, I just felt like putting it out that way :) > > Well, I have just obtained your email address. I won't write it won't > or ever spam you but by your definition I border on breaking the law > by reading your mail. > > I beg to differ. Obtaining email addresses is not evil in itself, > it's misusing them or passing them to bad hands. -- Itay 'z9u2K' Duvdevani, GNU/Linux Kinneret. Public GPG Key: ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/kinneret/z9u2k.asc = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care)
On Monday 16 June 2003 17:15, Arik Baratz wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Aviram Jenik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [snip] > > > > Believe it or not, some people think spam is a legit way to > > > > do business. > > > > Yes, and they are called "SPAMMERS" :-) > > > > Other people think robbing 7/11 stores is a legit way to make > > a living. They > > are called "ROBBERS". > > I beg to differ. Robbers know that what they are doing is not legit. > Otherwise they would not be running away from the police, but rather try to > sue the alarm system maker for alerting the police, the police force for > arresting them and the shop owner for instructing their shop-keepers to try > and prevent robberies, installing panic buttons and security cameras. I beg to differ. Spammers know EXACTLY what they are doing. Spammers are perfectly aware that what they're doing is not legit. Spammers do have conferences and training, spammers employ more or less sophisticated techniques and psychologic tricks, spammers constantly research anti-spam technology and counter emerging spam filtering measures. When people started filtering by From: header, spammers started writing bogus addresses. When people started complaining, spammers started forging headers. When people figured it out, spammers started using proxies. When proxies got nailed, spammers started using free email, insecure relays and throwaway accounts. When free email implemented human checks, insecure relays got blacklisted, ISPs started suing and antispammer movement deployed the forces, spammers moved offshore, started to fake identities, and pay crooked ISP personnel. When everyone figured out who exactly the spammers are, when honeypots popped up everywhere and started blackisting them even before they could actually do any damage spammers started hijacking netblocks, joe-jobbing, and SLAPP-suing. Even worse, they started listwashing and pretending being legit. You might not be aware that there's a war going on, but I have news for you. Spammers are worse than robbers. Robbers are scum; but spammers are *parasite scum*. Even worse, spammers are STUPID parasite scum. I might consider giving a fair trial to someone who robbed a pawnshop. But to a spammer? No. Spammers should be put to death. And you know what? Do a little googling. Sometimes, they *do* shoot spammers. [deletia] -- Mix Sella (well, not really but hey) This mail was checked for viruses by Romat email server = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care)
> -Original Message- > From: Mix Sella [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [snip] > I beg to differ. Spammers know EXACTLY what they are doing. > Spammers are > perfectly aware that what they're doing is not legit. > Spammers do have > conferences and training, spammers employ more or less sophisticated > techniques and psychologic tricks, spammers constantly > research anti-spam > technology and counter emerging spam filtering measures. Yes. Because they think what they are doing is legit, and the rest of the world (i.e. you and me) is wrong. > When people started filtering by From: header, spammers > started writing bogus > addresses. > When people started complaining, spammers started forging headers. > When people figured it out, spammers started using proxies. > When proxies got nailed, spammers started using free email, > insecure relays > and throwaway accounts. > When free email implemented human checks, insecure relays got > blacklisted, > ISPs started suing and antispammer movement deployed the > forces, spammers > moved offshore, started to fake identities, and pay crooked > ISP personnel. This does not say they know thay are illegit. They are still fighting their against the anti-spam movement and not against the 'legitimacy' of their actions. They claim that if it's legal and it makes them money, than it's okay. > When everyone figured out who exactly the spammers are, when > honeypots popped > up everywhere and started blackisting them even before they > could actually do > any damage spammers started hijacking netblocks, joe-jobbing, and > SLAPP-suing. Even worse, they started listwashing and > pretending being legit. > You might not be aware that there's a war going on, but I > have news for you. Oh, I know, I fight it every day. I'm on the good side :-) > Spammers are worse than robbers. Robbers are scum; but > spammers are *parasite > scum*. Even worse, spammers are STUPID parasite scum. I might While I agree they are the scum of the earth, there's a difference between that and being illegit or illegal. Take for example the gray-market debt collectors. They will come to you and hint at what will happen if you don't pay. They will apply pressure on you They will hint that your family will not like it. They will send you (anonymously) pictures of your children at school. They will tread on the fine line between harassment and a legitimate requirement for extrication of the debt. They are scum. They are low-lifes. They are legit, in their opinion. They are legal (well, at least they weren't caught). > consider giving > a fair trial to someone who robbed a pawnshop. But to a > spammer? No. Spammers > should be put to death. > And you know what? Do a little googling. Sometimes, they *do* > shoot spammers. I think no one should get the death penalty. It is just too light - a few days of fear, you shit in your pants, you die (I don't believe in an afterlife). I suggest everlasting torture - like reading spam at them day and night, in jail (...and you only have to send 5 bucks! It's the most amazing offer...). -- Arik ** This email and attachments have been scanned for potential proprietary or sensitive information leakage. Vidius, Inc. Protecting Your Information from the Inside Out. www.vidius.com ** To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customercare)
