Slashdot Mirror

EV1Servers Pays License Fee to SCO

...
By paying a licensing fee to insulate itself against SCO's legal claims, EV1Servers drew immediate fire from many corners of the Linux community, with some Slashdot readers suggesting a boycott of the company. EV1Servers is one of the largest dedicated hosting companies, with more than 11,000 Linux servers visible on the Web, according to our most recent survey.

"We realize we may be vilified by some diehards within the industry, but we feel a real obligation to take care of our customers," Marsh said in an interview this afternoon. "We had private discussions about this issue with some of our customers, and they were quite concerned about the uncertainty and the potential for a legal quagmire. What we've done is ensure that it's not an issue for our customers."
...

EV1Servers Pays License Fee to SCO

...
By paying a licensing fee to insulate itself against SCO's legal claims, EV1Servers drew immediate fire from many corners of the Linux community, with some Slashdot readers suggesting a boycott of the company. EV1Servers is one of the largest dedicated hosting companies, with more than 11,000 Linux servers visible on the Web, according to our most recent survey.

"We realize we may be vilified by some diehards within the industry, but we feel a real obligation to take care of our customers," Marsh said in an interview this afternoon. "We had private discussions about this issue with some of our customers, and they were quite concerned about the uncertainty and the potential for a legal quagmire. What we've done is ensure that it's not an issue for our customers."
...

...AKA karma whoring for fun and profit

Mirror w/ pictures

According to NetCraft, Alex Jones' site is hosted at EV1Servers.net... I wonder if the sum total of the ruined money is $700? I guess it would save a lot of time to just burn the money rather than give it to SCO, yet you would still have the same end result: out $700, and nothing much to show for it.

According to netcraft SCO's server is linux-based. SCO should sue themselves. Now that would be a test against our legal system.

Hey, the Pope lives in Vatican City, and BTW they use Tru64, i.e. Alpha!!! wow! I knew this pope was cool!

Actually the vatican runs on UNIX (Compaq Tru64)
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=www.vati can.va

The Pope's page is www.vatican.va
But the results are similar

... Themselves.

Nevermind, thats a lawsuit they might actually win. Given their current record of idiocy and bad public relations, my guess is that it will be the the Pope

Try again, their forums site is running LAMP. Probably just a weak box that isn't used to that kind of traffic for their forums.

> an ISP nobody ever heard of

Nobody ever heard of?! EVERYONE in the hosting industry knows of EV1Servers (aka Rackshack). They are one of the biggest providers of discounted rack servers on the planet. NetCraft apparently knows about them too, and had an interview with Marsh. The host a LOT of boxes.

They are likely the biggest provider of startup web hosting servers around. Although they aren't the cheapest around, they are probably the cheapest that still offers any level of service. I'd say anyone who hasn't heard of them probably isn't in the industry.

> an ISP nobody ever heard of

Nobody ever heard of?! EVERYONE in the hosting industry knows of EV1Servers (aka Rackshack). They are one of the biggest providers of discounted rack servers on the planet. NetCraft apparently knows about them too, and had an interview with Marsh. The host a LOT of boxes.

They are likely the biggest provider of startup web hosting servers around. Although they aren't the cheapest around, they are probably the cheapest that still offers any level of service. I'd say anyone who hasn't heard of them probably isn't in the industry.

> an ISP nobody ever heard of

Nobody ever heard of?! EVERYONE in the hosting industry knows of EV1Servers (aka Rackshack). They are one of the biggest providers of discounted rack servers on the planet. NetCraft apparently knows about them too, and had an interview with Marsh. The host a LOT of boxes.

They are likely the biggest provider of startup web hosting servers around. Although they aren't the cheapest around, they are probably the cheapest that still offers any level of service. I'd say anyone who hasn't heard of them probably isn't in the industry.

Ev1Hosting.net (formerly rackshack) used to run primarily Linux servers. They were approached by Microsoft (as many data centers have been) and Microsoft offered them a substantial discount on 2003 server because of the number of Linux servers hosting web pages vs. 2003 shown on a certain website. Microsoft also offered free 2003 server training programs to the staff at racksha... Ev1hosting.

Rumors in the industry have it that they are being used as a primary "showpiece" for Microsoft web servers.

I know this because I used to work for the competition, and Microsoft approached us with the same offer. Mind you, we all got laid off as our jobs were outsourced to India.

Interesting. If you check them out on Netcraft, it turns out that:

The site www.ev1servers.net is running Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on Windows 2000.

No wonder they're having problems. It also suggests that they're not particularly committed to Linux, doesn't it?

Interesting. If you check them out on Netcraft, it turns out that:

The site www.ev1servers.net is running Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on Windows 2000.

