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'

80 of 422 comments (clear)

  1. Re:http://www.sco.com/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Maybe we should all test it. Right now.

  2. Smoking crack poll by RedWizzard · · Score: 3, Funny

    I like their poll. I wonder how SCO's PR department would spin the fact that 96% of people think SCO are smoking crack.

    1. Re:Smoking crack poll by gl4ss · · Score: 2, Funny

      well it's pretty obvious that ibm paid some hippies to vote.

      .
      you mean you didn't get your cheque?

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:Smoking crack poll by nocomment · · Score: 4, Funny

      probably in one of 2 ways.

      1> They will blame it on IBM

      2> They will say that since they are known for vaporware, that any derivitive "vapors" belong to them. Then they will start to sue drug dealers and junkies charging them a license fee to to continue smoking their crack.

      --
      /* oops I accidentally made a comment, sorry */
      /* http://allyourbasearebelongto.us */
    3. Re:Smoking crack poll by eniu!uine · · Score: 2, Funny

      "2> They will say that since they are known for vaporware, that any derivitive "vapors" belong to them. Then they will start to sue drug dealers and junkies charging them a license fee to to continue smoking their crack."

      I wouldn't put it past them to go after the drug cartels.... in most cases their enforcers are preferable to IBM's lawyers.

  3. DOS too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh, as if the UNIX scandal wasn't bad enough... now they are after DOS as well!!!

    1. Re:DOS too? by Zocalo · · Score: 2, Informative

      What makes that even more funny is that Caldera really did used to own DOS (DR DOS to be precise), but the assets went to Lineo during a coorporate re-org, and from there to DeviceLogics. Some details here and some more here. Embedded DOS? Jeez, and I thought WinCE was bad!

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    2. Re:DOS too? by SiliconJesus101 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, DR-DOS was a beautiful thing. Multitasking 32 Bit DOS :-) You could actually switch between running DOS applications on it.

      --

      "The strong will do what they want, the weak will do what they must."
      -Thucydides

    3. Re:DOS too? by BrynM · · Score: 4, Funny

      Beside your point, but anyone who can orchestrate an attack with DOS is truly l33t. That must be one hell of a batch file.

      --
      US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
    4. Re:DOS too? by southpolesammy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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.
    5. Re:DOS too? by d3faultus3r · · Score: 3, Funny

      No I think that what the attack was was installing ms-dos on SCO's computers. A fate not even SCO deserves!

      --
      read my blog
      musings on politics and technol
  4. Typical zealot reaction by tomstdenis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is why script kiddies are annoying. They find exploits and other scripts/tools and then randomly use them thinking they know what they're doing.

    This is why armchair slashdot readers typically shouldn't be lawyers [myself included], doctors, etc...

    I hope they catch the people doing the DoS attack [probably as they brag how cool the attack is over some l33t IRC channelz] and beat their heads into the ground.

    SCO maybe "evil" but you gotta think before you act!

    Tom

    --
    Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    1. Re:Typical zealot reaction by vsprintf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I hope they catch the people doing the DoS attack [probably as they brag how cool the attack is over some l33t IRC channelz] and beat their heads into the ground.

      Sure, script kiddies deserve whatever knocks they get, but has anyone really shown these are DDoS attacks? What if they are just good, old-fashioned slashdottings? Slashdot often carries two SCO stories a day, and even if the main article doesn't have a link to SCO, one of the links or comments will. I know, I click on them (several times) just to let them know I'm still thinking of them. :)

      SCO maybe "evil" but you gotta think before you act!

      SCO has threatened to sue me unless I fork over hundreds of dollars without providing any evidence to back up their claims. I agree, scripted DDoS is a Very Bad Thing, but I don't feel guilty at all about sucking up their bandwidth by viewing their web pages with the reload button. They asked for my attention, and they got it.

    2. Re:Typical zealot reaction by vsprintf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      SCO might be threatening to sue you, but it seems to me they've already got you wasting your time.

      And we're both reading SCO stories on Slashdot and posting comments about same, and you're talking about someone wasting time? :)

    3. Re:Typical zealot reaction by Pharmboy · · Score: 2, Funny
      ...I don't feel guilty at all about sucking up their bandwidth by viewing their web pages with the reload button.

      Boy, that'll tell 'em!

      SCO might be threatening to sue you, but it seems to me they've already got you wasting your time.

