On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 08:29:06PM -0500, J. Hellenthal via NANOG wrote:
> I hate to say it but I really think pgp could benefit from a blockchain
> implementation keeping it distributed among peers versus its current status.
Absent a description of exactly how what you're proposing meaningfully
On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 02:18:30AM +, 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.
If there were a few hundred people with
On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 02:10:40PM -0800, William Herrin wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 1:18 PM Karl Auer wrote:
> > On Sun, 2021-11-28 at 12:53 -0800, Michael Thomas wrote:
> > > I was reading their howto yesterday and it seems they are only
> > > allocating a /64? Why?
> >
> > That's a /64 *pe
On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 11:29:49PM +, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> This seems like a really bad idea to me; am I really the only one who noticed?
>
> https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-schoen-intarea-unicast-127-00.html
>
> That's over a week old and I don't see 3000 comments on it, so maybe it's just
On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 01:45:04PM -1000, scott wrote:
> On 11/17/2021 1:29 PM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> > This seems like a really bad idea to me; am I really the only one who
> > noticed?
> >
> > https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-schoen-intarea-unicast-127-00.html
>
> https://github.com/schoen/unic
On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 08:38:44AM +0200, Xavier Beaudouin via NANOG wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
> > I absolutely HATE testing, developing and supporting IPv4+IPv6, more
> > than doubling my time, adding 3rd stack would actually not increase
> > cost that much, it's the 1=>2 which is fantastically expens
On Sun, Nov 08, 2020 at 08:01:12PM -0500, Rob McEwen wrote:
> except - don't forget that the root of a domain (that domain without "www."
> or any other label) - cannot have a CNAME as the "A" record - fwiw...
Yes. I didn't think that was something that needed to be explained on NANOG,
though.
-
On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 05:07:26AM -0500, Dovid Bender wrote:
> Sorry if this is a bit OT. Recently several different vendors (in
> completely different fields) where they white label for us asked us to
> remove A records that we have going to them and replace them with CNAME
> records. Is there an
On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 12:20:10PM -0500, Aaron Wendel wrote:
> We decommissioned 200,000 sq ft of DC space this year to turn into a
> marijuana grow. Very similar power and cooling requirements.
Phat pipes of a whole different kind.
- Matt
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 07:24:51PM -0400, Valdis Klētnieks wrote:
> And yes, I know that automated systems can't use passphrases.. so remember to
> check to see if you can use 'force-command=' in the known hosts file so that
> the
> key can only issue one command. (yes, this means that if the aut
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 12:24:01PM +0530, Mukund Sivaraman wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:40:16PM -0700, Matt Corallo wrote:
> > Sadly dumb kids are plentiful. If you have to nag an abuse desk every
> > time they sell a server to a kid who’s experimenting with nmap for the
> > first time then.
On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 05:10:56PM -0700, Michael Thomas wrote:
>
> On 4/26/20 5:07 PM, Matt Palmer wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 07:59:24AM -0700, Michael Thomas wrote:
> > > On 4/26/20 7:32 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 07:56
On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 07:59:24AM -0700, Michael Thomas wrote:
>
> On 4/26/20 7:32 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 07:56:30PM -0700, Michael Thomas wrote:
> > > $SHINYNEWSITE has only to entice you to enter your reused password which
> > > comes out in the clear on the other
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 07:47:58PM -0700, Michael Thomas wrote:
> On 4/23/20 7:35 PM, Matt Palmer wrote:
> > While I do think webauthn is a neat idea, and solves at least one very real
> > problem (credential theft via phishing), you do an absolutely terrible job
> > of makin
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 06:31:04PM -0700, Michael Thomas wrote:
> Passwords over the wire are the *key* problem of computer security. Nothing
> else even comes close.
Hmm, a bold claim, but I'm confident the author will have strong support for
their position.
> One only needs to look at the Linke
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 09:10:37AM -0700, Michael Thomas wrote:
> javascript is a hell of a lot safer than downloading native apps on your
> phone, for example.
Because those are, of course, the *only* two possible options for accessing
information.
- Matt
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 04:30:28PM -0700, Michael Thomas wrote:
> Ironically it seems that the way to disable javascript is to install a
> browser extension.
Nope. chrome://settings/content/javascript for Chromium, about:config ->
javascript.enabled in Firefox.
