Slashdot Mirror

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine)

APK

P.S.=> You = disgusting butthurt liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks & exchange/outlook in the free model does NOT work with AD specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine). Most people out there don't run a home LAN. They have single systems.

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting butthurt liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks & exchange/outlook in the free model does NOT work with AD specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine). Most people out there don't run a home LAN. They have single systems.

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting butthurt liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks & exchange/outlook in the free model does NOT work with AD specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine). Most people out there don't run a home LAN. They have single systems.

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting butthurt liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POST BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks & exchange/outlook in the free model does NOT work with AD specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine). Most people out there don't run a home LAN. They have single systems.

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting butthurt liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POST BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work w/ exchange/outlook in the free model with AD networks specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine). Most people out there don't run a home LAN. They have single systems.

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting butthurt liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POST BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks since the free model does NOT work with AD specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine). Most people out there don't run a home LAN. They have single systems.

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting butthurt liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POST BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks since the free model does NOT work with AD specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine). Most people out there don't run a home LAN. They have single systems.

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting butthurt liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POST BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks since the free model does NOT work with AD specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine). Most people out there don't run a home LAN. They have single systems.

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting butthurt liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POST BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks since the free model does NOT work with AD specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine). Most people out there don't run a home LAN. They have single systems.

APK

P.S.=> You're a disgusting butthurt liar... apk

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POST BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks since the free model does NOT work with AD specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine). Most people out there don't run a home LAN. They have single systems.

APK

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent back in 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POST BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks since the free model does NOT work with AD specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine). Most people out there don't run a home LAN. They have single systems.

APK

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent back in 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POST BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks since the free model does NOT work with AD specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine). Most people out there don't run a home LAN. They have single systems.

APK

"APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent back in 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

(Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POST BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks since the free model does NOT work with AD specifically you lying little imbecile).

I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine). Most people out there don't run a home LAN. They have single systems.

APK

"Nobody uses hosts files for security" - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @05:53PM (#49746865)

FROM -> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

SpyBot S&D does!

---

NOD32/ESET's says hosts = good security http://slashdot.org/comments.p... as I "overturned" an expert on a false positive on my Hosts program who gave in!

(MalwareBytes' employee VETTED it & hosts + RECOMMENDS it-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

Mr. Oliver Day @ Symantec/Norton does: http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

Bouldin denied it:

"I don't see Oliver Day of SecurityFocus on there" - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @08:43PM (#49747763)

FROM-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

---

Bouldin wrote a ware that secures you + SPEEDS YOU UP (vs antivirus - not as effective vs. online modern threats, mine is stopping infestation BEFORE it gets you & IF in you stops communique BACK to C&C!) security pros second me on? No.

---

Bouldin AGREES hosts give users security, speed, reliability, & anonymity:

"Hosts files are NOT effective at blocking command&control of botnets. I actually agree with most of the rest of the list, but hosts files are not the silver bullet you make them out to be." - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @05:53PM (#49746865)

FROM -> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

I never said hosts "cure all" + challenged him to show where I have - he couldn't.

Then Bouldin RAN vs. https://zeustracker.abuse.ch/m... since served up by host names hosts block.

(He *tried* DGA botnets later & they're ephemerals - LOW infection odds & below KILLS 'em + e.g.: 0.0.0.0 DGABotnetCandC#.com )

---

Bouldin tried Python scripts w/ DNS to rogue DNS server (firewalls stop this)!

Can't sneak it in: I CUTOFF AVENUES TO IT in my security guides:

E.G.-> http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

http://forums.pcpitstop.com/in...

(Based on CIS Tool an esteemed security tool I've put fixes in)

APK

P.S.=> You fail claiming to be a security pro... apk

Bouldin's Golden Top 10++ 'greatest hits' fails

"Nobody uses hosts files for security" - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @05:53PM (#49746865)

FROM -> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

SpyBot S&D does!

---

NOD32/ESET's says hosts = good security http://slashdot.org/comments.p... as I "overturned" an expert on a false positive on my Hosts program who gave in!

