Slashdot Mirror
SCO DOS Harming Innocent Bystanders
An anonymous reader writes "The SCO-IBM-Linux controversy has certainly caused quite a stir. Unfortunately the vigilantes conducting the DOS attacks against SCO are harming innocent by-standers as described in this e-Week story. " Choice conspiracy theory quote: 'Given SCO's behavior recently, it's just as likely that they're attacking themselves in their continued attempt to pump up their stock price'
I thought ESR asked the DoSer(s) to kindly stop DoSing, and they did.
Who's DoSing now?
www.sco.com seems to work for me.
Are we sure that Darl's not making shit up to put on the "we is poor, oppressed SCO being singled out and picked on..." face?
do() || do_not();
http://news.netcraft.com/
The SCO site has been up during business hours in Utah, but has since failed again. Many news sites carried the story that Eric Raymond had spoken to agroup responsible for a Distributed Denial of Service attack on the www.sco.com site and that they agreed to stop. However it appears that this may have been a hoax, or they subsequently changed their minds, or another person decided to continue the attack, or that the timeout on the attack has not yet been reached.
In a similar situation 10 days ago Microsoft chose to deploy Akamai's caching service, which has successfully averted any outages.
Akamai would be more dependable at warding off Distributed Denial of Service attacks than favours from Eric Raymond, but concievably SCO may have difficulty swallowing its pride and buying a service that uses tens of thousands of Linux servers, for which Akamai presumably has not purchased a SCO licence.
Not that I want to endorce vigialantism, but DOS attacks on SCO and its partners could be used to stop other corporations from doing business with them. Perhaps that is the DOS attackers' goal. However, I do not think that the DOS attacks are productive to the goal of getting rid of SCO's attacks on Linux.
IMO, a much better strategy would be for everyone using Linux to start buying SCO stock, and then, as a stock holder action, vote all of SCO's patents and copyrights into the public domain (and then disolve the company).
Galium Arsenide is the material of the future, and always will be.
Since when was there conclusive proof that SCO were actually being hit by DoS/DDoS?
I remember reading elsewhere that it's entirely possible that they've just taken down there site of their own accord.
I've noticed that the net seems to have been particularly slow recently. Checking on Xaffire Inc.'s Internet Average it's obvious that there are a few problems. Could this be a combination of the various DDoS's occuring at the moment and the recent worms?
sorry but http://www.caldera.com/company/drdos.html
says: "EMBEDDED LINUX MOVED TO TOP PRIORITY AT LINEO, INC., FORMERLY KNOWN AS CALDERA THIN CLIENTS, INC.
Lineo's Embedded Linux, Based on Caldera Systems' OpenLinux, is Natural Evolution for Companies With Years of Success in Both Linux and Embedded DOS"
ah well couldn't find much more under 1 minute.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
when the FBI comes calling, how far up the tree would the IT person point when he was arrested?
And how quickly would SCO trot out "most computer crime is perpetrated by insiders" and make him a scapegoat?
The SCO's hosting facility (formerly known as Center7, later spun off as via west) is owned and operated by the Canopy Group. So if the attack is effecting the hosting company, then it is causing harm to SCO indirectly. CenterShift should choose a hosting company that isn't owned by SCO's parent company. If you click on the canopy group link you will see a few other choice companies you might want to choose NOT to do business with: Linux Networx, shame on you - But TrollTech, on the same page as SCO??? All you KDE guys out there might want to think about switching to Gnome, otherwise you are giving a SCO your support.
Are people really naive enough to think that DOS attacks don't almost always harm innocent bystanders?
This site seems to be working fine as well.
IANAL, and this is slightly off topic, (mod me down if you must, but it is interesting SCO related material I haven't seen here) but I found this little gem, which could could spike SCO's guns even if they won:
>>For instance, did you know that, because SCO filed its initial Complaint before it registered its copyright, it's therefore limited by statute to recovering merely $150,000 for any infringements? There are several such Aha! moments awaiting an assiduous reader of this analysis.
Anybody know if this is true?
My rights don't need management.
Have you seen Goodman's paper from last year?
"The serotonergic system and mysticism: could LSD and the nondrug-induced mystical experience share common neural mechanisms?" J Psychoactive Drugs. 2002 Jul-Sep;34(3):263-72.
A bit wacky, but a good read if you're into behavioral neurobiology...
1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual.
I don't know about you, but the DoSer's actions pretty well makes him not one of us in my mind.
Karma: Frotzed (mostly due to the Frobozz Magic Karma Company)
Oh but there is. And he gets options to it at $0.66 a share. Each share dump is about 5,000 or 6,000 shares a time so presumably this fits into some scheme that avoids SEC type investigations.
-- Free software on every PC on every desk
SCO is the owner of the UNIX Operating System Intellectual Property that dates all the way back 1969, when the UNIX System was created at Bell Laboratories. Through a series of mergers and acquisitions, SCO has acquired ownership of the patents, copyrights and core technology associated with the UNIX System. The SCO source division will continue to offer traditional UNIX System licenses to preserve, protect and enhance shareholder value.
Darl, I can tell you're lying... your lips are moving! Care to list exactly which patents SCO owns?
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Hmmm....I wonder if SCO still owned DR-DOS if they would be picking on Microsoft with the same fervor as they're doing with IBM?
Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
No I'm talking about this http://www.drdos.com/fullstory/factstat.html
That probably confused you just as much, but I hope that makes the gibberish make sense.
Unbelieveable... SCO is now backtracking on the whole Linux user lawsuit thing... SCO's PR people in Australia are now claiming that there was never any serious plans to sue Linux companies or commercial Linux companies! This in spite of Darl's statement quite to the contrary just a week ago!
Are they really so stupid as to think that nobody will remember what they've actually said up to this point?
Wanted: One witty yet thought provoking