Re: U.S. test of national alerts on Oct. 4 at 2:20pm EDT (1820 UTC)

[nanog08]

Move?  ...  :-)

On 10/4/23 12:21, Sabri Berisha wrote:

- On Oct 1, 2023, at 3:24 PM, Sean Donelan s...@donelan.com wrote:

Hi,


This year's test of the U.S. national emergency alert includes something
for ISPs and network operators.

So, this "worked". Despite me ensuring that my settings for Amber Alerts, 
Emergency Alerts, Public Safety Alerts, and Test Alerts are all off, my phone went nuts.

Makes me wonder what I have to do to opt out of this. We all remember what 
happened in Hawaii.

Thanks,

Sabri

Re: Scanning the Internet for Vulnerabilities

[nanog08]

Hey - I have a neat new idea...  Let's test the structure of levees by 
flooding the rivers and seeing what levees don't survive.


Geoff


On 6/20/22 07:46, Mel Beckman wrote:

Carsten,

No, it’s more like 50,000 furnace guys who show up several times a 
day to rattle doorknobs, attempt to push slim Jim’s into window 
latches, hack your garage door opener, sneak into your back garden, 
and fly drones around your home to see what valuables you might have. 
Yes, some of them are altruistic, but some are self-righteous 
officious boobs, and the vast majority are career criminals that will 
rob your house, drain your retirement account, and kill your family 
with a spoofed SWAT raid.


-mel beckman


On Jun 20, 2022, at 4:20 AM, Carsten Bormann  wrote:
On 2022-06-20, at 04:18, Mel Beckman  wrote:
When researchers, or whoever, claim their scanning an altruistic 
service, I ask them if they would mind someone coming to their home 
and trying to open all the doors and windows every night.
Well, it is more like the guy who comes once a year and checks that 
your central heating is not going to blow up.


(Disclaimer: I have supervised students who designed and executed 
benign mass-scans of the IPv4 Internet in order to validate 
hypotheses about market penetration of certain security updates, and 
I definitely would do that again if there is a good reason to perform 
such a scan.)


Grüße, Carsten

Re: Starlink terminals deployed in Ukraine

[nanog08]

Kinda like sending Captain Kirk on a space launch.  Amazing marketing!

On 3/1/22 11:41, Phineas Walton wrote:
This is more of a brand image / marketing stunt for Starlink. A pretty 
ingenious way to market which will heavily pay off long term. To them, 
this is cheap for how much attention it’s getting them.


Phin

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 6:36 PM Crist Clark > wrote:


So they’re going to offer the service to anyone in a denied area
for free somehow? How do you send someone a bill or how do they
pay it if you can’t do business in the country?

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 4:39 PM Jay Hennigan  wrote:

On 2/28/22 16:17, Michael Thomas wrote:

> As a practical matter how does this help? You need to have base
> stations/dishes, right? Can they be beefy ones that can pump
out
> gigabytes that would be capable of backfilling the load? Or
would it
> need to be multiple in parallel? Wouldn't that bandwidth be
constrained
> by the number of visible satellites in the constellation? I
wonder if
> they've ever even tested it with feeding into an internet
facing router.
> Could tables on the satellites explode?

If there aren't fixed Internet-connected earth stations
line-of-sight to
the satellite that's serving the remote terminal, Starlink
will relay
satellite-to-satellite until a path to an Internet-connected
earth
station is in reach.

 From the linked article:

"Musk has previously stressed Starlink’s flexibility of
Starlink in
providing internet service. In September, Musk talked about
how the
company would use links between the satellites to create a
network that
could provide service even in countries that prohibit SpaceX from
installing ground infrastructure for distribution.

As for government regulators who want to block Starlink from
using that
capability, Musk had a simple answer.

“They can shake their fist at the sky,” Musk said."

-- 
Jay Hennigan - j...@west.net

Network Engineering - CCIE #7880
503 897-8550 - WB6RDV

Re: What do you think about this airline vs 5G brouhaha?

[nanog08]

Yeah - I'm sure they do and that is my point.  The heads of Verizon and 
ATT are not flying commercial. Their planes are not commercial airlines 
with hundreds of passengers == so they can much more easily just divert...


Geoff


On 1/19/22 15:12, sro...@ronan-online.com wrote:
Considering Verizon has a very sizable fleet of private aircraft, I am 
fairly certain this will happen often.


Shane


On Jan 19, 2022, at 4:59 PM, nano...@mulligan.org wrote:

 Scott - a side note to clarify things...

