On Saturday 06 Sep 2003 7:05 pm, Tom Brinkman wrote:
On Saturday September 6 2003 11:02 am, Derek Jennings wrote:
On Saturday 06 Sep 2003 3:03 pm, Jason Greenwood wrote:
Ok all, I have decided to ditch the wires and go wireless for
my ADSL Modem/router/Accesspoint and NIC at home. What is
On Sunday September 7 2003 08:02 am, Derek Jennings wrote:
Actually you will be lucky to get more than 5 Mbps of 'goodput'
out of an 11Mbps wireless card. I spent some time recently
putting together a wireless router for a small ISP here in the
UK, and that was the best throughput I measured,
On Saturday 06 Sep 2003 3:03 pm, Jason Greenwood wrote:
Ok all, I have decided to ditch the wires and go wireless for my ADSL
Modem/router/Accesspoint and NIC at home. What is the guts of it??
Nowadays adsl modems and nic's almost always work with Linux (my Nokia
Modem/Router and Generic NIC
On Saturday September 6 2003 11:02 am, Derek Jennings wrote:
On Saturday 06 Sep 2003 3:03 pm, Jason Greenwood wrote:
Ok all, I have decided to ditch the wires and go wireless for
my ADSL Modem/router/Accesspoint and NIC at home. What is the
guts of it?? Nowadays adsl modems and nic's almost
Hello HaywireMac,
Thursday, August 28, 2003, 1:17:32 PM, you wrote:
H Like I said earlier in the thread, the prob with app awareness is
H that a lot of trojans will either:
H a) disguise themselves as the trusted app, say IE, or Mozilla, by
H overwriting the executable.
H b) embed themselves
Hello Heather/Femme,
Thursday, August 28, 2003, 1:21:31 PM, you wrote:
HF for a free firewall its the best one out there for a windows
HF computer IMO. Anything better costs $1000 per liscence
HF (Checkpoint anyone?) is very hard to configure.
I prefer Kerio to ZA myself - used to use ZA but
Hello HaywireMac,
Thursday, August 28, 2003, 1:27:50 PM, you wrote:
Well, it would have to be in the exact same location and have the
same md5 signature - pretty difficult disguise. :-)
H ZoneAlarm cannot do this, AFAIK.
I haven't used ZA for quite a while, but I believe the latest version
Hello Derek,
Thursday, August 28, 2003, 1:59:29 PM, you wrote:
DJ As I understand it. There is nothing to stop a virus reconfiguring
DJ ZoneAlarm so it is undetected.
True - but this is a problem with the OS letting just about anything
do anything to anything. :-) ZA is at the mercy of a poor
Hello HaywireMac,
Thursday, August 28, 2003, 3:07:24 PM, you wrote:
If all an intruder can see is my router ip, how can it compromise
my system?
H It cannot, it must see open ports to access. This is the classic the
H only truly secure computer is one that is locked in a room with no
H
Hello Oliver,
Thursday, August 28, 2003, 3:38:54 PM, you wrote:
OM The shortcoming I have found with ZoneAlarm comes with virtual
OM machine or interpreted apps. e.g. you grant access rights to
OM java.exe, perl.exe, python.exe etc, and then *any* Java, Python
OM or Perl program you run can
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 21:59:29 +0100
Derek Jennings [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
As I understand it. There is nothing to stop a virus reconfiguring
ZoneAlarm so it is undetected.
Exactly.
--
HaywireMac
Registered Linux user #282046
Homepage: nodex.sytes.net
++
An idea is not
Hi Derek,
Thanks for the info. Yes I do use Klipper but ClipMate was a very useful
clipboard tool that I used constantly (I actually paid for that one, and
2 upgrades). With it you could create groups that you could copy into
and these groups were permanent. You also had the temporary group
Bryan Phinney wrote:
On Thursday 28 August 2003 03:14 pm, rikona wrote:
Hey, if I was running a bank with no vault, no security guard in the building,
no alarms and no way to stop someone from walking out with the money, and the
only security that I did have was a locked door, it would
Bryan Phinney wrote:
On Thursday 28 August 2003 03:14 pm, rikona wrote:
Hey, if I was running a bank with no vault, no security guard in the building,
no alarms and no way to stop someone from walking out with the money, and the
only security that I did have was a locked door, it would
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 10:46, Heather/Femme wrote:
Seen all this. ZA got smart, it generates an encrypted sig file for
itself now. Makes sure it can't be compromised either... and it is not
easily killed in newer versions. Sides, that kind of attack is pretty
sophisticated the avg ZA user
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of John Richard Smith
Sent: Friday, 29 August 2003 6:36 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [newbie] Linux Apps - Firewalls
Bryan Phinney wrote:
On Thursday 28 August 2003 03:14 pm, rikona
On Friday 29 Aug 2003 12:46 pm, Sharrea Day wrote:
Not that ZA can really help much in those situations. Clicking on
the link merely ran the script as the one-and-only user on Win98SE.