(MalwareBytes' employee VETTED it & hosts + RECOMMENDS it-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

Mr. Oliver Day @ Symantec/Norton does: http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

Bouldin denied it:

"I don't see Oliver Day of SecurityFocus on there" - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @08:43PM (#49747763)

FROM-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

---

Bouldin wrote a ware that secures you + SPEEDS YOU UP (vs antivirus - not as effective vs. online modern threats, mine is stopping infestation BEFORE it gets you & IF in you stops communique BACK to C&C!) security pros second me on? No.

---

Bouldin AGREES hosts give users security, speed, reliability, & anonymity:

"Hosts files are NOT effective at blocking command&control of botnets. I actually agree with most of the rest of the list, but hosts files are not the silver bullet you make them out to be." - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @05:53PM (#49746865)

FROM -> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

I never said hosts "cure all" + challenged him to show where I have - he couldn't.

Then Bouldin RAN vs. https://zeustracker.abuse.ch/m... since served up by host names hosts block.

(He *tried* DGA botnets later & they're ephemerals - LOW infection odds & below KILLS 'em + e.g.: 0.0.0.0 DGABotnetCandC#.com )

---

Bouldin tried Python scripts w/ DNS to rogue DNS server (firewalls stop this)!

Can't sneak it in: I CUTOFF AVENUES TO IT in my security guides:

E.G.-> http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

http://forums.pcpitstop.com/in...

(Based on CIS Tool an esteemed security tool I've put fixes in)

APK

P.S.=> See subject... apk

Bouldin's Golden Top 10++ 'greatest hits' fails

"Nobody uses hosts files for security" - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @05:53PM (#49746865)

FROM -> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

SpyBot S&D does!

---

NOD32/ESET's says hosts = good security http://slashdot.org/comments.p... as I "overturned" an expert on a false positive on my Hosts program who gave in!

(MalwareBytes' employee VETTED it & hosts + RECOMMENDS it-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

Mr. Oliver Day @ Symantec/Norton does: http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

Bouldin denied it:

"I don't see Oliver Day of SecurityFocus on there" - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @08:43PM (#49747763)

FROM-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

---

Bouldin wrote a ware that secures you + SPEEDS YOU UP (vs antivirus - not as effective vs. online modern threats, mine is stopping infestation BEFORE it gets you & IF in you stops communique BACK to C&C!) security pros second me on? No.

---

Bouldin AGREES hosts give users security, speed, reliability, & anonymity:

"Hosts files are NOT effective at blocking command&control of botnets. I actually agree with most of the rest of the list, but hosts files are not the silver bullet you make them out to be." - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @05:53PM (#49746865)

FROM -> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

I never said hosts "cure all" + challenged him to show where I have - he couldn't.

Then Bouldin RAN vs. https://zeustracker.abuse.ch/m... since served up by host names hosts block.

(He *tried* DGA botnets later & they're ephemerals - LOW infection odds & below KILLS 'em + e.g.: 0.0.0.0 DGABotnetCandC#.com )

---

Bouldin tried Python scripts w/ DNS to rogue DNS server (firewalls stop this)!

Can't sneak it in: I CUTOFF AVENUES TO IT in my security guides:

E.G.-> http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

http://forums.pcpitstop.com/in...

(Based on CIS Tool an esteemed security tool I've put fixes in)

APK

P.S.=> See subject... apk

"Nobody uses hosts files for security" - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @05:53PM (#49746865)

FROM -> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

SpyBot S&D does!

---

NOD32/ESET's says hosts = good security http://slashdot.org/comments.p... as I "overturned" an expert on a false positive on my Hosts program who gave in!

(MalwareBytes' employee VETTED it & hosts + RECOMMENDS it-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

Mr. Oliver Day @ Symantec/Norton does: http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

Bouldin denied it:

"I don't see Oliver Day of SecurityFocus on there" - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @08:43PM (#49747763)

FROM-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

---

Bouldin wrote a ware that secures you + SPEEDS YOU UP (vs antivirus - not as effective vs. online threats, mine is stopping infestation BEFORE it gets you & IF in you stops communique BACK to C&C!) security pros second me on? No.