The 737 Max8 problem was NOT due to lack of testing or 
non-incremental changes.  The system was well tested and put through 
it's paces.  It was a lack of proper pilot training in the aircraft 
and its systems and some carriers choosing to NOT purchase specific 
flight control options.


Full disclosure - my classmate was the Chief Test Pilot for the MAX8 
and another classmate is the current FAA Administrator.


But I digress - sorry...

If you look at 5G deployments around Japan and Europe, generally they 
are NOT right up next to major airports.


I would like to ask ATT and Verizon senior leadership to put their 
loved ones onto a commercial aircraft that is flying into ORD during 
a blizzard on a Zero-Zero landing (the pilots relying on radio 
altimeters) and the 5G network up and running and then ask how 
confident they are that NOTHING will interfere and 5G is perfectly safe.


Geoff

On 1/19/22 14:37, Scott McGrath wrote:
I’m guessing you are not a pilot,  one reason aviation is resistant 
to change is its history is written in blood,    Unlike tech 
aviation is incremental change and painstaking testing and 
documentation of that testing.


When that does not happen we get stuff like the 737 Max debacle

Aviation is the antithesis of ‘Move fast and break things mentality’ 
for a very good reason safety.


On my flying club’s plane every replacement part comes with a 
pedigree which is added to the plane’s maintenance log upon 
installation and the reason for removing the old one recorded


Imagine how much easier our networks would be to maintain if we had 
records down to the last cable tie in the data center.   If there 
was a bug in a SFP+ for instance all of them, when they were 
installed and by who and what supplier they came from was readily 
available sure would make my life easier.


The reasoning behind that massive pile of documents (pilot joke ‘a 
plane is not ready to fly until the weight of the paperwork equals 
the weight of the airplane’) is that if a failure is traced to a 
component all of them can be traced and removed from service.


On a Airbus for instance all the takeoff and landing safety systems 
are tied to the RadAlt.  The EU has strict rules about where the 
c-band can be used as does Japan both use the 120 second rule c-band 
devices not allowed in areas where the the aircraft is in its 
beginning/ending 2 minutes of flight.


So the REST of the world got c-band right the US not so much



On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 10:59 AM Dennis Glatting  wrote:

On Tue, 2022-01-18 at 12:29 -0800, Michael Thomas wrote:
>
> I really don't know anything about it. It seems really late to be
> having
> this fight now, right?
>

I worked in aviation as a technologist. Aviation is resistant to
change.
Any change. When you fly older aircraft, be aware that the
software is
old. Very old. As in some of the vendors long ago stopped
supporting the
software kind of old, assuming the vendors still exist.

Aviation didn't wake up one day with the sudden appearance of
5G. They
knew it was comming. They, aviation themselves, are heavily
involved in
standards. Aviation had plenty of time to test, correct, and
protest.

What aviation now wants is a 5G exclusion zone around airports,
or what
I sarcastically call "a technology exclusion zone," which tends
to be
businesses and homes. What is aviation going to do when 6G comes
along?
A new WiFi standard is implemented? Any other unforeseen future
wired/wireless technologies? Or perhaps cell phones should go
back to
Morse Code for aviation's sake?

🤷‍♂️️


-- 
Dennis Glatting

Numbers Skeptic

Re: What do you think about this airline vs 5G brouhaha?

[nanog08]

Scott - a side note to clarify things...

The 737 Max8 problem was NOT due to lack of testing or non-incremental 
changes.  The system was well tested and put through it's paces.  It was 
a lack of proper pilot training in the aircraft and its systems and some 
carriers choosing to NOT purchase specific flight control options.


Full disclosure - my classmate was the Chief Test Pilot for the MAX8 and 
another classmate is the current FAA Administrator.


But I digress - sorry...

If you look at 5G deployments around Japan and Europe, generally they 
are NOT right up next to major airports.


I would like to ask ATT and Verizon senior leadership to put their loved 
ones onto a commercial aircraft that is flying into ORD during a 
blizzard on a Zero-Zero landing (the pilots relying on radio altimeters) 
and the 5G network up and running and then ask how confident they are 
that NOTHING will interfere and 5G is perfectly safe.


Geoff

On 1/19/22 14:37, Scott McGrath wrote:
I’m guessing you are not a pilot,  one reason aviation is resistant to 
change is its history is written in blood,    Unlike tech aviation is 
incremental change and painstaking testing and documentation of that 
testing.


When that does not happen we get stuff like the 737 Max debacle

Aviation is the antithesis of ‘Move fast and break things mentality’ 
for a very good reason safety.