I feel much safer in Linux browsing the web as user (not root) -
although sometimes I wonder why, when the
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 20:10:43 +0800
Frankie [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
Disabling cookies outright is generally a bad idea..
I prefer to block any cookies with expiry dates that are over a week
in the future.
Also, I block any cookies coming from domains different from the page
you are on.
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 18:46:20 -0400
Bryan Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
Sorry for the long message, I get carried away sometimes. ;-}
No problemo, I enjoyed every minute of it, and gained a greater
understanding of security along the way.
I wholeheartedly agree with your perspective, esp.
HaywireMac wrote:
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 20:10:43 +0800
Frankie [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
Disabling cookies outright is generally a bad idea..
I prefer to block any cookies with expiry dates that are over a week
in the future.
Also, I block any cookies coming from domains different from the page
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 21:55:48 -0700
Russ [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
Hi All,
Thanks for the responses.
Hell, this is the best thread we've had in a long time, thank *you* for
starting it!
--
HaywireMac
Registered Linux user #282046
Homepage: nodex.sytes.net
++
Life can be
On Friday 29 August 2003 06:35 am, John Richard Smith wrote:
Bryan,
Can I ask you a question,
Am I paranoid for not wanting to enable cookies ?
you know, from the security point of view ?
John
Not wanting to have cookies enabled does not make you paranoid, but that
doesn't mean that
Hello Bryan,
Thursday, August 28, 2003, 3:46:20 PM, you wrote:
BP Requires some hardware but this is doable. Simply run a proxy
BP server on a dedicated machine, in the router or ipchains using
BP netfilter, allow only that machine's IP to initiate http traffic
BP on port 80 and then all the
Hello HaywireMac,
Thursday, August 28, 2003, 5:13:16 PM, you wrote:
As I understand it. There is nothing to stop a virus reconfiguring
ZoneAlarm so it is undetected.
H Exactly.
But this is an OS problem, not a ZA problem. Let's give discredit where
it's due. :-)
--
rikona
Hello HaywireMac,
Friday, August 29, 2003, 5:20:17 AM, you wrote:
H I wholeheartedly agree with your perspective, esp. the idea that
H you have to differentiate between something like a firewall *app*
H and a real firewall, one that cannot be compromised like any other
H app.
Is an apple better
Hello John,
Friday, August 29, 2003, 6:39:56 AM, you wrote:
JRS Isn't it a way in for virus writers to get inside your protection
JRS systems ?
If you have an OS problem, as does M$ with their infamous buffer
overruns, then yes. (Ignoring social hacking, of course.) Otherwise,
the 'virus' is
On Friday 29 August 2003 11:34 am, rikona wrote:
Hello Bryan,
Thursday, August 28, 2003, 3:46:20 PM, you wrote:
BP Requires some hardware but this is doable. Simply run a proxy
BP server on a dedicated machine, in the router or ipchains using
BP netfilter, allow only that machine's IP to
Hi All,
I was wondering if you could help me with some advice. I have just
jumped to only Linux on this computer. However there are a couple of
apps that I would like to find equivalents to for Linux.
One is an easy to use Firewall program (ZoneAlarm). Any suggestions.
Second is a Clipboard
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 17:58:11 -0700
Russ [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
One is an easy to use Firewall program (ZoneAlarm). Any suggestions.
Mandrake comes with one built in, which you can configure with Webmin.
Open a browser and in the address field:
https://localhost:1
log in as root and
On Wednesday 27 August 2003 07:58 pm, Russ wrote:
Hi All,
I was wondering if you could help me with some advice. I have just
jumped to only Linux on this computer. However there are a couple of
apps that I would like to find equivalents to for Linux.