No wonder they're having problems. It also suggests that they're not particularly committed to Linux, doesn't it?

And what's that site running?

It looks like FreeBSD, although until today they've running IIS 4.0 on Microsoft NT4 or 98. Which is... interesting, to say the least.

That would be funny, except its too bad the site is actually running Windows 2000.

TalkBack
An error occurred on the server when processing the URL. Please contact the system administrator.

CRN: How do you respond to people who say that the open-source approach and the associated peer-review process inherently create better code?

TAYLOR: Just because you have more people looking at the code does not guarantee a level of quality, because those people might not be the most-qualified people to do code review. I'm not [making] a disparaging comment on the open-source community. I'm just simply saying that more in number does not mean it's more in quality. Let's just say that. That said, it's something that we continue to look at to see at what level and how do we open it up and share. And at the end of the day, there are only about 14 to 25 guys that actually check code into the Linux kernel. Just because you have a bunch folks out in the community that have the access to look at open-source product means that, by default, it will be more secure or higher quality.

you poor sap. the source of the problem is a terribly insecure environment. the source of said problem is microsloth. guess what, these people know security like the back of their a%s and haven't been looking there much lately except with great "security" marketing initiatives using apple tibooks. Guess what. How Well is a "free" M$ going to virus scanner protect you? ??? ?? ? ? ? ? ?

i have never seen any virus that degrades the performance of a machine like AV software. now, the kings of software bloat are going to stick you with one, you poor unsuspecting User. yes, all my poor users will be crying, my computer is slow and tells me what to do now. if m$ really had a heart they would make a spyware scanner.

worse yet, any virus worth its salt will attack either sco, microsoft or your installed antivirus software.

my pronouncement is that this will, in time solve the problem of windows viruses altogether. because after another year or two, m$ will be dropped from the upgrade cycle for having such insecure s$#t-ware that nobody will touch it. killing norton like this will only leave windoze even less secure.

strange as this may sound, norton is the Ultimate Security Blanket, like what linus in the peanuts (pun not intended) carried around. people figure that if they have two companies looking out for viruses, they'll be protected. not that there is any truth to that. again, virii attack AV software first unless, of course the writer is a typical windows user like t33kid who only infected how many thousands of machines? ? ? ? ??

maybe, SP2 will be the straw that crunches the only "ISV" that we all thought they really needed, and breaks their own backs in the process. . . . .. .

we can all dream, can't we?

... is the NSA web site running on IIS?

(Yes, yes, I know that the web site will be totally physically separated from the spooks' computers...)

Their web site runs IIS.

1. Market BSD/OS, an OS that's used by ISPs.
2. Sell it to an embedded systems dealer.
3. Profit, but the OS goes to hell.

Meanwhile ISPs keep using BSD/OS

Well, the UN does *not* run Microsoft Windows servers and IIS...

Netcraft: The site www.un.org is running Apache/1.3.22 (Unix) AuthTDS/1.1 on Solaris 8.

Maybe they took it down because it was running on an unlicensed OS.

Take a look at this

My favorite question is #28

I have Linux servers deployed in my organization. What options do I have besides purchasing a SCO IP license?

There are 3 options for you to evaluate:

• You have the option to do nothing, adopt a "wait and see" attitude, and risk whether SCO may enforce its intellectual property rights with you.

• You can replace all servers, desktop and embedded uses of Linux with an alternative legal operating system.

• You can obtain SCO IP Licenses.

SCO is committed to protect and defend its intellectual property and believes that the most cost effective remedy is to purchase the necessary SCO IP License. However, the action you take should be based on the recommendation of your own legal counsel.

A quick Google search pointed me to this site with statistic about web server software.

The below uses data available on the above link, so don't flame me if it's wrong, this is just for example's sake

In January 2004 there were 31,040,922 Apache web servers on the Internet (let's assume those are all Linux or Un*x boxes). There were 9,675,979 Windows servers on the Internet. Let's say that mi2g's results were correct and 13,654 of the Linux/Un*x boxes are hackable. That makes roughly 4.4 percent of Linux/Un*x boxes hackable. If 2,005 of those Windows boxes are hackable, that makes roughly 2.07 percent of those boxes hackable

While those results (which I wouldn't recommend using for any kind of scientific purpose) still favor Windows (*gag*), it sort of puts things back in perspective

Also, how many of those Linux boxes had root passwords of "root," "r00t," "toor," or "t00r?"

The study chose to not consider malware because that is really a UI and social engineering problem, this study was about attacking servers without an inside patsy and Linux came up short. It is dishonest and dangerous to ignore these sorts of results.