On my flying club’s plane every replacement part comes with a pedigree 
which is added to the plane’s maintenance log upon installation and 
the reason for removing the old one recorded


Imagine how much easier our networks would be to maintain if we had 
records down to the last cable tie in the data center.   If there was 
a bug in a SFP+ for instance all of them, when they were installed and 
by who and what supplier they came from was readily available sure 
would make my life easier.


The reasoning behind that massive pile of documents (pilot joke ‘a 
plane is not ready to fly until the weight of the paperwork equals the 
weight of the airplane’) is that if a failure is traced to a component 
all of them can be traced and removed from service.


On a Airbus for instance all the takeoff and landing safety systems 
are tied to the RadAlt.  The EU has strict rules about where the 
c-band can be used as does Japan both use the 120 second rule c-band 
devices not allowed in areas where the the aircraft is in its 
beginning/ending 2 minutes of flight.


So the REST of the world got c-band right the US not so much



On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 10:59 AM Dennis Glatting  wrote:

On Tue, 2022-01-18 at 12:29 -0800, Michael Thomas wrote:
>
> I really don't know anything about it. It seems really late to be
> having
> this fight now, right?
>

I worked in aviation as a technologist. Aviation is resistant to
change.
Any change. When you fly older aircraft, be aware that the software is
old. Very old. As in some of the vendors long ago stopped
supporting the
software kind of old, assuming the vendors still exist.

Aviation didn't wake up one day with the sudden appearance of 5G. They
knew it was comming. They, aviation themselves, are heavily
involved in
standards. Aviation had plenty of time to test, correct, and protest.

What aviation now wants is a 5G exclusion zone around airports, or
what
I sarcastically call "a technology exclusion zone," which tends to be
businesses and homes. What is aviation going to do when 6G comes
along?
A new WiFi standard is implemented? Any other unforeseen future
wired/wireless technologies? Or perhaps cell phones should go back to
Morse Code for aviation's sake?

🤷‍♂️️


-- 
Dennis Glatting

Numbers Skeptic

Re: Google uploading your plain text passwords

[nanog08]

Has anyone used or looked at Bitwarden.

They have a commercial cloud version, but also there is a run it 
yourself version.


There is a RUST port called vaultwarden with docker images.

Anyone have any experience with this particular password manager?

Geoff


On 6/13/21 11:12 AM, Tom Beecher wrote:


There's a problem with your theory. The browser I viewed the passwords
from Google in wasn't Chrome. And it didn't have a local copy of any
Google passwords or keys. The only place they could have come from was
Google's server.


Yes. The *encrypted* blob of login/password data was retrieved from 
Google's servers over a TLS protected session. When you click on any 
password to view it, the Javascript that it also downloaded presents 
you with another password challenge, which when successful, the JS 
will then to decrypt and display the data.


- Nothing is ever transmitted in the clear.
- The decryption as far I can see is only ever done locally. ( Using 
the OS hooks if in Chrome, or Javascript via passwords.google.com 
. )


On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 10:36 PM William Herrin > wrote:


On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 3:55 PM K. Scott Helms
mailto:kscott.he...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> I don't think you're lying, but you are mistaken.
>
> "I'm not lying. Google's server at passwords.google.com

> composed an html web page containing my plaintext passwords and sent
> it to me. Not decrypted by my browser after combining it with a
> locally stored key. "
>
> So, you're not describing all of the possible ways to decrypt
data.  What's happening is that the keys to decrypt the passwords
are handed to your client (with some checks like a local admin
password or pin) when you attempt to decrypt a given password. 
The passwords _are_ decrypted on your device and you did not get a
HTML page with your passwords.  Please, go look at the source
yourself.  What you got was a page that's almost entirely
javascript and that includes the functions that handle the decryption.
>
> Don't take my word for it, "When you log in to a website while
signed in to Chrome, Chrome encrypts your username and password
with a secret key known only to your device. Then it sends an
obscured copy of your data to Google. Because the encryption
happens before Google’s servers get the information, nobody,
including Google, learns your username or password."

There's a problem with your theory. The browser I viewed the passwords
from Google in wasn't Chrome. And it didn't have a local copy of any
Google passwords or keys. The only place they could have come from was
Google's server.

Regards,
Bill Herrin



-- 
William Herrin

b...@herrin.us 
https://bill.herrin.us/ 

Microsoft problems...

[nanog08]

Anyone else noticing major MAJOR problems with various MS services?

Geoff

Re: Technology risk without safeguards

[nanog08]

Since the Science is not settled... I still won't put a wireless earbud 
so close to my brain, and I'm especially worried about people doing this 
over extended periods.  Personally I try to use a wired earbud when I'm 
using my cell phone.