One is an easy to use Firewall program
That is all true BUT I have been running Linux for 3 years now with no
special software and I have not been cracked or had any virii or
security problems of any kind. I think you'll find that most of your
security concerns just melt away just by switching to Linux. It is sad
really, Linux
On Thursday 28 Aug 2003 3:13 am, HaywireMac wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 17:58:11 -0700
Russ [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
One is an easy to use Firewall program (ZoneAlarm). Any
suggestions.
Mandrake comes with one built in, which you can configure with
Webmin.
Open a browser and in the
On Thursday 28 Aug 2003 3:17 pm, Derek Jennings wrote:
On Thursday 28 Aug 2003 10:32 am, Anne Wilson wrote:
On Thursday 28 Aug 2003 3:13 am, HaywireMac wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 17:58:11 -0700
Russ [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
One is an easy to use Firewall program (ZoneAlarm). Any
On Thursday 28 Aug 2003 10:32 am, Anne Wilson wrote:
On Thursday 28 Aug 2003 3:13 am, HaywireMac wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 17:58:11 -0700
Russ [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
One is an easy to use Firewall program (ZoneAlarm). Any
suggestions.
Mandrake comes with one built in, which
Hello Russ,
Wednesday, August 27, 2003, 9:55:48 PM, you wrote:
R Besides, I know next to nothing about various types of connections
R and whatnot. So trying to set this firewall up manually would be a
R disaster.
I would agree. If you can't find a good front end, it would be better
to try to
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 07:53:49 -0700
rikona [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
I don't think you can get this with ANY configuration in Mandrake
because, as I understand it, iptables is NOT application-aware as are
several firewalls for Windoze. IMHO, this is a great oversight in
protecting individual
On Thursday 28 Aug 2003 5:55 am, Russ wrote:
Hi All,
Thanks for the responses.
I tried https://localhost:1; but the connection was refused.
You need to install the webmin package first.
Besides, I know next to nothing about various types of connections and
whatnot. So trying to set
Hello HaywireMac,
Thursday, August 28, 2003, 8:16:59 AM, you wrote:
H Trojans are better checked with chkrootkit (sp?) anyway, IMHO.
That's a good way, but you may not know it until you do the check.
Besides, suppose the trojan is inside a program you thought you
wanted? YOU installed it not
Hello Anne,
Thursday, August 28, 2003, 12:13:45 PM, you wrote:
AFAIK, you can't even do this with hand coding of iptables, and
thus no front end would be able to do it either.
AW I know you have been looking for this for a while, so I assume that
AW you haven't made much progress?
On Thursday 28 Aug 2003 7:54 pm, rikona wrote:
H ZoneAlarm is a joke, but it's better than *no* joke I guess,
except H in the sense it might give one a false sense of security.
I prefer other FW's, but I'm curious as to what's so bad about it?
I fail to see the joke, too. When I used to run
Hello Derek,
Thursday, August 28, 2003, 9:38:41 AM, you wrote:
Besides, I know next to nothing about various types of connections
and whatnot. So trying to set this firewall up manually would be a
disaster. ZoneAlarm was quick and easy Do you want this program to
access the net? yes or no
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 12:14:00 -0700
rikona [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
Some things, like app-awareness, seem to be better in the Win FW's.
Like I said earlier in the thread, the prob with app awareness is that
a lot of trojans will either:
a) disguise themselves as the trusted app, say IE, or
On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 13:13, Anne Wilson wrote:
On Thursday 28 Aug 2003 7:54 pm, rikona wrote:
H ZoneAlarm is a joke, but it's better than *no* joke I guess,
except H in the sense it might give one a false sense of security.
I prefer other FW's, but I'm curious as to what's so bad about
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 20:13:45 +0100
Anne Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
I fail to see the joke, too. When I used to run it I used the on-line
checkers, and got nothing back but my router address. What joke?
Because it is *on* the machine it is trying to protect. You
compromise the
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 11:54:45 -0700
rikona [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
Well, it would have to be in the exact same location and have the same
md5 signature - pretty difficult disguise. :-)
ZoneAlarm cannot do this, AFAIK.
H Or infects Mozilla?
Same md5? Not likely.
The need to do some
On Thursday 28 Aug 2003 9:24 pm, HaywireMac wrote:
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 20:13:45 +0100
Anne Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
I fail to see the joke, too. When I used to run it I used the
on-line
checkers, and got nothing back but my router address. What joke?
Because it is *on* the
On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 14:24, HaywireMac wrote:
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 20:13:45 +0100
Anne Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
I fail to see the joke, too. When I used to run it I used the on-line
checkers, and got nothing back but my router address. What joke?