There is two ways to approach the fact that there are cockroaches in the world. One is to try having them away from you, and another is to understand how come they survive so well. And in fact I don't think that you can be really effective about the former without the latter. Despite my annoyance when spam hits my own mailbox and my opinion of those who practice it, I think that there is something fascinating about spam. It's the fact that it's actually working. I mean, someone is making money out of it, otherwise it would have stopped a long time ago. Who is earning the money, then? How many mails do you have to send in order to get a fruitful response? What does a spamming businessplan look like? How large is its margins? Has anyone seen a clean business analysis of spam? Does it really work, to send thousands of mail messages at random? Will that pay the bill of your internet connection? The answer may be negative. It's possible that the only ones who make the money, are those sell discs with e-mail addresses. Spam filters are like killing cockroaches with a shoe. If you really want to get rid of them, you have to start understand what keeps them going. Eli = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
VT switching problem with XFree86 4.3.0 tracked down(?)
I've just experienced the VT switching problem on RedHat 9.0. I
remembered some post here linking it to xkb, so I tried my xkb options
one-by-one. I hunted it down to the option `altwin:alt_win` which is
a custom thing I wrote to map the ALT keys to the Meta modifier and
the WIN keys to the Alt modifier (I like it like this). With it, I
couldn't switch, without - I could. Which led me to try (with the
option enabled) pressing Ctrl-Win-F1 -- it worked! Apparently the new
XFree86 is interpretting the VT-switching sequences after all XKB
mappings.
However all the standard altwin:* options seem to map ALT to Alt, so
this doesn't expolain the problem for others. Perhaps on Mandrake
9.1, where it was widely reported the default options do map ALT to
something different?
P.S. Here are my customizations:
$ cat /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xkb/symbols/meta
// alternative definition for the extra keys on 104-key "Windows95"
// keyboards: Meta on ALT keys and Alt on WIN keys.
partial modifier_keys
xkb_symbols "alt_win" {
key {[ Meta_L ] };
key {[ Meta_R ] };
key {[ Alt_L ] };
key {[ Alt_R ] };
key {[ Menu] };
// modifier mappings
modifier_map Mod1 { Meta_L, Meta_R };
modifier_map Mod4 { Alt_L, Alt_R };
};
$ grep alt_win /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xkb/rules/xfree86
altwin:alt_win= +meta(alt_win)
--
Beni Cherniavsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
=
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care)
On Monday 16 June 2003 17:48, Arik Baratz wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Itay 'z9u2K' Duvdevani [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 5:32 PM > > [snip] > > > Regarding spam, > > One has the right for privacy, including his e-mail address. > > One who gains an e-mail address against the will, or without > > the knowing, of > > the owner is breaking the law. > > I again beg to differ. > > Let's try the real-world example of you posting your address on a buletin > board for, say, giving private lessons. > Bad analogy. A local bulletin board is not the vast searchable space of All Internet. > Someone reads it and emails you for help in Algebra. That's fine. > > What's not fine is someone taking this address (which you put in the public > domain) You don't. Email address is not a commodity, a e-mailbox is not a property. Not due the current laws anyway. > and using it to cause you damage (i.e. spam you, make you pay for > the bandwidth). Another legal problem. Spam doesn't really HURT me and it doesn't really do damage that would be admissible in court. The problem with spam is much more subtle than just advertising hitting your mailbox per se. The problem is that commercial entities willingfully and knowingly deceive their potential customers by acting as if they had a *right* to sell/make a profit. > > If you want to get legal, there's section 30-aleph of Israel's Bezeq's law, > saying that if you want to send a fax message to someone, you have to get > their consent. The rational behind this law is that a fax owner pays for > the reception of the fax message (paper, fax toner). Correct me if I am wrong but this only applies to services transmitted over or terminated at Bezeq property. How about SMS? How about snail mail? > > It can be argued that the same may apply for spam - because the recipient > pays for the bandwidth (even if the payment is flat-rate). > This is a bad argument. 1) Logic - it deals only with the secondary consequences of the problem and not with the root premises of it (see above) 2) Enforceability - while legal action against junk fax spammers is enforceable due to the way POTS networks are build, it is not so in the chaos of All Internet. Spammers get nailed mostly due to their stupidity. Consequently, should this argument be accepted and legislation based on it, nothing will improve but the problem would be considered solved. > Take a look at: > > http://www.law.co.il/showarticles.php?d=h&cat=33&abtd=1 > > Some very nice articles about world-wide spam with the Israeli POV. > > -- Arik > ** > This email and attachments have been scanned for > potential proprietary or sensitive information leakage. > Vidius, Inc. Protecting Your Information from the Inside Out. > www.vidius.com > ** > > To unsubscribe, send mail to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message > body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Mix Sella (well, not really but hey) This mail was checked for viruses by Romat email server = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care)