- Matt
[Hideously mangled quoting fixed]
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 02:51:55PM +0530, Kushal R. wrote:
> Matt Palmer wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:14:11PM +0530, Kushal R. wrote:
> > > All abuse reports that we receive are dealt within 48 business hours.
> >
> > At eig
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:14:11PM +0530, Kushal R. wrote:
> All abuse reports that we receive are dealt within 48 business hours.
At eight business hours per calendar day, and five business days per
(typical) calendar week, 48 business hours is... a week and a bit, calendar
wise.
- Matt
On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 05:26:44PM -0500, b...@theworld.com wrote:
> If the commitment really was to spread IPv6 far and wide IPv6 blocks
> would be handed out for free, one per qualified customer (e.g., if you
> have an IPv4 allocation you get one IPv6 block free), or perhaps some
> trivial admini
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 09:30:20AM -0400, Matt Hoppes wrote:
> On 10/24/19 9:25 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
> > Once upon a time, Matt Hoppes said:
> > > You don’t suddenly just not need a/8 or suddenly not need a/21.
> >
> > You don't "suddenly just" do lots of things, because things change over
> >
On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 05:28:08PM -0700, Matt Corallo wrote:
> Because people seem to include “you tried three to log
> in three times and got the password wrong” in their definition of abuse,
> I’ve had to provide bogus abuse contacts (and include actual abuse
> comments in the comments section).
On Sat, Oct 05, 2019 at 04:36:50PM -0400, b...@theworld.com wrote:
>
> On October 4, 2019 at 15:26 o...@delong.com (Owen DeLong) wrote:
> >
> > OK… Let’s talk about how?
> >
> > How would you have made it possible for a host that only understands
> 32-bit addresses to exchange traffic with
On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 11:48:33PM +, Michel Py wrote:
> > Owen DeLong wrote :
> > How would you have made it possible for a host that only understands 32-bit
> > addresses to exchange traffic with a host that only has a 128-bit address?
>
> With some kind of NAT mechanism, naturally.
That w
On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 03:20:50PM +, Naslund, Steve wrote:
> Can you imagine keeping those v6 addresses in your head the same way?
I don't have to imagine, I do it on a daily basis. Doesn't seem to cause me
any grief.
In my experience, IPv4 addresses which need to be used directly on a regu
On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 05:45:57AM -0400, Valdis Klētnieks wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Oct 2019 01:55:13 -0600, "Keith Medcalf" said:
> > It is a common fallacy that TLS connections are authenticated. The vast
> > majority of them are not authenticated in any meaningful fashion and all
> > that
> > can b
On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 04:50:33AM -0400, Jim Popovitch via NANOG wrote:
> On 10/1/2019 4:09 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> > possible that this is various AWS customers making iptables/firewall
> > mistakes?
> >"block that pesky rfc1918 172/12 space!!"
>
> AWS also uses some 172/12 space on
On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 06:26:21PM -0800, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Which is it…
>
> It’s being reported on NPR as “Australia required Apple and others to
> remove encryption protections from their devices.”
>
> That’s a massively different (and arguably even worse) outcome than
> “Australia is requir
On Sun, Dec 03, 2017 at 07:34:29PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 12/02/2017 02:39 PM, Ryan Gard wrote:
> > *Oh, you must be sharing your IP with everyone else in your area*
>
> CGNAT by any chance?
... and yet:
$ dig www.ticketmaster.com
; <<>> DiG 9.10.3-P4-Debian <<>> www.ticketmaster.c
On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 02:02:46PM -0400, Sean Donelan wrote:
> There must be a perfectly logical explanation Yes, people in the
> industry know where the choke points are. But the choke points aren't always
> the most obvious places. Its kinda a weird for diplomats to show up there.
Maybe th
On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 12:20:54PM -0700, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
> That said, a pretty quick way to get on some homeland security watch lists
> would be to hang around a cable landing station beach location with a big
> DSLR camera, and appear uninterested in the beach...
I think regardless of what yo
On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 08:12:41PM -0400, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Tue, 16 May 2017 16:41:36 -0600, "Keith Medcalf" said:
> > Of course Microsoft knew, since they wrote in the backdoor in the first
> > place. That is why when informed by their employers that the backdoor was
> > going t
On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 09:47:23PM -0300, Kurt Kraut wrote:
> But one of my collegues quickly realized the incoming MAC ADDRESS was the
> actual Facebook router we have a peering at a internet exchange. So indeed
> the traffic came from their network.