Because it is *on* the
On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 14:59, Derek Jennings wrote:
snip
As I understand it. There is nothing to stop a virus reconfiguring ZoneAlarm
so it is undetected.
http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/backdoor.tron.html
I may be wrong but I believe there is also nothing In
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of HaywireMac
Sent: Tuesday, 19 August 2003 11:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [newbie] Linux saves MS's butt.
On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 23:17:45 -0400
Brant Fitzsimmons [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
We can
On Mon, 2003-08-18 at 23:51, HaywireMac wrote:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 23:17:45 -0400
Brant Fitzsimmons [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
We can only speculate what was in the mind of the worm's author(s).
But if the 200,000 instances of this worm had chosen to target
On 19 Aug 2003 07:33:03 -0400
ed tharp [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
unless I borrow a copy, I might not ever get to use XP.
bet yer real busted up about that!
I do have the VLE if you want tho, ;-)
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
On Tue, 2003-08-19 at 08:06, HaywireMac wrote:
On 19 Aug 2003 07:33:03 -0400
ed tharp [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
unless I borrow a copy, I might not ever get to use XP.
bet yer real busted up about that!
I do have the VLE if you want tho, ;-)
is it in ISO format?
On 19 Aug 2003 08:12:00 -0400
ed tharp [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
is it in ISO format?
could be, if you wanted...
loong download tho, my upstream is capped at 128.
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
On Mon, 2003-08-18 at 23:51, HaywireMac wrote:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 23:17:45 -0400
Brant Fitzsimmons [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
We can only speculate what was in the mind of the worm's author(s).
But if the 200,000 instances of this worm had chosen to target
On Mon, 2003-08-18 at 07:44, Frankie wrote:
Bill Gates didn't make people idiots, God did. Hate the user, not the
developer.
Next...
Brandon Vanderberg
www.clueless.m$killedmydoggy.andi'mgonnacry.whaaa.com
Linux User #34.5 | Linux machine
Bill Gates didn't make people idiots, God did. Hate the user, not the
developer.
Next...
Brandon Vanderberg
www.clueless.m$killedmydoggy.andi'mgonnacry.whaaa.com
Linux User #34.5 | Linux machine
123amicoolyet472notyet340now?987NO!needlongersig05789
Kernel
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 10:59, Tom Brinkman wrote:
On Friday August 15 2003 05:02 pm, Charles A Edwards wrote:
On 16 Aug 2003 07:49:28 +1000
Stephen Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wonder if they're going to change their official stance on
linux and OSS now that they've had to resort to
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Stephen Kuhn
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 10:22 PM
To: Mandrake Newbie
Subject: Re: [newbie] Linux saves MS's butt.
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 08:44, Erylon Hines wrote:
Looks like that's whats been done. Any
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 15:27, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote:
Which is why we need to get the word out as widely as possible. Allow me to
demonstrate:
http://www.pclinuxonline.com/modules.php?name=Newsfile=articlesid=7498
Enough said :)
Has anyone submitted this to Slashdot and Newsforge yet?
Joe Six Pack here,
Just to say that the hammer has fallen! I don't care how you say it, slice it
or dice it LINUX IS SAVING WINDOWS!! ALL WHO AGREE SAY I!!
Sincerely,
J6P
touring Japan!
On Saturday 16 August 2003 7:08 am, Stephen Kuhn wrote:
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 04:58,
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 10:26, Brandon Vanderberg wrote:
Anyone dumb enough to leave a PC wide open with no protection, and got hit
by this worm deserves it - Just as much as someone who runs linux with no
security deserves to have their box owned.
Bill Gates didn't make people idiots, God
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 03:26, Brandon Vanderberg wrote:
Brandon, as I see it tho, M$ built a system designed to require
expensive maintenance, as a business model. linus builds a system to
'work right' as an Operation system, as an Computer Operation System
model.
Let's see do I want an
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3154117
has the headline 'Internet worm 'thwarted''
and says that MS 'implemented a series of counter-measures'
'However, a flaw in the worm may have enabled Microsoft to fend off its
worst effects.
The worm instructed computers to call up
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 21:47, Paul wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3154117
has the headline 'Internet worm 'thwarted''
and says that MS 'implemented a series of counter-measures'
'However, a flaw in the worm may have enabled Microsoft to fend off its
worst effects.