On Monday 16 June 2003 18:02, Arik Baratz wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Mix Sella [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [snip] > > > I beg to differ. Spammers know EXACTLY what they are doing. > > Spammers are > > perfectly aware that what they're doing is not legit. > > Spammers do have > > conferences and training, spammers employ more or less sophisticated > > techniques and psychologic tricks, spammers constantly > > research anti-spam > > technology and counter emerging spam filtering measures. > > Yes. Because they think what they are doing is legit, and the rest of the > world (i.e. you and me) is wrong. > No. Because they KNOW what they are doing is not legit and trying to make everyone believe they don't. > > When people started filtering by From: header, spammers > > started writing bogus > > addresses. > > When people started complaining, spammers started forging headers. > > When people figured it out, spammers started using proxies. > > When proxies got nailed, spammers started using free email, > > insecure relays > > and throwaway accounts. > > When free email implemented human checks, insecure relays got > > blacklisted, > > ISPs started suing and antispammer movement deployed the > > forces, spammers > > moved offshore, started to fake identities, and pay crooked > > ISP personnel. > > This does not say they know thay are illegit. They are still fighting their > against the anti-spam movement and not against the 'legitimacy' of their > actions. They claim that if it's legal and it makes them money, than it's > okay. It does. Spamming is fraud, theft and trespassing (NANAE rule #0: Spam is theft). That it's not outlawed doesn't make it any less fraud, theft and trespassing. Spammers know people don't want them to do it and they do it anyway until they piss off someone and get caught (NANAE rule #3: Spammers are stupid). While doing so they try to distract everyone by pleading innocent (NANAE rule #1: Spammers lie). It's too bad you buy their lies (NANAE rule #2: If a spammers seems to be telling the truth, see rule #1). > > > When everyone figured out who exactly the spammers are, when > > honeypots popped > > up everywhere and started blackisting them even before they > > could actually do > > any damage spammers started hijacking netblocks, joe-jobbing, and > > SLAPP-suing. Even worse, they started listwashing and > > pretending being legit. > > You might not be aware that there's a war going on, but I > > have news for you. > > Oh, I know, I fight it every day. I'm on the good side :-) > I'm a NANAE lurker. DIXI. > > Spammers are worse than robbers. Robbers are scum; but > > spammers are *parasite > > scum*. Even worse, spammers are STUPID parasite scum. I might > > While I agree they are the scum of the earth, there's a difference between > that and being illegit or illegal. There is? Please show me one non-retarded, experienced user that's not affiliated with spammers or spammer business who would say that spam is legitimate and has rights to live. No wait, let's be fair and speak real numbers. Show me 5 people who think that way. > > Take for example the gray-market debt collectors. They will come to you and > hint at what will happen if you don't pay. They will apply pressure on you > They will hint that your family will not like it. They will send you > (anonymously) pictures of your children at school. They will tread on the > fine line between harassment and a legitimate requirement for extrication > of the debt. Threat constitutes assault and is a felony punishable by criminal law. And, when you say 'debt collectors', you imply that I owe someone something. To spammers, I don't owe jack shit. > > They are scum. They are low-lifes. They are legit, in their opinion. They > are legal (well, at least they weren't caught). > I see the analogy, but the analogy is not good enough. By not being violent criminals and having their ass covered with the anonimousity of All Internet, spammers commit acts of abuse of similar extent while holding by a much more decaying moral ground. > > consider giving > > a fair trial to someone who robbed a pawnshop. But to a > > spammer? No. Spammers > > should be put to death. > > And you know what? Do a little googling. Sometimes, they *do* > > shoot spammers. > > I think no one should get the death penalty. It is just too light - a few > days of fear, you shit in your pants, you die (I don't believe in an > afterlife). I suggest everlasting torture - like reading spam at them day > and night, in jail (...and you only have to send 5 bucks! It's the most > amazing offer...). Heh heh. -- Mix Sella (well, not really but hey) This mail was checked for viruses by Romat email server = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care)