---

Bouldin AGREES hosts yield security, speed, reliability, & anonymity:

"Hosts files are NOT effective at blocking command&control of botnets. I actually agree with most of the rest of the list, but hosts files are not the silver bullet you make them out to be." - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @05:53PM (#49746865)

FROM -> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

I never said hosts "cure all" + challenged him to show where I have - he couldn't.

Then Bouldin RAN vs. https://zeustracker.abuse.ch/m... since served up by host names hosts block.

(He *tried* DGA botnets later & they're ephemerals - LOW infection odds & below KILLS 'em + e.g.: 0.0.0.0 DGABotnetCandC#.com )

---

Bouldin tried Python scripts w/ DNS to rogue DNS server (firewalls stop this)!

Can't sneak it in: I CUTOFF AVENUES TO IT in my security guides (that use hosts too):

E.G.-> http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

http://forums.pcpitstop.com/in...

(Based on CIS Tool an esteemed security tool I've put fixes in)

APK

P.S.=> See subject: Prove it after those messes above... apk

"Nobody uses hosts files for security" - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @05:53PM (#49746865)

FROM -> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

SpyBot S&D does!

---

NOD32/ESET's says hosts = good security http://slashdot.org/comments.p... as I "overturned" an expert on a false positive on my Hosts program who gave in!

(MalwareBytes' employee VETTED it & hosts + RECOMMENDS it-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

Mr. Oliver Day @ Symantec/Norton does: http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

Bouldin denied it:

"I don't see Oliver Day of SecurityFocus on there" - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @08:43PM (#49747763)

FROM-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

---

Bouldin wrote a ware that secures you + SPEEDS YOU UP (vs antivirus - not as effective vs. online modern threats, mine is stopping infestation BEFORE it gets you & IF in you stops communique BACK to C&C!) security pros second me on? No.

---

Bouldin AGREES hosts give users security, speed, reliability, & anonymity:

"Hosts files are NOT effective at blocking command&control of botnets. I actually agree with most of the rest of the list, but hosts files are not the silver bullet you make them out to be." - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @05:53PM (#49746865)

FROM -> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

I never said hosts "cure all" + challenged him to show where I have - he couldn't.

Then Bouldin RAN vs. https://zeustracker.abuse.ch/m... since served up by host names hosts block.

(He *tried* DGA botnets later & they're ephemerals - LOW infection odds & below KILLS 'em + e.g.: 0.0.0.0 DGABotnetCandC#.com )

---

Bouldin tried Python scripts w/ DNS to rogue DNS server (firewalls stop this)!

Can't sneak it in: I CUTOFF AVENUES TO IT in my security guides:

E.G.-> http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

http://forums.pcpitstop.com/in...

(Based on CIS Tool an esteemed security tool I've put fixes in)

APK

P.S.=> You fail claiming to be a security pro... apk

Bouldin's Golden Top 10++ 'greatest hits' fails

"Nobody uses hosts files for security" - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @05:53PM (#49746865)

FROM -> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

SpyBot S&D does!

---

NOD32/ESET's says hosts = good security http://slashdot.org/comments.p... as I "overturned" an expert on a false positive on my Hosts program who gave in!

(MalwareBytes' employee VETTED it & hosts + RECOMMENDS it-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

---

Mr. Oliver Day @ Symantec/Norton does: http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

Bouldin denied it:

"I don't see Oliver Day of SecurityFocus on there" - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @08:43PM (#49747763)

FROM-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

---

Bouldin wrote a ware that secures you + SPEEDS YOU UP (vs antivirus - not as effective vs. online modern threats, mine is stopping infestation BEFORE it gets you & IF in you stops communique BACK to C&C!) security pros second me on? No.

---

Bouldin AGREES hosts give users security, speed, reliability, & anonymity:

"Hosts files are NOT effective at blocking command&control of botnets. I actually agree with most of the rest of the list, but hosts files are not the silver bullet you make them out to be." - by bouldin (828821) on Thursday May 21, 2015 @05:53PM (#49746865)

FROM -> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

I never said hosts "cure all" + challenged him to show where I have - he couldn't.