The
Still think Dyson is the best though
ed tharp wrote:
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 03:26, Brandon Vanderberg wrote:
Brandon, as I see it tho, M$ built a system designed to require
expensive maintenance, as a business model. linus builds a system to
'work right' as an Operation system, as an Computer
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 08:01, Michael Lothian wrote:
Still think Dyson is the best though
sure,,, in _your_ (the real) world...
ed tharp wrote:
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 03:26, Brandon Vanderberg wrote:
Brandon, as I see it tho, M$ built a system designed to require
expensive maintenance, as
On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 00:26:47 -0700
Brandon Vanderberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
Anyone dumb enough to leave a PC wide open with no protection, and got
hit by this worm deserves it - Just as much as someone who runs linux
with no security deserves to have their box owned.
Operating systems,
Hello Brandon,
Saturday, August 16, 2003, 12:26:47 AM, you wrote:
BV Anyone dumb enough to leave a PC wide open with no protection, and
BV got hit by this worm deserves it - Just as much as someone who
BV runs linux with no security deserves to have their box owned.
BV Bill Gates didn't make
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Sevatio
Sent: Saturday, 16 August 2003 10:02 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [newbie] Linux saves MS's butt.
No, this is for real and unbelievable as it is. Look up
www.microsoft.com or microsoft.com and you'll see
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 10:26, Brandon Vanderberg wrote:
Anyone dumb enough to leave a PC wide open with no protection,
and got hit
by this worm deserves it - Just as much as someone who runs
linux with no
security deserves to have their box owned.
Bill Gates didn't make people
Stirred up a hornet's nest didn't I? ;)
On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 00:26:47 -0700
Brandon Vanderberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered:
Anyone dumb enough to leave a PC wide open with no protection, and got
hit by this worm deserves it - Just as much as someone who runs linux
with no security deserves
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 13:53, Brandon Vanderberg wrote:
Stirred up a hornet's nest didn't I? ;)
Not really.
Not arrogant and certainly not l33t (whatever it means).
And taking a jab at Stephen's sig is not blasting you or anyone else.
He can take it, so cowboy up.
Troll on, troller.
Hello,
It seems to me that this is an insolubale problem. The 'Joe six pack' crowd
will never be able to outhack someone who is au currant and deals with
networking day in and day out, even if they understand the need for
protection. As they say, 'where there's a will there's a way.'
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 05:25, James Henry Maiewski wrote:
Hello,
It seems to me that this is an insolubale problem. The 'Joe six pack' crowd
will never be able to outhack someone who is au currant and deals with
networking day in and day out, even if they understand the need for
Feel you're being a bit harsh here.
Don't forget that the vast majority of computer users/car drivers/TV
watchers have no idea what goes on under the hood only realise this
when things go wrong. Ms has been sold on it's ease of use - and people
have believed the salesmen (it's also
For those who don't know--MS has changed around a lot of their Windows
Update network to try and handle the expected onslaught of hits from
computers commandeered by the MSBlast worm. Guess who they put at the
the front line of their defense.
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 07:11, Brant Fitzsimmons wrote:
For those who don't know--MS has changed around a lot of their Windows
Update network to try and handle the expected onslaught of hits from
computers commandeered by the MSBlast worm. Guess who they put at the
the front line of their
On 16 Aug 2003 07:49:28 +1000
Stephen Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wonder if they're going to change their official stance on linux and
OSS now that they've had to resort to linux to save their ass?
No, once it has passed, they'll probably just fire the tech who set it
up and disavow any
Yesand no. What I see is a cache server (akamai) running Linux. The MS
site is an IIS server. It is a way for MS to use a third party to lighten
the bandwidth load--having akamai serve up a cached copy of the Windows
Update site.
e.
On Friday 15 August 2003 05:11 pm, Brant Fitzsimmons
Frankie wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Brant Fitzsimmons
For those who don't know--MS has changed around a lot of their Windows
Update network to try and handle the expected onslaught of hits from
computers commandeered by the MSBlast
If that was the address that the attack was pointed at won't it make
sence for MS to disable it?
Mike
Brant Fitzsimmons wrote:
Frankie wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Brant Fitzsimmons
For those who don't know--MS has changed
http://www.iht.com/articles/106638.html
Michael Lothian wrote:
If that was the address that the attack was pointed at won't it make
sence for MS to disable it?
