TCP-IP stacks vary widly across platforms. What OS are you refering
to? Sounds like you want to hack into the stacks entry point ;o)
not good idea unless you know how exactly it will behave once ya
jmp'd into the fray.. more likly ya get a gosub with out a return.
Original Message
Fro
Dudes, thanks for the book reference. i go to Borders fora copy
myself.
Is it OSI 8 mounth that that eats the osi7 layer buritto, like the
ones you get down in Jose's Burrito Shack. foot of HMm good!
Original Message
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TC
Thats an ethics issue. Cant speak for other sysadmins, but, pretty
much I consider user data on my harddrive private and under no
circumstance allow it out. heck, if need be I will snap www backup
CDR in to mini pieces if the need and situ. gets deep in the doo-doo.
>1) Can we trust the Administ
Then a global PKI protocol server needs to be invented so you can just get the
certs from the domain in question. i dont wanna see DNS system bogged down by
this stuff. IMHOOC!
use dns to get the IP and request from its IP the pki doc.. duh.
6/11/02 6:51:26 PM, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTE
If some cretin p8s your domain name away from your IP then when some1 request the
pubic pki from that domain they will get bogus info. and the transaction will
abort. now if the same pki info was on DNS, they still get good and transact
with the cretin instead of u. that info need be on your
yeah, but they not assuming your personality if some1 snooks some dead presidents
from ur wallet.
6/18/02 4:45:02 PM, Einar Stefferud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>None of this, whether the dollar was stolen or not, has any impact on
>the trustworthiness of the original dollar, as it is a bearer
Thanks man.. that clear up confusion on PPP !
>mentioned before PPP is an example written since rfc 1122-23. It is
>now its
>own suite, with a family of link and network control protocols.
>
>
A quick guide to the apostrophe: http://www.angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif
10/15/02 4:55:58 AM, Lloyd Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, Joe Baptista wrote:
access-list 100 deny ip 207.46.230.218 0.0.0.0 12.246.56.92 0.0.0.0 gt 1
access-list 100 permit ip any any
oh well. :)
10/21/02 9:37:42 AM, "Haren Visavadia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>If Microsoft can not produce secure products, what chance is there of
>them producing a secure protocol?
>
>I