Then Bouldin RAN vs. https://zeustracker.abuse.ch/m... since served up by host names hosts block.

(He *tried* DGA botnets later & they're ephemerals - LOW infection odds & below KILLS 'em + e.g.: 0.0.0.0 DGABotnetCandC#.com )

---

Bouldin tried Python scripts w/ DNS to rogue DNS server (firewalls stop this)!

Can't sneak it in: I CUTOFF AVENUES TO IT in my security guides:

E.G.-> http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

http://forums.pcpitstop.com/in...

(Based on CIS Tool an esteemed security tool I've put fixes in)

APK

P.S.=> You fail... apk

For action oriented games on a console, a locked 60 fps rate is the "gold standard" and is becoming almost mandatory for twitch-shooters, precision driving games and other genres that rely on rapid response times.

This might explain their recent comments:

Guérin had backup from the 30FPS camp, with Assassin's Creed Unity's Creative Director, Alex Amancio chiming in, saying: "30 was our goal, it feels more cinematic. 60 is really good for a shooter, action adventure not so much. It actually feels better for people when it's at that 30fps. It also lets us push the limits of everything to the maximum. It's like when people start asking about resolution. Is it the number of the quality of the pixels that you want? If the game looks gorgeous, who cares about the number?".

Of course, then they have trouble even hitting that 30fps, even after trying to lower people's expectations...

It might be wrong, but it's not a *typo* -- that figure is from the PC Mag article -- "(though the screen itself is a mere 1928-by-1080-pixel resolution)." ...

A slightly unusual resolution number, but by no means crazy: http://www.tweaktown.com/news/...

If that number is wrong, would be happy to update!

timothy

I didn't know that but I'm pretty sure planned or existing designs are at PCIe 2.0, ditto the M2 format.
See this Asus Z87 motherboard prototype
http://www.tweaktown.com/artic...
SATA express was for Z97, and it was canned.. well that doesn't prevent you from including it on a piece of hardware. I have no problems imagining the spec supports PCIe 3.0, it's an easy and logical upgrade. Simply what exists now runs at 2.0, and 2.0 is what comes out of the motherboard's chipset.

I was reading this review of Slashdot Beta made last October, which shows a variety of screenshots and also has explanations from Timothy in it.

http://www.tweaktown.com/news/33368/slashdot-launches-redesigned-website-in-beta-form-we-check-it-out/index.html

Honestly, I was impressed by at least some of the reasoning, and I can see how some changes would actually be positive. The problem, though, is that not all the changes are good, and it's far too much at once. There is a potential to lose what is special about Slashdot including its moderation system. They need to examine Beta and see and what needs to change for it to be accepted by the Slashdot community. Off the top of my head:

1. Less whitespace, fewer pictures: Slashdot is all about the text and what the community writes here. It needs to be clear and easy to see a lot of information at one time. How many times do we have to say this? Just change the fucking CSS already.
2. The moderation system needs to either stay the same or change only slightly. Major changes are going to disrupt the community and the flow of the discussion. Nobody wants Slashdot reduced to +1 and -1 like this is Facebook and we're all retards posting pictures of hamburgers and ugly babies.
3. It would be nice if someone from Dice had the balls or the ovaries enough to make a formal apology to the community about how this has been handled. This isn't all Timothy's problem, and he shouldn't have to take all the heat. The future direction of Slashdot is the responsibility of Dice and Alice, so they should be responding and taking responsibility.
4. Stop forcing everyone to switch over and stop forcing redirection until the actual site is finished. To do otherwise is confusing and disrespectful. Wait until you have a finished product.
5. Do a better job explaining everything to the community and respecting the community. Hell, we would be doing a lot of this work for you and making recommendations for you, but Beta was forced on everyone without proper feedback (not to mention the fact that Beta is still unusable and broken).