But I'm overly cautious I guess.  I wear a mask when I go to the store 
and I use list specific email addresses - so ignore everything I say on 
this subject.


Geoff


On 11/4/20 7:32 PM, Tom Beecher wrote:


The hypothesis that RF may cause damage to human DNA is not at all
conspiracy. The
fact that we haven't been able to identify a factual relationship,
does not mean
that there isn't any. For example:


If you are going to cite that American Cancer Society article, you 
should cite all the relevant parts. The parts you skipped are bolded.


*RF waves don’t have enough energy to damage DNA directly. Because
of this, it’s not clear how RF radiation might be able to cause
cancer. Some studies have found possible increased rates of
certain types of tumors in lab animals exposed to RF radiation,
but overall, the results of these types of studies have not
provided clear answers so far.*

*A few studies have reported evidence of biological effects that
could be linked to cancer, but this is still an area of research.*

In large studies published in 2018 by the US National Toxicology
Program (NTP) and by the Ramazzini Institute in Italy, researchers
exposed groups of lab rats (as well as mice, in the case of the
NTP study) to RF waves over their entire bodies for many hours a
day, starting before birth and continuing for at least most of
their natural lives. Both studies found an increased risk of
uncommon heart tumors called malignant schwannomas in male rats,
but not in female rats (nor in male or female mice, in the NTP
study). The NTP study also reported possible increased risks of
certain types of tumors in the brain and in the adrenal glands.

*While both of these studies had strengths, they also had
limitations that make it hard to know how they might apply to
humans being exposed to RF radiation. A 2019 review of these two
studies by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation
Protection (ICNIRP) determined that the limitations of the studies
didn’t allow conclusions to be drawn regarding the ability of RF
energy to cause cancer.*

*Still, the results of these studies do not rule out the
possibility that RF radiation might somehow be able to impact
human health.*

The majority of science to date finds no causal relationship between 
EM radiation and cancerous mutations. If someone wants to claim 
otherwise, scientific proof is required.


On Wed, Nov 4, 2020 at 7:56 PM Sabri Berisha > wrote:


Hi,

Not that I'm into conspiracy theories, or believe at this point
that RF emissions
are in any way related to cancer, but Suresh' statement is not
very scientific:

> This is an internet conspiracy theory with no basis in reality
or science.

RF emissions are absorbed by the human body. Your kitchen
microwave works at
the same frequency as your 2.4Ghz wifi. We all know it's a bad
idea to put your
head in a microwave oven.

The hypothesis that RF may cause damage to human DNA is not at all
conspiracy. The
fact that we haven't been able to identify a factual relationship,
does not mean
that there isn't any. For example:

> In large studies published in 2018 by the US National Toxicology
Program (NTP)
> and by the Ramazzini Institute in Italy, researchers exposed
groups of lab rats
> (as well as mice, in the case of the NTP study) to RF waves over
their entire
> bodies for many hours a day, starting before birth and
continuing for at least
> most of their natural lives. Both studies found an increased
risk of uncommon
> heart tumors called malignant schwannomas in male rats, but not
in female rats
> (nor in male or female mice, in the NTP study). The NTP study
also reported
> possible increased risks of certain types of tumors in the brain
and in the adrenal
> glands.

Source:

https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/radiofrequency-radiation.html

> If your doctor suspected that you had cancer caused by something
related to
> microwave band communications equipment, you need to find a new
doctor.

On the contrary. Few people are more exposed to higher-powered RF
radiation
than a MW techie. That would make them an excellent subject for
scientific
research. Dismissing a medical professional's opinion based in
your own
firm beliefs is counterproductive to the advance of scientific
knowledge.

Thanks,

Sabri, M.Sc

- On Nov 4, 2020, at 2:01 PM, Matt Harris m...@netfire.net

Re: WIKI documentation Software?

[nanog08]

I've been using MoinMoin wiki for years.  It hasn't been updated for 
quite a while, but it has worked really well for me, is trivial to 
install, uses text file backend so no need for a database, allows for 
hierarchical structure, is pretty fast, is very very light weight and 
extensible, built on python and free.


I don't know if there is a docker container, but I'm thinking of 
building one.


If you want something simple, stable, older, small and usable you might 
take a look at MoinMoin.


If you want a docker container, ask and I'll probably build one.

Geoff


On 3/14/20 2:35 PM, Gavin Henry wrote:

I think DokuWiki does this and as an added bonus saves all as text files.

Re: Reminiscing our first internet connections (WAS) Re: akamai yesterday - what in the world was that

[nanog08]

Speaking of dial up...