No it is not dishonest to ignore these results. These results are dishonest. Raw numbers don't prove anything. There is no statistical analysis done at all. Perhaps there is some worthwhile anylysis in their report but you have to pay to see it. Sounds a little sketchy to me. It's absolutely insane to say that MacOSX is the most secure simply because it is hardly ever used as a webserver in comparison to Linux.

The previous survery they mention was reported here:

linuxword

As you can see they are reporting about only webservers.

As you can see here, Apache is the most common webserver (by far):

netcraft

Considering Apache is the most used webserver and Linux is the most used operating system to run Apache on then I would say that the results makes perfect sense, but prove nothing.

What if I made my own operating system and made it as insecure as possible, then ran a webserver on it but since no one cares about cracking my website it never gets cracked? Am I to presume that it is the "World's Safest Operating System"? It seems you would. It also seems that the "World's Safest Operating System" could be a worm infested zombie and still be considered safe by your standards and by mi2g's standards. You have to admit that at least the title was misleading.

Not only is BSD (apparently) the "safest", but you mignt be suprised to notice that the 50 highest uptimes on the net belong to BSD

And I run linux. You'd think I would learn...

Maybe ./ is getting ./ed? The irony.

Unfortunately, the RIAA is running Windows.

Netcraft confirms, BSD is being used.

OSS isn't taken seriously? Maybe someone should tell all these poor suckers relying on it.

Are they TRYING to taunt the SEC into investigating? What could be a more foolish move, when you're doing a pump-n-dump scheme, than to make loud (possibly perjurous) threats in the face of the very people who have the ear of the SEC?... What could possibly be more stupid or suicidal?

They could have sued the SEC itself.

This would also have the advantage of preventing further ddos attacks.

Think how much more productive we'd all be ;)

They are, unless there's some other company making machines that run Irix.

The article says: "RedHat has a far greater number of sites but a slower growth rate, and actually fell this month"

actually using something as simple as groups can achieve this in case you (obviously) didn't know. ACL's work fine and lsacl written in Ruby can be tweaked to run elsewhere. But just in case you don't feel like tweaking, or perhaps you just ... don't know how... ACL Linux can be downloaded. Personally I prefer solaris over most flavors of *nix, and I've been through them all starting about 6 years ago with Linux. As an admin, for financial purposes... I would go with the following in this order... Sun* (including trusted sol), AIX, HPUX, BSD, Linux

From Netcraft

The site www.oktoberfest.de is running Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) (Red-Hat/Linux) PHP/4.1.2 behind a computer running unknown

Why am I not surprised that the site www.devx.com is running Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on Windows 2000 and there's a huge .Net ad on the front page.

I find it VERY hard to take security advice from a website that runs IIS5 on Windows 2000. Considering the recent win2k source leak, I bet hey'll be the first jumping up and down going "you see! you see!" in that typically ignorant way.

According to NetCraft, it is.

Here's what NetCraft shows for SCO today:

OS, Web Server and Hosting History for www.thescogroup.com

OS Server Last changed IP address Netblock Owner

Linux Apache 3-Feb-2004 216.250.128.21 NFT

NetBSD/OpenBSD Apache 2-Feb-2004 216.250.128.21 NFT

And when you go to the the Netblock owner and peruse the SCO entries there, you see that 19 of the 22 SCO servers shown are apparently running linux.

You may draw whatever conclusions you wish from this... :-)

Here's what NetCraft shows for SCO today:

OS, Web Server and Hosting History for www.thescogroup.com

OS Server Last changed IP address Netblock Owner

Linux Apache 3-Feb-2004 216.250.128.21 NFT

NetBSD/OpenBSD Apache 2-Feb-2004 216.250.128.21 NFT

And when you go to the the Netblock owner and peruse the SCO entries there, you see that 19 of the 22 SCO servers shown are apparently running linux.

You may draw whatever conclusions you wish from this... :-)

1. SCO have proven themselves unstable and can be relied on only to make random legal claims with no actual backing.
2. SCO have recent experience only in pissing off their entire potential customer base and making half assed threats.
3. SCO CEO, Darl McBride should be committed.
4. SCO can't even take simple steps to stop a DoS of their own webserver.
5. SCO are currently in a legal quagmire of their own devising.

According to netcraft it is Linux and NetBSD/OpenBSD:

http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=www.thes cogroup.com

SCO had been using Linux in their Web Servers!
And still using Linux in their Web Servers!

SCO had been using Linux in their Web Servers!
And still using Linux in their Web Servers!

So the DOS attack that took out their website last week was normal business operation?

As others have pointed out, their webserver runs Linux, so technically, SCO Unix wasn't hit by the DoS attack.

Oh, wait, they claim Linux is a derivative of SCO Unix... Never mind...