      Guess he didn't tell you he had his reload key remapped to a script:

      #!/bin/bash
      while true
      do
      wget --no-http-keep-alive --delete-after -m -p http://www.sco.com
      done

      and it was on a dual cpu box parked on an OC-3, so maybe his time wasn't completely wasted ;)

      Don't do this at home kiddies, you should go own someone elses box first, or maybe a few boxes....

      Just kidding, go ahead and do it at home.
      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
  5. Yeah well by pclminion · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeah, well tough shit. If they don't like it, they can complain to their ISP to get those SCO criminals booted off their network.
    </sarcasm>

    Sorry, I was just trying to imitate the SPEWS guys ;-)

    1. Re:Yeah well by MuParadigm · · Score: 5, Informative

      "'Stepping aside from the issues of how, architecturally, this would have spilled over into Centershift's domain, it should be known that bystanders are being injured as this war rages on,' Hafen added."

      Problem is, you can't really "step aside" from the architectural issues given the point he is making. The DDoS attacks on SCO have been exclusively aimed, as far as I can tell from the reports, at their *web* sites -- which appear to be located in a Denver co-location.

      If the attacks had been aimed at SCO's mail server, or local ISP connection, then then Hafen might have a point. But unless he's using the Denver co-lo for his office connection and e-mail, then I think he just has a problem with his ISP that is unrelated to the DDoS attacks on SCO.

      Besides which, I'm still not convinced SCO experienced any kind of DoS last weekend. I think they just came down for maintenance, and have since used misleading - but not outright mendacious - statements to "confirm" that they were attacked:

      a) "SCO considered issuing a formal statement in the matter,
      said Stowell, but decided against it."

      Because a formal statement would have been a denial of the
      attack?

      b) Stowell has also told the press that the "latest" attack
      has been reported to "law enforcement authorities".

      If the "latest" attack was in May, then Stowell's statement
      would remain as true as if the attack was in August. Note also
      the vague phrase "law enforcement authorities" rather than
      specifying which agency was contacted, as if Stowell didn't
      want anyone following up on the matter. In the May attack,
      Stowell was very specific as to which agency the attack had
      been reported to - the FBI Cyber Crimes division.

      c) When called, people working for SCO either don't know why the
      web site is down, or say it was down for an upgrade or
      maintenance. I know, because I was one of the people who
      called, and I documented the conversation at Groklaw
      (http://radio.weblogs.com/0120124/, about 2/3 down the page).

      d) The recent outages generally start during non-business hours.
      SCO possibly had a short DoS attack on Friday afternoon, but
      there is no way it kept them down for 3 days; the utter
      vagueness of their public announcements regarding it do not
      lend confidence to the idea that they experienced any DoS
      attack at all; their own employees have consistently told
      callers that the site is/was down for maintenance; sites on
      the same Center 7 network (canopy.com) were responding
      without problems during the SCO outages; and even SCO's
      public statements have confirmed that outages since the
      weekend outage were for maintenance:

      The outage prompted Netcraft to declare that
      SCO was again the target of a DoS attack. However,
      the outage was actually due to preventative
      measures taken by SCO and its hosting service to
      mitigate the effects of future attacks, according
      to company spokesman Marc Modersitzki.
      (http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1233231,00.a sp)

      So, in short, I think that a) SCO didn't experience any DoS attacks, and b) that Centershift / Hafen has problems with their ISP and should get a new one rather than making statements to the press that their Internet problems are due to inadequately verified DoS attacks on SCO's webserver in Denver, hundreds of miles away from Centershift's Salt Lake City offices.

    2. Re:Yeah well by MuParadigm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do you mean something like this? Someone at Newforge has posted that they have done traceroutes to routers on Center 7's network and it tends to confirm the suspicion that SCO isn't experiencing any DoS attacks:


      Well, if it was a DOS how could I access machines behind the same routers the website is on?

      Such as these routers
      c7pub-216-250-136-74.center7.com (216.250.136.74)
      c7pub-216-250-136-98.center7.com (216.250.136.98)
      c7pub-216-250-136-254.center7.co m (216.250.136.254)

      And these machines behind the routers
      fgw.calderasystems.com (216.250.128.253)
      mail.sco.com (216.250.130.37)
      phoenix.ut.caldera.com (216.250.130.1)

      These machines were ALL accessable with NO dropped packets and LOW latency. A simple traceroute from 3 parts of the country (OR, WI, CT) produced the same route from "hs-10-1-1.a01.ptldor01.us.ra.verio.net (157.238.26.129)" on to the endpoint.