> -Original Message- > From: Mix Sella [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [snip] > > Let's try the real-world example of you posting your > address on a buletin > > board for, say, giving private lessons. > Bad analogy. A local bulletin board is not the vast > searchable space of All > Internet. Should read: an ONLINE buletin board > > What's not fine is someone taking this address (which you > put in the public > > domain) > You don't. Email address is not a commodity, a e-mailbox is > not a property. > Not due the current laws anyway. Where did I state that? > > and using it to cause you damage (i.e. spam you, make you pay for > > the bandwidth). > Another legal problem. Spam doesn't really HURT me and it > doesn't really do > damage that would be admissible in court. The problem with On the same ground a fax spammer can say that spam-fax doesn't really hurt you because you get one free roll of paper from your fax supplier when you got your fax. It does hurt me. It is interfering with my work. It is costing me (and my company) expensive bandwidth. > spam is much more > subtle than just advertising hitting your mailbox per se. The > problem is that > commercial entities willingfully and knowingly deceive their > potential > customers by acting as if they had a *right* to sell/make a profit. This is not in the electronic domain - this is misleading business advertisement. If you publish in a newspaper that you can buy herbal viagra that works, the FTC / Israeli industry and commerce chambers would own your ass. They should be prosecuted just like those who are outside of cyberspace. > > If you want to get legal, there's section 30-aleph of > Israel's Bezeq's law, > > saying that if you want to send a fax message to someone, > you have to get > > their consent. The rational behind this law is that a fax > owner pays for > > the reception of the fax message (paper, fax toner). > > Correct me if I am wrong but this only applies to services > transmitted over or > terminated at Bezeq property. How about SMS? How about snail mail? IANAL, but I don't think so. The hebrew word 'BEZEQ' means communication. The company with the same name simply has a cool name. > > It can be argued that the same may apply for spam - because > the recipient > > pays for the bandwidth (even if the payment is flat-rate). > > This is a bad argument. > > 1) Logic - it deals only with the secondary consequences of > the problem and > not with the root premises of it (see above) The ones that have to do with the electronic domain. I agree. This is what I am good at. Let the lawyers deal with the legal aspect of false advertisement. > 2) Enforceability - while legal action against junk fax spammers is > enforceable due to the way POTS networks are build, it is not > so in the chaos > of All Internet. Spammers get nailed mostly due to their stupidity. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Enforcability is very much an option. It is very hard to really hide on the internet. The touple (source ip address, time of connection to mail server) is a one-to-one mapping to a specific physical computer (when a TCP connection is involved, such as SMTP) or at least its NAT zone boundary. The algorithm is very simple: 1. Correlate the source IP address to the net block. 1.1 Case privately owned space: 1.1.1 set liable=owner(space) 1.2 Case ISP: 1.2.1 use ISP billing records, IP and time to locate terminal 1.2.1.1 Case fixed endpoint: 1.2.1.1.1 set liable=owner(endpoint) 1.2.1.2 Case dial-up: 1.2.1.2.1 use telco records and the time of the call to locate endpoint 1.2.1.2.2 set liable=owner(endpoint) 1.3 Case ISP in a non-compliant country 1.3.1 Collect evidence 1.3.2 If enough evidence 1.3.2.1 Filter port 25 from above entity for a month (or other corrective measure) 1.3.3 exit 2. Ask liable to defend itself 3. If liable defends 3.1 if defence checks out 3.1.1 set liable=defence(liable) 4. sue liable > Consequently, should this argument be accepted and > legislation based on it, > nothing will improve but the problem would be considered solved. If there will be a task force with sufficient rights to execute the steps in my algorithm without undue hinderance, it can work. It should not be a local law, but rather an international treaty. -- Arik ** This email and attachments have been scanned for potential proprietary or sensitive information leakage. Vidius, Inc. Protecting Your Information from the Inside Out. www.vidius.com ** To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care)
> -Original Message- > From: Mix Sella [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [snip] > It does. Spamming is fraud, theft and trespassing (NANAE rule > #0: Spam is > theft). That it's not outlawed doesn't make it any less > fraud, theft and > trespassing. Spammers know people don't want them to do it > and they do it > anyway until they piss off someone and get caught (NANAE rule > #3: Spammers > are stupid). While doing so they try to distract everyone by pleading > innocent (NANAE rule #1: Spammers lie). It's too bad you buy > their lies > (NANAE rule #2: If a spammers seems to be telling the truth, > see rule #1). That's your decision. These NANAE (what is that?) rules are not generally accepted by formal entities. You have to prove it first. > I'm a NANAE lurker. DIXI. NANAE? DIXI? > There is? Please show me one non-retarded, experienced user > that's not > affiliated with spammers or spammer business who would say > that spam is > legitimate and has rights to live. No wait, let's be fair and > speak real > numbers. Show me 5 people who think that way. Milions think that O. J. Simpson was guilty, yet he was acquitted. What's your point? Billions think there is a god. So? > > Take for example the gray-market debt collectors. They will > come to you and > > hint at what will happen if you don't pay. They will apply > pressure on you > > They will hint that your family will not like it. They will send you > > (anonymously) pictures of your children at school. They > will tread on the > > fine line between harassment and a legitimate requirement > for extrication > > of the debt. > > Threat constitutes assault and is a felony punishable by criminal law. Right, the singular acts - not the practice. > And, when you say 'debt collectors', you imply that I owe > someone something. > To spammers, I don't owe jack shit. No analogy is perfect. > I see the analogy, but the analogy is not good enough. By not > being violent > criminals and having their ass covered with the anonimousity > of All Internet, > spammers commit acts of abuse of similar extent while holding > by a much more > decaying moral ground. You just proved my point. -- Arik ** This email and attachments have been scanned for potential proprietary or sensitive information leakage. Vidius, Inc. Protecting Your Information from the Inside Out. www.vidius.com ** To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
