DLINK DNS323 has a Marvel processor like the Pogoplug has except it has room
to mount 2 SATA drives.
And like the Pogoplug it runs Linux and has GB Ethernet.
You can also pick one up locally. Last I checked Fry's had them for about
$130...
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Jeme A Brelin wrote:
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Rich Shepard wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Jason Dagit wrote:
>
> > Have you looked at cubespace?
>
> Jason,
>
> Did they resolve the rent issue? I know the community raised about $3,000
> in a couple of hours several weeks ago but I never saw whether that was
> su
On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Jason Dagit wrote:
> Have you looked at cubespace?
Jason,
Did they resolve the rent issue? I know the community raised about $3,000
in a couple of hours several weeks ago but I never saw whether that was
sufficient to save the place.
Rich
--
Richard B. Shepard, Ph.D.
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 2:27 PM, David Kaplan wrote:
> A friend and I are looking for a class room type space to video a series of
> Linux lessons. Somewhere we can use a projector w/ laptop for presentations
> and a white board to write on. A space that could be used on weekends if
> the
> busine
A friend and I are looking for a class room type space to video a series of
Linux lessons. Somewhere we can use a projector w/ laptop for presentations
and a white board to write on. A space that could be used on weekends if the
business is open M-F. It can be on the east side or west side of Portl
> I found this and it made sense to an almost-literate-with-route2 person.
> When it worked and the logwatch entries dropped from
> tens/hundreds/thousands a day to less than ten I was thrilled.
>
> I have been meaning to get rid of the logging since it goes the console
> of the server(s) which ar
Joe Pruett wrote:
>> And I'll recommend this iptables recipe again. (CentOS 5.3 system -
>> /etc/sysconfig/iptables -- therefore Redhat, Fedora, SciLinux, Whitebox
>> should be similar. You'll have to figure it out for if you're using
>> something else.)
>>
>> #+# Handle brute force assaults.
>>
> And I'll recommend this iptables recipe again. (CentOS 5.3 system -
> /etc/sysconfig/iptables -- therefore Redhat, Fedora, SciLinux, Whitebox
> should be similar. You'll have to figure it out for if you're using
> something else.)
>
> #+# Handle brute force assaults.
> -N SSH_WHITELIST
> -A SSH
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 9:16 AM, MJang wrote:
> FWIW, I disable root logins for SSH on my /etc/ssh/sshd_config with
>
> PermitRootLogin no
>
An interesting trick that I use to make it so that backup tools like Dirvish
remain useful is:
PermitRootLogin without-password
That (somewhat counter-int
On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 08:31 -0700, Quentin Hartman wrote:
> Just wanted to comment that the super-wimple way to avoid all this headache
> is to run SSHD on a non-standard port. I never get scans like that on my
> boxes which are on weird ports. To make connecting to the machines easy (and
> to keep
Rich Shepard wrote:
>Not long ago there was a thread on cracking attempts via ssh. Several
> commenters reported that the perpetrators gave up after a few tries. My
> experience is that every day a variable number of potential crackers bang on
> the system via sshd, but most of them must use sc
Quentin Hartman (qhart...@gmail.com) typed this ...
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Kurt Sussman wrote:
> >
> > This is why I use BlockHosts from aczoom.com...
> >
>
> Blockhosts is useful, for sure, but I find it gets "false positives" in some
> cases, which is obnoxious. If you really wanted
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Kurt Sussman wrote:
>
> This is why I use BlockHosts from aczoom.com...
>
Blockhosts is useful, for sure, but I find it gets "false positives" in some
cases, which is obnoxious. If you really wanted defense in depth, you could
move to a non-standard port and run bl
Rich Shepard (rshep...@appl-ecosys.com) typed this ...
> Illegal users from:
> 83.14.99.10 (sig.com.pl): 1 time
> 88.191.77.63 (sd-14397.dedibox.fr): 3742 times
This is why I use BlockHosts from aczoom.com... it adds a firewall rule
after a configurable number of failed attempts. See
h
On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Quentin Hartman wrote:
> Just wanted to comment that the super-wimple way to avoid all this headache
> is to run SSHD on a non-standard port. I never get scans like that on my
> boxes which are on weird ports. To make connecting to the machines easy (and
> to keep things like r
Just wanted to comment that the super-wimple way to avoid all this headache
is to run SSHD on a non-standard port. I never get scans like that on my
boxes which are on weird ports. To make connecting to the machines easy (and
to keep things like rsync and scp happy) and not have to remember a bunch
On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, drew wymore wrote:
> The scripts probably just cycle through a list of common users to try
> hoping someone hasn't secured their box. If they can get in as postfix
> then they can try and work on becoming root.
Drew,
I'm sure they use scripts, and I've seen some attempts a
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 6:54 AM, Rich Shepard wrote:
> Not long ago there was a thread on cracking attempts via ssh. Several
> commenters reported that the perpetrators gave up after a few tries. My
> experience is that every day a variable number of potential crackers bang
> on
> the system via
Not long ago there was a thread on cracking attempts via ssh. Several
commenters reported that the perpetrators gave up after a few tries. My
experience is that every day a variable number of potential crackers bang on
the system via sshd, but most of them must use script automation because
most
This is to finish the story of missing e-mails, including the daily log
report
summaries. As I wrote before, Joe Pruett identified the culprit as
SpamAssassin by examining the procmail strace output.
Knowing where the problem originated I had to learn what and how, so I
subscribed to the Sp
20 matches
Mail list logo
