Re: avahi-daemon

2006-02-23 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 08:59:40AM -0800, Rick Moen wrote: Quoting aliban ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): MS Blaster infected many million system within seconds... Relying on the vulnerable MSDE embedded SQL database engine being embedded into a large number of consumer software products, and

Re: avahi-daemon

2006-02-23 Thread Michael Stone
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 12:04:50PM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: The former worm targeted a critical OS service, the later a database service. Neither of which were actually useful if bound to loopback, BTW. Actually, they were. A lot of the embedded DB servers were only used by

Re: avahi-daemon

2006-02-23 Thread aliban
Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña schrieb: If I were you (aliban) I would bug rhythmbox. It seems that Bug #349478 got it to reduce the Depends: on that daemon to a Recommends:, I think it would be better to have that as Suggests: Disclaimer: I don't know much about rhythmbox and the relationship of

Re: avahi-daemon

2006-02-23 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 12:47:44PM +0100, aliban wrote: I am sorry, but I am quite new linux and debian at all and you may excuse my question: why is there no rule to prompt the user for all applications that open ports on non-localhost? The default policy is a compromise between

unsubscribe

2006-02-23 Thread Alessandro Alboni
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: avahi-daemon

2006-02-23 Thread Rick Moen
Quoting Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): You are confusing worms, Blaster exploited the DCOM RPC vulnerability (CAN-2003-0352). The one that exploited CAN-2002-0649 and CAN-2002-1145 in both SQL Server and MSDE was SQLExp / Slammer. True. Thank you, and apologies for my

Using multicast for security updates

2006-02-23 Thread npmrphy
Has this concept been considered? Instead of having all users connect and DL their own copies of security updates (which requires tremendous bandwidth), would it be possible to use multicast to 'broadcast' the updates. The thought is that updates could be distributed without saturating the

Re: Using multicast for security updates

2006-02-23 Thread Michael Loftis
Good idea except this requires large scale rollout of mutlicast, which AFAIK, hasn't happened. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Using multicast for security updates

2006-02-23 Thread Neal Murphy
On Thursday 23 February 2006 17:05, Michael Loftis wrote: Good idea except this requires large scale rollout of mutlicast, which AFAIK, hasn't happened. I thought it had progressed further than being a curiosity. Is its current scale enough to make a difference? N -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email

Re: Using multicast for security updates

2006-02-23 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Neal Murphy wrote: On Thursday 23 February 2006 17:05, Michael Loftis wrote: Good idea except this requires large scale rollout of mutlicast, which AFAIK, hasn't happened. I thought it had progressed further than being a curiosity. Is its current scale enough to make

Re: Using multicast for security updates

2006-02-23 Thread Daniel Sterling
Interesting, indeed. Looks like multicast is available on some networks: http://www.multicasttech.com/status/mbgp.sum But the best place to ask this type of question might be the debian-admin or debian-mirrors mailing list. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Has this concept been considered? Instead of

Re: Using multicast for security updates

2006-02-23 Thread Edward Faulkner
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 04:40:38PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Instead of having all users connect and DL their own copies of security updates (which requires tremendous bandwidth), would it be possible to use multicast to 'broadcast' the updates. The thought is that updates could be

Re: Using multicast for security updates

2006-02-23 Thread Geoff Crompton
Edward Faulkner wrote: Or you could just use bittorrent. The server runs a tracker and everyone cooperatively downloads chunks. Same kind of idea, but it doesn't require multicast support (which may or may not exist in various networks). When you say The server runs a tracker, are you

Re: Using multicast for security updates

2006-02-23 Thread Edward Faulkner
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 11:13:35AM +1100, Geoff Crompton wrote: When you say The server runs a tracker, are you explaining bittorrent, or do the security.debian.org servers actually run a tracker at the moment? I was just explaining bittorrent. Sorry for the confusion. How well does

Re: Sell Your Organs Online!

2006-02-23 Thread kwd
so what's this all about? get back to me with a list of what's worth what.

Re: Using multicast for security updates

2006-02-23 Thread Chris Evans
On Feb 23, 2006, at 4:22 PM, Edward Faulkner wrote: On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 11:13:35AM +1100, Geoff Crompton wrote: When you say The server runs a tracker, are you explaining bittorrent, or do the security.debian.org servers actually run a tracker at the moment? I was just explaining

Re: Mail Delivery (failure [EMAIL PROTECTED])

2006-02-23 Thread DEARMAIL1/ARTSANA/DE . DEARDOM
Vielen Dank für Ihre Anfrage. Ihr Email wird schnellstmöglich beantwortet. Ihr Chicco Team