Here's a real and serious recommendation for Timothy if he wants Beta to eventually succeed without disrupting the Slashdot community: do redirections one day out of the week, and on that one day, have a story posted by Timothy asking the community for feedback -- one day each week for experimentation ("Slashdot Labs Day"). Then for the next 6 days, they can fix the site, while readers continue to use the classic interface. Keep doing that until the big problems in Beta are ironed out and the community is halfway satisfied with it. That is seriously a simple and reliable way that they could fix this and make people happy again. You can take that one to the bank. Unfortunately I don't know if they have the sense to do so because they haven't accepted feedback very well and they haven't kept in contact with the community.

Had broken it every winter since 1971? Because in australia last year they had to add 2 colors to the temperature charts because how hot things were then, and this year things aren't so far from that, and if 2 years is not enough you have the previous 40 contiguous years where the same trend was there. Thats the difference between long standing climate trends and the weather in a particular season of a limited area. Is the forest the one that matters, not the tree you just stumbled upon. And if you can see the forest because you are not high enough, maybe you should check what the people that can see the whole forest say. The cold fact is that the world as a whole is getting hotter.

http://www.tweaktown.com/news/34196/google-glass-owner-asked-to-take-his-glass-off-at-seattle-diner/index.html

Meinert says "it's all about privacy" and his business partner, Jason Lajeunesse, told Forbes "It's one thing to take out a camera and capture a moment, people see you doing it, they have a chance to step out if the want to. With Glass people don't have a chance to do that. We want our customers to feel comfortable, not like they're being watched."

Since the link to the article seems slashdotted, here's one to another about the same incident.

http://www.tweaktown.com/news/34196/google-glass-owner-asked-to-take-his-glass-off-at-seattle-diner/index.html

Same guy owns both places.

Oh, and the glasshole customer tried to make trouble for the waitress who was just implementing the policy established by the owner.

I believe this is intel's "NGFF" or "Next Gen Form Factor" -- I think the trade name is now m.2 . This format which apparently is a hybrid pcie-e and sata form factor. I guess the electrical signals are there for sata? But these devices can operate at pci-e x2 or x4. http://www.techpowerup.com/178188/intel-ssd-530-in-ngff-form-factor-pictured-arrives-in-q2.html

Look familiar?
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/27850/adata_shows_working_next_generation_form_factor_ngff_on_video_at_ces/index.html

Apple seems to have their own "extra long" variety (maybe) -- possibly to get at capacities around 1tb?

The shrink from 22 to 32nm is a staggering size change - 33% finer lithography - and it uses their much-hyped 3D transistor technology on top of things. Yet, Ivy Bridge, being just a shrink of the older Sandy Bridge die, shows no improvements over the 32nm version. Traditionally, Intel has always been able to show lower power consumption and more than a tangible performance improvement when just doing a process shrink, but the Ivy Bridge does nothing extra in terms of performance and consumes not lower power than its older 32nm sibling - and let's not mention the inefficient heat packaging causing temperatures hotter than the 32nm Sandy Bridge. There's a problem here, Intel.

While I will accept you reversed some numbers (the shrink was from 32 to 22, not the other way around) and Intel is using tri-gate transistors, most everything else you describe is just flat out wrong. Ivy Bridge DOES show lower power consumption at stock voltages (TDPs of 77W vs 95W are a testament to that), and it is higher performance at the lower power consumption (though not by huge amounts, nor was it intended to be). Since it is lower power than Sandy Bridge at the same frequency, it is not having any issues related to thermals and packaging.

Now, if you want to rant about the fact that it doesn't handle overvoltage well for overclocking purposes, that is fine, but it is a separate discussion compared to stock. What you are seeing now is that Intel (probably extremely wisely for the market they are chasing most heavily) has tuned in their process node for stock voltages, but this is resulting in very leaky transistors at high voltages. Additionally, while the current packaging has the ability to remove heat just fine at stock voltages, when you start leaking too much the heat builds up too quickly- which certainly is a 22nm node issue and not actually a packaging issue. Quite possibly, though how far in the future I can't begin to guess, they will probably tweak the process for the Extreme Edition CPUS to make them handle an overclock without leaking so much, but that will take some time learning how they can play with the various knobs to get what they want without destroying what they need.