Mike
Brant Fitzsimmons wrote:
Frankie wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
snip
Looks like they've decided to drop it or something:
http://www.msnbc.com/news/952935.asp?vts=081520031730
Michael
--
Michael Viron
Core Systems Group
Simple End User Linux
You are absolutely correct. www.windowsupdate.com is not coming up. I
do know, however, that it does indeed
On Friday August 15 2003 05:02 pm, Charles A Edwards wrote:
On 16 Aug 2003 07:49:28 +1000
Stephen Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wonder if they're going to change their official stance on
linux and OSS now that they've had to resort to linux to save
their ass?
No, once it has passed,
On Friday August 15 2003 01:58 pm, Erylon Hines wrote:
Yesand no. What I see is a cache server (akamai) running
Linux. The MS site is an IIS server. It is a way for MS to use
a third party to lighten the bandwidth load--having akamai serve
up a cached copy of the Windows Update site.
On Friday 15 August 2003 06:49 pm, Frankie wrote:
snipped
I don't know if I understand it..
I thought the urls for m$ updates were:
http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/
which goes though to:
http://v4.windowsupdate.microsoft.com/en/default.asp
The site v4.windowsupdate.microsoft.com
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 19:59:30 -0500, Tom Brinkman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well someone please tell me how you'd run Microsoft-IIS/6.0 on
Linux ?? ... or is the server just spoofed?
Neither. It's an IIS server _behind_ a Linux server.
From netcraft:
Webservers that operate behind a
On Friday 15 August 2003 08:59 pm, Tom Brinkman wrote:
On Friday August 15 2003 05:02 pm, Charles A Edwards wrote:
On 16 Aug 2003 07:49:28 +1000
Stephen Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wonder if they're going to change their official stance on
linux and OSS now that they've had to
Looks like that's whats been done. Any errors trying to access will have a
lot to do with DNS updates not showing up on our servers for 24 hours or so
(just guessing, but I've seen it before).
However, their solution is pretty half-assed, and I can see all kinds of holes
in their thinking.
No, this is for real and unbelievable as it is. Look up
www.microsoft.com or microsoft.com and you'll see linux. So yes this is
happened.
Brant Fitzsimmons wrote:
Frankie wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Brant Fitzsimmons
For
For those who don't know--MS has changed around a lot of their Windows
Update network to try and handle the expected onslaught of hits from
:)
Anyhow, I hope SCO gets their $1300 fee per machine from MS. ;)
*Sweet Justice*
Brant Fitzsimmons
Erylon Hines wrote:
Looks like that's whats been done. Any errors trying to access will have a
lot to do with DNS updates not showing up on our servers for 24 hours or so
(just guessing, but I've seen it before).
However, their solution is pretty half-assed, and I can see all kinds of holes
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 08:44, Erylon Hines wrote:
Looks like that's whats been done. Any errors trying to access will have a
lot to do with DNS updates not showing up on our servers for 24 hours or so
(just guessing, but I've seen it before).
However, their solution is pretty half-assed,
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 10:24, Michael Lothian wrote:
http://www.iht.com/articles/106638.html
I just find this all so personally comical; doesn't matter that the
worms would cause damage - Microsoft is causing their own damage to
themselves.
I'm sure the writer(s) of the bug foresaw this
On 16 Aug 2003 15:21:45 +1000, Stephen Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2003-08-16 at 08:44, Erylon Hines wrote:
Looks like that's whats been done. Any errors trying to access will have a
lot to do with DNS updates not showing up on our servers for 24 hours or so
(just guessing, but
On Wed, 2003-08-06 at 03:57, Paul wrote:
From 'Wired'
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0%2C1367%2C59905%2C00.html
Paul M.
What I find funny is that unix, mainframes and linux have been used for
quite a number of years ANYWAYS; it's just becoming more mainstream
now...and that's a good
From 'Wired'
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0%2C1367%2C59905%2C00.html
Paul M.
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Rob Blomquist wrote:
On Saturday 26 July 2003 10:19 am, Aron Smith wrote:
Has anyone had any success setting up multi function devices?
(eg. printer-fax-copier-scanners with linux)
there are some great deals on refurbished HP equipment around.
Check out www.linuxprinting.org and be ready
On Sunday 27 Jul 2003 9:12 am, Maureen L. Thomas wrote:
I use a HP OfficeJet G85 and everything works execpt the fax. I
just hook the fax to my phone line when I need it. Otherwise it
prints great, copies great, and scans great.
Could you add this info to the HardwareCompatibility page on
301 - 400 of 2138 matches
Mail list logo