If you've got a bilateral peering session with
On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 07:21:48AM +, Mike Goodwin wrote:
> Useful information on potentially compromised sites due to this:
>
> https://github.com/pirate/sites-using-cloudflare
"This list contains all domains that use Cloudflare DNS"
That's only marginally more useful than saying "any domai
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 03:42:12AM +, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> James DeVincentis via NANOG wrote:
> > On top of that, the calculations they did were for a stupidly simple
> > document modification in a type of document where hiding extraneous
> > data is easy. This will get exponentially computat
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 01:16:23PM -0600, James DeVincentis via NANOG wrote:
> The CA signing the cert actually changes the fingerprint
The what? RFC5280 does not contain the string "finger".
> (and serial number, which is what is checked on revocation lists)
The CA doesn't "change" the serial
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 01:15:28AM -0500, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> On Feb 26, 2017, at 21:16, Matt Palmer wrote:
> > Even better: I want a CA cert. I convince a CA to issue me a regular,
> > end-entity cert for `example.com` (which I control) in such a way that I can
> >
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 05:41:47PM -0600, Brett Frankenberger wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 12:18:48PM -0500, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> > I repeat something I've said a couple times in this thread: If I can
> > somehow create two docs with the same hash, and somehow con someone
> > into using
On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 04:15:47PM -0700, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
> Further update on all known suspicious activity from Wosign:
>
> https://wiki.mozilla.org/CA:WoSign_Issues
>
> Seriously, what level of malice and/or incompetence does one have to rise
> to in order to be removed from the Mozilla (and
On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 11:07:33PM -0600, Manuel Marín wrote:
> We are currently using RT for tracking tasks related to network operations
> like BGP configuration change requests, circuit/ports activation, support
> tickets, etc, but when trying to track multiple activities that involve
> multiple
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 06:49:17PM -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> > On Aug 31, 2016, at 6:36 PM, Matt Palmer wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, Netscape. Great ecosystem you built.
>
> Nobody at that time had a clue how this environment was going to scale,
> let alone wha
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 09:33:18PM -0700, George William Herbert wrote:
> > On Aug 31, 2016, at 6:36 PM, Matt Palmer wrote:
> > there's just wy too many sites using WoSign (and StartCom) for the
> > CAs' roots to just be pulled. Sad, but true.
>
> Not even
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:45:48AM -0800, Royce Williams wrote:
> Hypothetically, it would be an interesting strategy for a CA to
> publicly demonstrate this level of competence:
>
> https://www.schrauger.com/the-story-of-how-wosign-gave-me-an-ssl-certificate-for-github-com
>
> ... while at the s
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 01:25:42AM -, John Levine wrote:
> In article
> you
> write:
> >I was working within the limits of what I had available.
>
> Here's the subscription page for mailop. It's got about as odd
> a mix of people as nanog, ranging from people with single user linux
> machi
On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 06:36:23PM -0700, Ca By wrote:
> On Thursday, July 7, 2016, Spencer Ryan wrote:
>
> > Dotted-quad notation is completely valid, and works fine.
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_address#Presentation
> >
> > http://[:::37.48.108.112] loads fine in my browsers.
On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 09:28:54PM -0500, Edgar Carver wrote:
> Hello NANOG community. I was directed here by our network administrator
> since she is on vacation. Luckily, I minored in Computer Science so I have
> some familiarity.
Well played, Tay. Well played.
For everyone else:
https://twit
On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 04:43:07PM -0700, Nathan Anderson wrote:
> Is anybody out there aware of a piece of software that can take data from
> an arbitrary source and then present it, using a MIB or set of OIDs of
> your choosing, as an SNMP-interrogatable device?
Many, many years ago, I wrote a f
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 01:14:42PM +0100, nanog-...@mail.com wrote:
> Would those with IPv6 deployments kindly share some statistics on their
> percentage of IPv6 traffic?
https://twitter.com/discourse/status/679808652128030720
We're a smallish content source.