This leaves me with the feeling that the only problem here is your expectations of a CPU that was manufactured with the intent of taking the mobile market by storm (and they have tuned the process properly for that) when what you want is an overclocking king. Let's see how they tune the process technology for the Extreme Edition (and hopefully copy into other desktop-bound CPUS) before any decisions are made that they have screwed the pooch on being able to overclock.

A roundup of reviews from the usual major sites as well as others not mentioned in the summary above: Overclockers Review, Anandtech Review, Anandtech Undervolting/Overclocking, HardwareSecrets, Bit-tech, PCPer, Tweaktown, Hard OCP, The Inquirer, Techspot, Computer Shopper, Tom's Hardware, ExtremeTech, PC Mag, Overclockers Club, and Guru 3d

Most notably android doesn't include what anyone else makes off the phones.

Android: "$2".
developers: $50

manufacturers: some amount.

Since apple is involved with all of the above, they're naturally including all of that. Which is not exactly an apples to apples comparison.

Android manufactures aren't exactly getting rich either....

http://www.tweaktown.com/news/23334/apple_and_samsung_make_up_95_of_all_handset_profits_in_q4_2011/index.html

"A new study from Canaccord Genuity is claiming that Apple and Samsung account for a combined 95-percent of all handset profits in Q4 2011. Apple accounts for 80-percent of profits, while the company behind the GALAXY range of handsets, Samsung, takes 15-percent. The remaining 5-percent is left to all of the other manufacturers."

Or, in other words, hell to the no.

If I wanted that speed, I'd get an SSD.
And even then, I can easily just mount that crap on a DRAM drive if I REALLY needed the speed.

Games like, say, Minecraft, or audio / video / picture temp caches that constantly change, you'd be better off just doing that. SSDs horribly fail. A DRAM drive would last you a lifetime unless you have constant brownouts or blackouts, or have a very noise powerline.
Even just making a virtual drive in RAM if you have enough of it would do fine.
The downside? It'd probably cost a few SSDs worth to buy, unless you DIY it.
Actually, I forgot Gigabyte made this. Not even sure what's happening or happened with it.
Gigabyte i-ram.

• Overclockers
• pcperspective
• Hardware canucks
• hardocp
• neoseeker
• tweaktown
• hexus

Here's also an interesting story where a guy pushed a dual CPU 440BX board to its maximum. It has 1.05GHz P3 processors and can even run stuff like Red Alert 3.

http://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/31535-oldschool-gigabyte-board-still-kickin-6bxds.html

Summary is a bit light on sources... pcper.com is good, but you should be looking at multiple reviews to get a well rounded perspective.

Here's a few:
http://www.overclockers.com/intel-i7-2600k-sandy-bridge-review
http://legitreviews.com/article/1501/1/
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/3754/intel_core_i7_2600k_and_core_i5_2500k_sandy_bridge_cpus/index.html
http://www.hitechlegion.com/reviews/processors/7689-intel-core-i5-2500k-processor-review

AC, please read the post before replying. They said that the AC1 lagged due to it's DRM, not because it ways 'aways on'. And its not uncommon of DRM causing lag (the DRM does use up some resources to run on top of the game), in fact the game Elder Scrolls 3 Morrowind had many sources (including at least one magazine) suggesting to use a no-cd crack to speed it up (gave you on average 5fps). Their friend was concerned that AC2 would have even more DRM (the internet connection plus other possible DRM) which could slow down their computer even more and thats why they didn't buy it.

Really? Because here's a SATA 6G drive reading over 350MB/s.

You can roll your own PoE, just run half-duplex connections to your kit (1/2 and 3/6 pairs, IIRC) and use the other wires in the bundle to carry power.

Interesting, but I'd rather not for a number of reasons.
1. Future upgradeability - gigabit requires the extra lines, and at 600mbit, even at half duplex a N device can be fast enough to saturate a 100mb connection. Especially if you get a dual radio router and run networks on both the 2.4 and 5 ghz range.
2. Selling - I don't want to leave landmines for a future purchaser of my house.
3. Trouble for me - I get a new router, I may have to make MORE adapters for my wireless router to make it work.