I remember on a trip I got the hotel sometime after 2am (bad weather, 
bad flight). I was trying to dial out from hotel - 9 to get an outside 
line, then "pause" and then 1 for long distance and 202 for the area code.


I mistyped the phone number or something, and I was not getting 
connected but kept trying.  There was a knock at the door and "Police, 
everything ok".


I answered and explained that I guess I had mistakenly dialed 911. They 
did check the room and then left.


I gave up, went to bed, muttering that my email would just have to wait.

Geoff



On 2/17/20 5:41 PM, Mike Lyon wrote:

Then call waiting came out and would disconnect the session sometimes. That 
sucked ass.


On Feb 17, 2020, at 16:37, Scott Weeks  wrote:



I can't help myself... :)



My mother in the 1980s: "no one can ever call us because the phone line is always 
busy"

Me with an Osborne 1 and a 300 baud modem:  "We need a second phone line!"
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_1)

My mother: "That's too expensive.  Quit clogging up the phone line with that 
toy!"

Me: 
"Ok...Pshhhkk​kakingkakingkakingtsh​chchchchchchchcch​*ding*ding*ding*" 
  (*)



I never would've guessed in those days that it would provide me an entire 
professional career.

scott



(*) I copied 
Pshhhkk​kakingkakingkakingtsh​chchchchchchchcch​*ding*ding*ding*
from a website as I could not spell that.

Re: Reminiscing our first internet connections (WAS) Re: akamai yesterday - what in the world was that

[nanog08]

Back in 1973 I was hired by Tymshare to "hack" Tymnet and some of the 
various systems (XDS 940, PDP-10s) - I was 15.  Tymshare provided me 
with a Teletype ASR-33 (with the built in tape punch and reader).  I had 
an AJ 300 baud acoustic coupler.  We had a second phone line installed, 
'cause my dad was tired of picking up the phone and hearing tones.  I 
ended up rewiring the house phones so I could put the terminal in my room.


When I went to the Pentagon in '79 I was in charge of PENT-TIP and got 
to take home and travel with a TI Silent700 with a built in acoustic 
coupler.  We had a bank of 300/1200 baud modems on PENT-TIP.  Our IMP 
was connected to the Arpanet via a 56K modem that was the size of 5 foot 
tall 19" rack!  Back in those days it seems TIP phone numbers were 
closely guarded treasure.


I still remember when I got an LS ADM-3A (no more finding rolls of 
thermal paper). I still have it, though I don't know why...


Geoff

On 2/17/20 11:20 AM, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. wrote:



On Feb 17, 2020, at 10:38 AM, Gene LeDuc  wrote:

I was a student worker at a computer lab at USC in the 70s and a buddy had a 
system operator job at ISI in Marina Del Rey.  One day he connected to his 
office from my lab via a 300baud acoustic modem and then got on the ARPA-NET.  
From there he connected to a system called ATLAS in the UK.  I had no idea what 
to do at the prompt so I typed


?

to get list of commands.  My global eyes were opened when the response was

Pardon?

instead of the usual rude or cryptic error message that I was used to. There 
was a big world out there and we were definitely not in Kansas anymore!

It was about 1980.  My C-128 came with one of those CIS snap packs to let you 
test connecting to the 'net via Compuserve.  So I connected with my 300baud 
modem and..whoa!!!

When I got my next computer (and first portable) shortly thereafter (a TRS 
Model 100) I got acoustic cups for it, and suddenly I was connected from 
anywhere and everywhere there was a phone - including from my job at a Fotomat 
booth (remember those?) :-)

Anne

--
Anne P. Mitchell, Attorney at Law, Dean of Cyberlaw & Cybersecurity, Lincoln 
Law School
CEO/President, SuretyMail Email Reputation Certification
Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)
Legislative Consultant, GDPR, CCPA (CA) & CCDPA (CO) Compliance Consultant
Former Counsel: Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS)

Re: HPE SAS Solid State Drives - Critical Firmware Upgrade Required

[nanog08]

Since this is a SSD manufacturer problem does it impact other servers 
that might have SSD from the same manufacturer???


HP hasn't said who the manufacturer is?

Geoff


On 11/26/19 1:45 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:

I do not normally post about firmware bugs, but I have this nightmare scenario 
running through my head of someone with a couple of mirrored HPE SSD arrays and 
all the drives going POOF!  simultaneously. Even with an off-site backup, that 
could be disastrous. So if you have HPE SSDs, check this announcement.

https://support.hpe.com/hpsc/doc/public/display?docId=emr_na-a00092491en_us