nfs blocking "mount"
How can one get a list of mounted filesystems without getting blocked running "df" or "mount" with a dead NFS server? I am writing a little status monitor script to see if NFS is up or down and what's mounted. if I mount and then disconnect the server, running mount or df just hangs blocked till the server comes back. any way to read the mounts tables without having to get blocked if there is a problem? Thanks, Ira. -- The place to be Ira Abramov http://ira.abramov.org/email/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nfs blocking "mount"
Ira Abramov wrote: How can one get a list of mounted filesystems without getting blocked running "df" or "mount" with a dead NFS server? I am writing a little status monitor script to see if NFS is up or down and what's mounted. if I mount and then disconnect the server, running mount or df just hangs blocked till the server comes back. any way to read the mounts tables without having to get blocked if there is a problem? How about reading /etc/mtab ? -- Oded ::.. The biggest lies: 4. It's only a cold sore. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: nfs blocking "mount"
> From: Oded Arbel > Ira Abramov wrote: > > >How can one get a list of mounted filesystems without getting blocked > >running "df" or "mount" with a dead NFS server? I am writing a little > How about reading /etc/mtab ? And then do what with that info? You just get a static list as maintained by mount/unmount. It still won't prevent you from accessing a broken NFS server. That's unless I'm missing some Linux-specific trickery... But back to Ira's original question and Oded's suggestion combined - 1. get the list (from /etc/mtab or wherever it is under /proc) 2. If it's a "host:/directory" format then try pinging the remote host. 3. You can also try rpcping and I suspect there is also some sort of nfsping to check accessability of the nfs server. 4. Access the filesystem. --Amos = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: nfs blocking "mount"
Use the "soft" mount option? http://btr0xw.rz.uni-bayreuth.de/cgi-bin/manpages/mount/8 Hope this helps. BTW - have you considered other network filesystems? I'm aware that NFS is much more portable, but if it's between all-linux machines then I heard about other network filesystems which sound to be more advanced. --Amos > -Original Message- > From: Ira Abramov > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > lshell.com > ] > Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 8:39 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: nfs blocking "mount" > > > How can one get a list of mounted filesystems without getting blocked > running "df" or "mount" with a dead NFS server? I am writing a little > status monitor script to see if NFS is up or down and what's > mounted. if > I mount and then disconnect the server, running mount or df just hangs > blocked till the server comes back. any way to read the mounts tables > without having to get blocked if there is a problem? > > Thanks, > Ira. > > -- > The place to be > Ira Abramov > http://ira.abramov.org/email/ > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -- Your email is protected by Mailshell -- > To block spam or change delivery options: > http://www.mailshell.com/control.html?a=blshp8bbumg87yq1j9157q v2pz6_58z35eg0 ReturnPath.net http://rd.mailshell.com/ad481 Earn up to $3 for each of your friends who signs up with Mailshell! http://rd.mailshell.com/sp5 = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Spamming (was [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care)
On Monday 16 June 2003 19:00, you wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Mix Sella [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > [deletia] > Should read: an ONLINE buletin board > > > > What's not fine is someone taking this address (which you > > > > put in the public > > > > > domain) > > > > You don't. Email address is not a commodity, a e-mailbox is > > not a property. > > Not due the current laws anyway. > > Where did I state that? > You can't put an email address in "public domain". You can publish it in public place though. [deletia] > > > and using it to cause you damage (i.e. spam you, make you pay for > > > the bandwidth). > > > > Another legal problem. Spam doesn't really HURT me and it > > doesn't really do > > damage that would be admissible in court. The problem with > > On the same ground a fax spammer can say that spam-fax doesn't really hurt > you because you get one free roll of paper from your fax supplier when you > got your fax. I wish it was correct but it's not. Not everywhere law recognizes email interchange as conversation, or even a media per se. Internet communications only recently began getting the same protection of law that the ``traditional'' means enjoyed. And let's face it, junk faxes aren't precisely a criminal offense either. > It does hurt me. It is interfering with my work. It is costing me (and my > company) expensive bandwidth. > So if you wanted