- Matt
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 10:54:49PM -0500, Chuck Church wrote:
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Matt Palmer
> >Depends on how many devices you have on it. Once you start filling your
> >home with Internet of Unpatchable Security Holes devices, having eve
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 09:23:04PM -0500, Chuck Church wrote:
> I agree that a /48 or /56 being reserved for business
> customers/sites is reasonable. But for residential use, I'm having a hard
> time believing multi-subnet home networks are even remotely common outside
> of networking folk
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 08:11:53PM -0700, Keith Medcalf wrote:
> > I agree that a /48 or /56 being reserved for business
> > customers/sites is reasonable. But for residential use, I'm having a hard
> > time believing multi-subnet home networks are even remotely common outside
> > of networkin
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 07:30:35PM +0300, Ahmed Munaf wrote:
> > On Dec 17, 2015, at 8:47 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> >
> > On 17/12/2015 17:36, Ahmed Munaf wrote:
> >> we are using ESP 20
> >
> > You haven't said what you mean by "better". This could mean "faster" or
> > "copes with more sessi
On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 04:58:08PM -0800, Matthew Petach wrote:
> Or, if you feel that Cogent's stubborn insistence on partitioning the
> global v6 internet shouldn't be rewarded with money, pay someone *other*
> than cogent for IPv6 transit and also connect to HE.net; that way you
> still have acc
On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 02:24:05PM -0500, Andrew Kirch wrote:
> remember folks, redundancy is the savior of all f***ups.
Except for the fuckups that the redundancy *caused*...
- Matt
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 01:35:55PM -0800, Jim Burwell wrote:
> My questions are:
>
> 1) Does the DHCPv6 protocol include any standards/mechanisms/methods for
> managing routes to prefixes it delegates, or does it consider this
> outside of its function? (I suspect the latter)
It's considered out
On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 05:32:41PM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote:
> In message <20151114044614.ga4...@hezmatt.org>, Matt Palmer writes:
> > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 10:51:52AM +0100, Bj�rn Mork wrote:
> > > So what do we do? We currently point the blocked domains to addresses of
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 10:51:52AM +0100, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> So what do we do? We currently point the blocked domains to addresses of
> a web server with a short explanation. But what if the domains were
> signed? We could let validating servers return SERVFAIL. But I'd
> really prefer avoiding
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 09:54:28AM +, a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
> > BTW, the proposed law, being done by lawyers, will have the list of
>
> you say law but this idea of blocking all competitors to the states
> lotto sounds very unlawful and anti-competitive - yes, I can
> understand
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 08:44:03PM -0400, Sean Donelan wrote:
> As the saying goes, cloud computing is just someone else's computer. Always
> backup your cloud backups... in your backup.
This was data loss on GCE "persistent disks" (equivalent to AWS EBS), not
archival storage. Hopefully very few
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 11:41:08PM -0600, Bryan Tong wrote:
> Yes that is part of it.
>
> There are other blocks they listed as well.
Well, http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/query/SBL263089 has a fair amount of shady
stuff going on, and http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/listings/esited.com gives a
pretty dec
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 11:13:02PM -0500, Larry Sheldon wrote:
> On 7/28/2015 22:57, Bryan Tong wrote:
>
> >Yes I have followed all of the procedures. I will continue to wait to see
> >if there is any change.
>
> Would you please send me the address range in question--I would like to see
> what t
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 07:14:17PM +, Michael O Holstein wrote:
> >making 99% of the web secure is better than keeping an old 1% working
>
> A fine idea, unless for $reason your application is among the 1% ..
> nevermind the arrogance of the "I'm sorry Dave" sort of attitude.
First they came
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 10:26:22AM +0200, Alexander Maassen wrote:
> Ok, it is good to think about security, but not giving you any chance to
> make exceptions is simply forcing users to use another browser in order to
> manage those devices, or to keep an old machine around that not gets
> updated
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 05:07:22PM -0700, Dave Taht wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 5:00 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
> >> "What about IPv6? We have a plan! We plan to be dead before customers
> >> demand IPv6".
> >> I am pretty sure the authors are still alive(?).
> >
> > and customer demand for ipv6 s
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 10:31:25AM +0200, Sander Steffann wrote:
> I don't think it is unreasonable. If the network doesn't support the
> features you need then let the user know (grey out the feature and add a
> note that says "broken network"). It will put pressure on the network
> department to
On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 02:56:26PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Further, the cellular companies would do well to be more adaptive to the
> capabilities that exist in the hardware rather than insisting that they
> choose the solution and the hardware makers must adapt.
Hahahahahaha!
