[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think this is at all easily solvable - when the X server starts up, the
card is probably in console mode using the VGA emulation, which is pretty
brain-dead and doesn't touch much of the card memory (when you have 32M or 64M
on-card, that 640x480 gets lonely
Stan Bubrouski wrote:
Michael Holstein wrote:
Seems like an easy fix would be to write a routine into KDM to write
4-5 seconds worth of something benign (like the KDE logo in different
spots) to the screen before logout/shutdown (note how 2000/XP already
do this with the 'preparing to shutdown'
Nick FitzGerald wrote:
Seems you need to upgrade to Wetware/1.01. With that Wetware will
quickly note that the trick to navigating iDEFENSE's site is to add
flashstatus=true or flashstatus=false (the latter is probably
more generally preferable) to the end of its internal links, and that
this
Ill will wrote:
just like just about every other webserver gets hacked, they use third
party server software that hasnt gone through enough rigorous testing
to make sure its not vulnerable to any flaws.. simple search on google
will give you the answer
I don't doubt the concept of what you're
Anders Langworthy wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unless we have a Schrodinger's Cat John who manifests itself twice, once
saying Yup and once saying Oh shit!. :)
Hehe. Technically it doesn't work that way. At this very moment, the
certificate can be both valid and invalid. However, once we
Martin Stricker wrote:
a href=http://bad-site.xx/;
onmouseover=javascript:window.status='http://nice-site.xx';blah/a
If you point your mouse over that link, you'll see http://nice-site.xx;
in the status bar, but clicking will lead you to http://bad-site.xx/.
This is already widely used in spoof
Danny wrote:
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 17:51:16 +0100 (CET), Feher Tamas
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5567529.html
GeCad RAV, GIANT and now Sybari Antivirus. Microsoft
swallows smaller anti-malware firms one by one. When the
last one is gone, MS will probably eat the
James Eaton-Lee wrote:
First off, thanks for the e-mail! It was well argued, and you obviously
took a lot of time on it; this is much appreciated. With that, let the
reply begin..
Thanks. Nah - it took me like 5 minutes to write. Not a lot of time at
all. :)
but the devil is in the detail,
James Eaton-Lee wrote:
Add to this the fact that implementing archive support in an antivirus
package isn't as simple as it might seem; although bz2 is released under
a BSD license, gzip isn't - it's GPL, and therefore any antivirus vendor
would have to write their gzip code totally from scratch.
James Eaton-Lee wrote:
For many SMEs, the distinction is irrelevant, as a significant number of
e-mail servers do *NOT* incorporate antivirus software designed with
gateway scanning in mind - they run desktop scanning tools on e-mail;
thus, for many companies, the distinction between 'gateway' and
J.A. Terranson wrote:
Forgetting for a moment that you cannot bind someone to an agreement just
by having them READ IT, you may want to consider that you also can't bind
them to a secrecy agreement AFTER giving out the secret. To put that
into English for those who are common-sense-impaired: you
J.A. Terranson wrote:
When you feed trolls, they grow :-)
Hey - I'm preplanning for Thanksgiving!
Seriously, we seem to be getting more crap like this. Are people just
bored?
I'm bored :-)
mx1# touch killme
mx1# chmod 0 killme
mx1# ls -al killme
--
Yeah, I think that someone mistook the new year for April 1st.
Seriously, we seem to be getting more crap like this. Are people just
bored?
-Barry
Jörg Eschke wrote:
Sure, a user with admin rights is able to access/delete every local
file, regardless of the specific
Michael R. Schmidt wrote:
Is putting a murderer in jail too much for you too?
Cause that is the end justifying the means
Are you saying that a murderer going to jail justifies the murder?!? Or
are you saying that the murderer being in jail justifies the
trial/investigation? Or are you
Jason wrote:
It is an effective method to make your voice heard using a different
form and it is not only acceptable it is a form of peaceful protest IMHO.
My question is how effective at stopping spam can it actually be?
For this to work, you not only have to DDoS dedicated SPAM systems, you
Adam Challis wrote:
The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
(_http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/1030_new.html_).
Being based in Germany, wouldn't they be subject to German and EU law?
Does anybody know which German and EU laws are relevant to MLNS?
Adam
IANAL, but my understanding is that some
everybody else has a chance to view my remarks
to Barry's obviously short-sighted arguments.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Thomas Sutpen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:31:49 -0700
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] University Researchers Challenge Bush
Win In Florida
To: bkfsec
Thomas Sutpen wrote:
Any sort of impartiality and vested interest in the actual security of
the whole process that you might have claimed to had was pissed away
in your very first post on the subject. The one where you came out
waving the Kerry flag. Remember?
It is my observation that your
Chris Umphress wrote:
Next time you make a printout from your color laser printer,
shine an LED flashlight beam on it and examine it closely
with a magnifying glass. You might be able to see the small,
scattered yellow dots printed there that could be used to
trace the document back to you.
Paul Schmehl wrote:
I disagree. Until the research is credible and vetted, investigating
is premature. Many people don't seem to understand, investigating
supposed discrepancies in the vote costs millions of dollars. The
recount in Ohio will cost the state $1.5 million. That's money that
vord wrote:
and for the record, they would move to another resource is not a
coherent argument against his position [his question, rather]
concerning the elimination of a problem-child medium. perhaps the cost
to society via the spread piracy and virii [more importantly the
altter] isnt worth the
Danny wrote:
Well, it sure does help the anti-virus (anti-malware) and security
consulting business, but besides that... is it not safe to say that:
1) A hell of a lot of viruses/worms/trojans use IRC to wreck further havoc?
2) A considerable amount of script kiddies originate and grow through
Vincent Archer wrote:
Other apps flatly refuse to work with anything but IE. None of these
are strictly web applications anymore - they are applications that use
an UI processor, which happens to be the HTML processor as well.
You see, this is precisely the problem.
HTML processors in web
Andrew Farmer wrote:
In fact, I'm not so sure it's even a component of Nautilus. Is this a
recent change?
Nope - it depends on how you install Nautilus, though. I know that on a
number of RH systems I've had to configure lately, Mozilla is a
dependancy (not firefox) because Nautilus seems to
Michael Evanchik wrote:
I have no problem with this list. I use a tool to passively filter this
list the same that I do for the spam problem that has taken over planet
earth
In your email client there is a button that will take care of this for you.
Look for something in the respects of
Rafel Ivgi, The-Insider wrote:
Firefox is not intgrated to the OS, because it doesn't have an OS.
Its just a trimmed Mozilla for windows..
Not exactly... it's a mozilla core in a native application, as opposed
to an interpreted XUL front-end. It's a bit faster in both GNU/Linux
and Windows.
26 matches
Mail list logo