to bring civil action against a spammer as an individual, how would you go? > > spam is much more > > subtle than just advertising hitting your mailbox per se. The > > problem is that > > commercial entities willingfully and knowingly deceive their > > potential > > customers by acting as if they had a *right* to sell/make a profit. > > This is not in the electronic domain - this is misleading business > advertisement. If you publish in a newspaper that you can buy herbal viagra > that works, the FTC / Israeli industry and commerce chambers would own your > ass. > Correct, but circumstances are different. Spammers went WAY beyond any ``misleading business advertisement''. Make-penis-fast and 419 are but rigorous evidence of such. While a company might actually try to lie to its customers and get slapped just to get back in check, spammers do it repeatedly, and knowingly. Spammers are not a branch of legitimate business gone horribly wrong - they as a whole are proof that business and profit is a *privilege* and not a right. > They should be prosecuted just like those who are outside of cyberspace. > Sure, the day there's Internet government and Internet taxes. But hey, I might get elected to the Ministry Of IP Allocation ;) > > > If you want to get legal, there's section 30-aleph of > > > > Israel's Bezeq's law, > > [deletia] > > > It can be argued that the recipient pays for the bandwidth (even if the payment is flat-rate). > > > > This is a bad argument. > > > > 1) Logic - it deals only with the secondary consequences of > > the problem and > > not with the root premises of it (see above) > > The ones that have to do with the electronic domain. I agree. This is what > I am good at. Let the lawyers deal with the legal aspect of false > advertisement. "Fraud". The word is "fraud". > > > 2) Enforceability - while legal action against junk fax spammers is > > enforceable due to the way POTS networks are build, it is not > > so in the chaos > > of All Internet. Spammers get nailed mostly due to their stupidity. > > Wrong, wrong, wrong. Enforcability is very much an option. It is very hard > to really hide on the internet. The touple (source ip address, time of > connection to mail server) is a one-to-one mapping to a specific physical > computer (when a TCP connection is involved, such as SMTP) or at least its > NAT zone boundary. The algorithm is very simple: > Let's see. > 1. Correlate the source IP address to the net block. > 1.1 Case privately owned space: > 1.1.1 set liable=owner(space) Hijacked netblock or a misconfigured mail server - who is liable? Is it criminal liability by a chance? > 1.2 Case ISP: > 1.2.1 use ISP billing records, IP and time to locate terminal Court subpoena -> issues of jurisdiction, privacy, assesment of damages. How do you obtain a subpoena that's valid for an ISP in Oregon while the spammer lives in Canada and you're in Kiryat Malachi? > 1.2.1.1 Case fixed endpoint: > 1.2.1.1.1 set liable=owner(endpoint) See 1.1.1 > 1.2.1.2 Case dial-up: > 1.2.1.2.1 use telco records and the time of the call to locate endpoint See court subpoena. > 1.2.1.2.2 set liable=owner(endpoint) > 1.3 Case ISP in a non-compliant country > 1.3.1 Collect evidence > 1.3.2 If enough evidence > 1.3.2.1 Filter port 25 from above entity for a month (or other corrective > measure) Right, that's a wonderful measure which actually works. bezeqint.net's been blacklisted in SPEWS for 2 months now. Let's just block ourselves now. > 1.3.3 exit > 2. Ask liable to defend itself > 3. If liable defen
Re: nfs blocking "mount"
Hi I have added this binary . it just checkes if nfs daemon is running ( using RPC ) i took it from nagios to monitor NFS servers Hope it will help check_rpc -H $HOSTADDRESS$ -C nfs Erez check_rpc Description: Binary data
Fw: nfs blocking "mount"
" > Hi > > I have added this binary . > > it just checkes if nfs daemon is running ( using RPC ) > i took it from nagios to monitor NFS servers > > Hope it will help > > check_rpc -H $HOSTADDRESS$ -C nfs > > Erez check_rpc.dat Description: Binary data
please erase your AIX OS
Well, thats what SCO says ;) As of (give or take) an hour ago, SCO officially terminated IBM's license to sell AIX.. http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=111534 Of course, ask any sane IT guy about this issue and they'll laugh out loud, but still, this is the first time I see that a company declares another company's product as "illegal" yet I don't know a single sane IT person that would switch/erase their server due to this announcment... Oh, and regarding the money that they got from Microsoft - it's not $30 million, not $20 million and not even $10 million. According to their 10-Q filing (Quaterly report which can be found here - http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1102542/000110465903012299/j2045_10q.htm - warning - very borring stuff!) the money that they got from 2 companies from licenses (one is MS and another one which they don't tell who) - is total of $8.3 millions - not enough money if they want to fight IBM in court. They'll be dead before there will be a ruling... Hetz = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: please erase your AIX OS
On Monday 16 June 2003 23:58, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote: > Well, thats what SCO says ;) > > As of (give or take) an hour ago, SCO officially terminated IBM's license > to sell AIX.. > > http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=111534 Well, since the last email 2 things happend: 1. SCO says that your existing AIX license is also illegal http://news.com.com/2100-1016-1017719.html 2. SCO share goes down 10% as I write this email.. interesting times, isn't it? Hetz = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] A note about internet zahav customer care.