Fun fill in the
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 11:30:00AM -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> I don't get why
> 'ipv6 address on my vm' matters a whole bunch (*in a world where v4 is
> still available to you I mean),
It simplifies infrastructure management considerably. Having to balance
between "how many subnets will I
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 10:49:09AM -0700, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
> On 6/1/2015 12:06 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> >... Here’s the thing… In order to land IPv6 services without IPv6 support
> >on the VM, you’re creating an environment where...
>
> Let's hypothetically say that it is much easier for the
The question that Matthew Kaufman proposed was specifically asking about app
architecture deployments, so what Facebook is choosing to do is entirely
germane.
- Matt
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 02:43:27PM -0400, Todd Underwood wrote:
> fb is not a 'cloud provider'.
>
> it's orthogonal to the questio
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 10:46:02PM -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> So... ok. What does it mean, for a customer of a cloud service, to be
> ipv6 enabled?
IPv6 feature-parity with IPv4.
My must-haves, sorted in order of importance (most to least):
> o Is it most important to be able to terminat
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 01:38:05AM +1000, Andras Toth wrote:
> Perhaps if that energy which was spent on raging, instead was spent on
> a Google search, then all those words would've been unnecessary.
>
> Official documentation:
> http://docs.aws.amazon.com/ElasticLoadBalancing/latest/DeveloperGui
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 10:56:22AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
> In message <20150505210746.gh22...@hezmatt.org>, Matt Palmer writes:
> > On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 12:03:23PM -0400, Luan Nguyen wrote:
> > > There's a form here - https://support.google.com/websearch/c
On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 12:03:23PM -0400, Luan Nguyen wrote:
> There's a form here - https://support.google.com/websearch/contact/ip
> But google is pretty smart, its systems will learn the correct geolocation
> over time...
That'd be quite a trick, given that the netblock practically can't be use
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 05:24:39PM -0400, Jean-Francois Mezei wrote:
> A search on Google yields many products dating back to the days of
> ADSL-1 advertising 1mbps profiles, but a few seem more recent and
> support ADSL2+ (not sure if any support VDSL2).
>
> Are these thing out of date and no lon
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 09:42:07PM -0400, Jared Mauch wrote:
> > On Apr 13, 2015, at 9:02 PM, Christopher Morrow
> > wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 7:30 PM, Will Dean wrote:
> >> Reddit started using CloudFlare late last year, so they should able to
> >> serve content up over v6.
> >
> > ni
Or, to answer your question more simply: "No".
- Matt
On Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 11:39:36AM +0100, Pedro Cavaca wrote:
> https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/86640?hl=en
>
> On 3 April 2015 at 04:53, Randy wrote:
>
> > I've started to get some message today from google claiming that my
> >
On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 09:05:38AM -0700, Mike wrote:
> On 03/27/2015 10:34 AM, Frank Bulk wrote:
> >Glad you figured that out.
> >
> >I've used three SSL evaluation websites to help me with intermediate
> >certificate issues:
> >https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html (will show the names an
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 08:05:18PM +, Kelly Setzer wrote:
> I don't know if you're referring to HSTS.
No, HSTS is separate to certificate pinning. Certificate pinning would, in
fact, cause Chrome to freak out in the presence of an HTTPS-intercepting
proxy, but that's what it's supposed to do.
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 12:34:23PM +0300, Stepan Kucherenko wrote:
> I want to reiterate on AirConsole because it IS amazing. I don't even
> grab a laptop when I go onsite anymore, just an AirConsole, its
> usb-serial cable and a tablet.
My, that *is* a rather snazzy piece of kit. I'm almost sad
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 03:15:38PM -0800, Kate Gerry wrote:
> The bonus about the adapter that I linked is that they use legit chips.
If only supply chain security were that easy.
- Matt
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 12:57:49PM -0800, Max Clark wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Job Snijders wrote:
> > Do you have a specific application that would prohibit the use of USB?
>
> It's purely for convenience and forgetfulness.
Cable ties. They're my forget-me-not.
- Matt
--
"Al
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 11:05:39AM -1000, joel jaeggli wrote:
> ftdi chipsets work on both mac and windows devices.
As long as it's FTDI and not "FTDI"...
- Matt
--
"Once one has achieved full endarkenment, one is happy to have an entirely
nonfunctional computer"
-- Steve VanDev
On Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 10:37:45PM -0500, Jon Lewis wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Nov 2014, Roland Dobbins wrote:
> >But this kind of thing punishes the victim. It's far better to do
> >everything possible to *protect* the target(s) of an attack, and
> >only use D/RTBH as a last resort.