Remember that this would be a NEW BUILD house, so running more wire is cheap. I'd rather just pay the $20-60 to have 2 ethernet lines run to the spots I plan on possibly having routers than to mess with half-duplexing. Heck, it's about the same price to have them put a power slot next to it as well.

One of the main selling points to POE wireless points, in my opinion, isn't for NEW builds, it's for when you're retrofitting. That way you only have to run the network cable over to where you're going to mount it to on the ceiling, instead of also having to run a power cable, doubling the infrastructure upgrade costs. It's marginally neater as well.

As for the wall power jacks from radio shack; the local one is pretty horribly canted towards consumer electronics, not 'do it yourself'. I'd end up using the local menards or ordering off the internet.

Anyways, with new build you might as well put a proper AC jack there, it's more versatile.

The only reason for having them is paranoia anyways. A centrally located wiring closet with an AP should work, but a couple spots I can put APs in would ensure excellent connectivity in the living room, bedrooms, even garage* and yard(if I want it).

Heck, the 'TRENDnet TEW-653AP' are almost just right for my purposes though. Still a bit heavy on features - I'm thinking more of a central controller doing the DHCP and firewall stuff, kinda like how aruba networks work(dumb AP that essentially tunnels all of it's traffic via VPN to a central controller that decides what to do with it). The other point is that it's 2.4 ghz only. Produce a dual radio 2.4/5 Ghz version and I'm sold(as long as reliability, range are still adequate).

I don't know if it's a problem with 802.11G or a problem with DD-WRT but if I have a file transfer going I get dropouts, and my two APs are on different channels with no others visible in the area since I live in the boonies.

Possibly your router; I've done LARGE data transfers over 802.11G without problems other than 'takes forever'. I'm much happier now that I'm running on N, and one router easily covers the whole house. The whole reason for having multiple APs in my 'New' house is because it'll be bigger and the closet will be in the basement. I'd probably get a 8 port switch or something anyways and hardwire stuff like game stations and my desktop machines. Server/s will go in the closet(remember to have cooling to that closet).

*for looking up advice on car maintenance/repairs, maybe?

You're going to love the Android slates then. Multitasking is a standard feature of course since Android is based on Linux. Preemptive multitasking (not the hopeless cooperative multitasking of Windows < W95) has been a feature of Linux since before Linus unleashed it on the public in 1991. Unix and other BSD based operating systems have had it since 1969 of course. You will probably be able to install a BSD based operating system on your Android slate before too long after it's introduced because those guys are legendary for getting their stuff to run on almost anything that executes instructions.

Anyway, the iPhone OS of the iPad has multitasking (it's based on Unix technologies too) - Apple just doesn't allow it for third party apps. That's one reason why the iPad will be my slate of last recourse. Getting Apple gear to work with a real OS is a pain. I would frankly rather Tuxify the HP slate that comes with W7 and the Intel Atom, even though the battery life won't be there, because my computers belong to me and they do what I tell them to or they get disassembled - sometimes in a most informal fashion. The Windows tax is a nuisance in that case, but I might be willing to pay it. By far I would prefer an Android slate with Snapdragon or equivalent (hardware video decode and >1GHz CPU).

BTW, we could have had this stuff nearly a year ago. Asus had an ARM (Snapdragon/Android) netbook nearly a year ago that was looking to be the darling of Computex but someone gave them a call and they "disappeared it" in the middle of the trade show. Keep your eye on this topic, as no doubt we'll be seeing an antitrust investigation one day that enlightens us about what happened here. I think ASUS is going to regret playing ball here - that thing was sweet, they had it, and they let it go - they caved. They probably got a one year discount on XP licenses in return. Sigh.

The new OCZ SSDs, while a welcome addition to the market aren't anywhere near "fastest storage".
Crucial RealSSD C300: http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/3118/crucial_realssd_c300_256gb_sata_6gbps_solid_state_disk/index5.html
Fusion-IO: http://storage-news.com/2009/10/29/hothardware-shows-first-benchmarks-for-fusion-io-drive/