On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 17:17, Mix Sella wrote: > On Monday 16 June 2003 03:45, Stiven Andre wrote: > > May be the post is OT but some weeks ago i wrote a latter about problems > > connecting to rh8 httpd server that was connected by > > internet zahav ADSL service. The problem was that some people simply [snip] > > > > You are correct. The morons use a misconfigured transparent proxy (something > they've been scolded for repeatedly), which [I believe] [in this particular > case] is also on very unfriendly terms with the closest DNS server. Been > there, done that. IMO netvision is less half-assed than the rest. Lately > though it looks like the entire Israeli 'net is having issues. > I have a cable connection to Actcom and never had problems running a website. Their transparent proxy does not cache inter-Israeli traffic. Personally, I have not heard complains on Internet Zahav transparent proxy. I would try to double check the DNS sync issue. Have you been tracerouting by IP or FQDN ? Ask the users to telnet your IP to port 80, it will give you an indication whether you are talking to proxy or real web server (look an the HTTP headers) Regs, Guy > > > Best Regards. > > S.A. > > > > > > = > > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > This mail was checked for viruses by Romat email server -- = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PPPoE on Linux - timeout waiting for PADO/PADS packets
There is a small button (about a size of a pinhead) at the back of the modem. Use it to reset the modem to factory defaults. Reboot the modem (disconnect/connect the power) and let it sync.After that it should work with PPTP. Guy On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 09:26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hello, > > I've followed the instructions of enabling PPPoE on Linux > as described at http://www.isoc.org.il/~doron/PPPoE.html > and it worked at first but now after a reboot it stopped. > > I get multiple messages like "Timeout waiting for PADO packets" > and some "Timeout waiting for PADS packets". I tried configuraing > the modem back to the PPTP setup but the old PPTP doesn't work either > (gives same messages, but much less of them). > > The modem is an ethernet SpeedTouch Home, debian unstable. ISP > is actcom. Kernel is 2.4.20 with mppe and preemptive patches. > > I googled for the error message but it looks like people mostly > suspect the line or the ISP, not the setup. Also the PPTP broke > so I don't know where to proceed. > > Any hints anyone? > > Thanks, > > --Amos > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nfs blocking "mount"
Quoth Erez Kirson on Mon, Jun 16, 2003: > I have added this binary . You'd better point to the source, this being a Linux list at all (and, BTW, how will Ira know it isn't a worm?). Also, next time please put files on a web page or an FTP site and post a link. Or, if you don't have access to such servers, mail the files to one recipient. Thanks.[0] > it just checkes if nfs daemon is running ( using RPC ) > i took it from nagios to monitor NFS servers What's nagios? [Google google] Oh, I see: http://www.nagios.org/ Looks nice. Vadik. [0] Hope it sounded like a polite reminder and not a flame (as I often sound like, usually unintentionally). -- To the systems programmer, users and applications serve only to provide a test load. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: traceroute and network timeouts to/from israel?