>
> I'm sure it's no
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 02:41:55PM -0700, Peter Baldridge wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Matthew Petach wrote:
> > Why can't systemd have a --text flag to
> > tell it to output in ascii text mode for those
> > of us who prefer it that way?
^
This | is not what that | does
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 01:55:43PM -0700, Matthew Petach wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Stephen Satchell
> wrote:
> > Oh, and I hate binary logs. Period. If you can't stand plain text,
> > then try XML. At least humans have a *chance* to read it without having
> > to make fancy read
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 04:17:14PM -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Matt Palmer wrote:
> >On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 12:12:13PM -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote:
> >>On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 12:04 PM, Mike. wrote:
> >>>GNU/Linux is morphing into GNU/systemd
> >&
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 10:56:40AM -0400, Randy wrote:
> I've enjoyed kernel hot patches (ksplice) until now.
>
> So my primary concern is that updates to systemd appears to require
> a full reboot:
>
> http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=300166
>
> Is systemd really like a 2nd 'kerne
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 12:12:13PM -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 12:04 PM, Mike. wrote:
> > GNU/Linux is morphing into GNU/systemd
>
> Let's start calling it Systemd/Linux... that will get RMS on their
> case real fast. :-)
I don't think they've done anything to dese
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:05:30PM -0500, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
> To achieve the level of integration that timedated has with the rest
> of systemd would require more than just putting code into timedatectl
> to write out /etc/ntpd.conf and starting a service. timedated talks
> to networkd (that
>
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:00:52PM +0100, Daniel Ankers wrote:
> On 22 October 2014 11:34, wrote:
> > Before leaving Debian, things to think:
> > - will systemd be officialy the only system available ?
> > - if so, won't we get a way to bypass that ?
>
> And one other thought... is it really that
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 07:20:12PM -0500, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 8:40 AM, wrote:
> [snip]
> > It started as a replacement init system. I suspected it had jumped
> > the shark when it sprouted an entirely new DHCP and NTP service. And this
>
> Yikes. What's next? Built-
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 09:40:30AM -0400, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 14:44:57 +0900, Randy Bush said:
> > systemd is insanity. one would have hoped that deb and others would
> > know better. sigh.
>
> It started as a replacement init system. I suspected it had jumped
>
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 09:36:26PM -0400, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Oct 2014 20:10:44 -0500, Jimmy Hess said:
>
> > The only way to legally block cell phone RF would likely be on behalf
> > of the licensee In other words, possibly, persuade the cell
> > phone companies to a
On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 03:20:58PM -0400, Alain Hebert wrote:
> On the 1st of January 2015:
That's quite short notice. Perhaps we could delay it by exactly three
months?
- Matt
On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 11:01:37AM -0700, Grant Ridder wrote:
> For those interested, this is the Xen bug they were fixing with the reboots
> http://xenbits.xen.org/xsa/advisory-108.html
Ouch. Good thing Bashpocalypse is still capturing everyone's attention...
Interestingly, Amazon *didn't* disc
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 10:02:45AM +0200, Tei wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-1_alpha-2#Decoding_table
>
> GO [...] seems to be free :D
1600 Amphitheatre Parkway... the newest independent state.
- Matt
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 01:01:24PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote:
> .PC, for Picts (I believe it's available.) But I doubt that would fly.
They could abolish all taxes and fund the entire country just on domain name
sales.
> I don't know anything about Scotland's attitude toward being
> identified wit
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 08:05:28PM -0400, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 16:39:14 -0700, Owen DeLong said:
>
> > I was talking about Amazon, not AWS. Yes, AWS would help too, but in terms
> > of
> > the Alexa list, Amazon would swing the percentage meaningfully. I dont
> >
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 09:28:53AM +1200, Tony Wicks wrote:
> 2. IPv6 is nice (dual stack) but the internet without IPv4 is not a viable
> thing, perhaps one day, but certainly not today (I really hate clueless
> people who shout to the hills that IPv6 is the "solution" for today's
> internet acces
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 06:19:31PM -0400, Lee Howard wrote:
> Thanks for sharing your experience; it's very unusual to get the
> perspective of an operator running CGN (on a broadband ISP; wireless has
> always had it).
>
> On 7/29/14 5:28 PM, "Tony Wicks" wrote:
>
> >OK, as someone with experie
1 - 100 of 166 matches
Mail list logo