It looks like BezeqInt have one of their international lines way overloaded. Their was a extesive discussion at Tapuz's broadband forum regarding the issue [1] Take a look at your IP. BezeqInt, as far as I recall, have 2 IP pools: 212.X.Y.Z and 81.X.Y.Z If the user's IP is from the second pool, most of the chances are that he will suffer from slow response time accessing resources abroad. Several people tried to talk to their support, but got no comprehensive answer. In your place I'd switch to ISP who does care about his customers. [1] Warning: flash bloated site ! http://www.tapuz.co.il/tapuzforum/main/Viewmsg.asp?id=20&msgid=16532720 Guy On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 12:32, Yasha Harari wrote: > shalom :) > > i use bezeqint.net to connect to the net, using their little blue samsung > ethernet adsl modem... attached to my linux slackware 8.1 server. > > yesterday i tried to traceroute: > sucksads.lonex.org and > lonex.org > > which is where we keep some files for remote hosting ... > > i timed out after about 20 hops ... but i noticed the first big lag was > inside bezeqint.net itself! > > so my questions are: how can the timeouts be annihilated? is there another > ISP that we should be using? any worthy recommendations are appreciated :) > > note: these errors are replicable from all the places we have checked via > bezeqint.net's network. we are losing thousands of visitors a day to our > sites/servers here in israel, because they keep timing out with network > delays when they try to reach our sites... ie: > www.schoolsucks.com > > cheers, > > yasha harari > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[OT] Re: please erase your AIX OS
NB: [OT] added to subj. Hetz Ben Hamo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 2. SCO share goes down 10% as I write this email.. Still, it went up more than 10-fold since February... Going back to your previous post about M$ money: didn't M$ own a piece of the pre-Caldera SCO? If yes, do they still? -- Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: PPPoE on Linux - timeout waiting for PADO/PADS packets
Thanks. I 'm aware of that button. I dthis reset this morning but it didn't help. Actcom support (a Debian user himself, it turned) said that as far as he's aware once Bezeq notices you use PPPoE they'll support on PPPoE on the line. Bezeq support denied this. Bezeq support also said they don't support PPPoE on that modem and the only thing they can tell me to do is to reset the modem. My next line of options: 1. Test it with the Windows machine connected directly to the modem. 2. Upgrade the modem to PRO and use its dialer. Any other suggestions? Thanks, --Amos > -Original Message- > From: Guy Teverovsky > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 3:14 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: PPPoE on Linux - timeout waiting for PADO/PADS packets > > > There is a small button (about a size of a pinhead) at the back of the > modem. > Use it to reset the modem to factory defaults. Reboot the modem > (disconnect/connect the power) and let it sync.After that it > should work > with PPTP. > > Guy > > On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 09:26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I've followed the instructions of enabling PPPoE on Linux > > as described at http://www.isoc.org.il/~doron/PPPoE.html > > and it worked at first but now after a reboot it stopped. > > > > I get multiple messages like "Timeout waiting for PADO packets" > > and some "Timeout waiting for PADS packets". I tried configuraing > > the modem back to the PPTP setup but the old PPTP doesn't > work either > > (gives same messages, but much less of them). > > > > The modem is an ethernet SpeedTouch Home, debian unstable. ISP > > is actcom. Kernel is 2.4.20 with mppe and preemptive patches. > > > > I googled for the error message but it looks like people mostly > > suspect the line or the ISP, not the setup. Also the PPTP broke > > so I don't know where to proceed. > > > > Any hints anyone? > > > > Thanks, > > > > --Amos > > > > = > > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- > > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -- Your email is protected by Mailshell -- > To block spam or change delivery options: http://www.mailshell.com/control.html?a=blshp8bbumg87yq1j9157qv2pz6_58z35eg0 Wouldn't you rather have amos.shapira.com as your personal domain? http://rd.mailshell.com/ad465 Earn up to $3 for each of your friends who signs up with Mailshell! http://rd.mailshell.com/sp5 = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nfs blocking "mount"
Quoting Oded Arbel, from the post of Mon, 16 Jun: > Ira Abramov wrote: > > >How can one get a list of mounted filesystems without getting blocked > > > > > How about reading /etc/mtab ? can I trust the state it holds? I think I read somewhere once that it can be giving me the wrong info in some odd cases (read-only filesystems, RAMfs and other cases I have to deal with. Amos: this is an Oracle cluster. I wish I could try other exotic filesystems but it has to be compliant with their tested configurations. plus I don't know of any stable enough other than maybe CIFS, which adds too much complexity to our setup. but thanks :) -- The human aphrodesiac Ira Abramov http://ira.abramov.org/email/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: nfs blocking "mount"
Quoting Erez Kirson, from the post of Mon, 16 Jun: > > it just checkes if nfs daemon is running ( using RPC ) > i took it from nagios to monitor NFS servers this I test with showmount and the package I'm writing this for (mon) already has a nice module of it's own to see if the RPC service is registered. what I need is a test on the client side weather the mountpoint was indeed mounted and is available. I guess that other than asserting soft mounting I don't have many choices. -- Merry wanderer of the night Ira Abramov http://ira.abramov.org/email/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