      It cannot be a DOS without disrupting traffic to the other machines behind the final router unless the there is some absurd setup like www.sco.com having a 128KB/s link while the router has a 1GB/s link. I do not think this is the case though.

      Besides, you would WANT to attack the Routers instead since they can do something fancy like redirect legitimate HTTP requests to the webserver at a different address while letting the DOS'ing machines continue to think 216.250.140.112 is the correct address.


      And again, even SCO says they are doing maintenance and not experiencing DoS attacks.

  6. Who takes the fall? by Bonker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I highly doubt that SCO is peforming this attack themselves. There are simply too many others willing to do it for them.

    If a SCO executive ordered the self-attack, and a loyal SCO IT person (I want a shot of what he's drinking) carried it out, when the FBI comes calling, how far up the tree would the IT person point when he was arrested?

    If a SCO executive was pinpointed in ordering a DOS (unlikely, but hey, Enron being publicly exposed was unlikely), how would that affect the Linux lawsuit? IANAL, but it seems like SCO execs would have nothing to gain from DOSing theirselves and only fines or Jail-time to face.

    --
    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    1. Re:Who takes the fall? by stwrtpj · · Score: 2, Interesting
      He affirms that he doesn't actually know the guy, but that "[he has been] told enough about his background and how he did it to be pretty sure he is one of us".

      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)
  7. DOS? Perhaps not. by Picass0 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:DOS? Perhaps not. by killthiskid · · Score: 2, Funny
      I honestly don't think Eric Raymond can stop the DoS attackers to stop..

      I think honestly words above english proper not.

      Not a gramma nazi... just thought that sentance read funny enough to point out. Don't hate me =)

      And, no, I'm not off topic, moderators. At this point I would comment on how commenting on a moderator giving me an off topic mod would be self fulling, but I won't, since then it would happen.... oh wait... damn.

  8. Re:Friendly fire... by CaptBubba · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't think so, this is a PR war, and has been from the instant SCO started the FUD campaign. Linux users cannot be seen as a group of geeks with no respect for the law and proper buisness procedures. The very thing SCO needs right now is something to feed to the FUD machine, and the last thing geeks need to give SCO is ammunition.

  9. Maybe it's a subtle plan by lgordon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Perhaps SCO placed the alleged IP infringing code into the linux kernel themselves. Maybe the code contains a timebomb so as to cause a distributed denial of service attack against SCO, giving them more publicity. I wonder when the Underpants Gnomes are going to sue SCO for patent infringement for their unique business model...

    So much for trying to be funny...

  10. Economics by luzrek · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I think that if I were and ISP, and SCO was continually being hammered by denial of service attacks, I would kick them off my servers. If I were a customer of said ISP, or shared the same chunks of cable, I would look for a different way to get service.

    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.

    1. Re:Economics by Sloppy · · Score: 2, Insightful
      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).
      You would reward fraud? Who do you think would be selling all that stock that Linux users would buy?
      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    2. Re:Economics by kardar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      These attacks are just making a bad situation worse. The SCO Group has many lawsuits that have been filed against it; it looks like they don't really have any evidence, and none of this would have happened at all if they had been bought like they wanted to be in the first place.

      Some people may feel that "something needs to be done" about this SCO Group, but I would imagine that the large organizations that have big money backing them are not worried at all. Can we keep using Linux? Yes. Is anyone going to stop us? No. Can the SCO Group file a lawsuit? Yes, they can file it, but that doesn't mean they are going to win. How much money has been saved (and will be saved in the future) by using Linux? It's almost more of a case that Linux is a wonderful operating system that just happens to be free - not that people are putting up with an inferior operating system just so they don't have to pay money. Obviously, Linux is worth the effort defending - it has, does, and will continue to provide millions of people and organizations across the world an excellent value. If someone needs to foot the bill to keep Linux healthy, they would be doing a great service that will benefit all of mankind for decades to come.

      A significant problem is that if the SCO Group goes under, and they have sued you and you have spent money on legal fees, or you have given up and bought their "product", they may be unable to pay those legal fees for you, or refund the license you have been paying them to use their "IP" that was never theirs. This could probably be prevented by requiring the SCO Group to sign an NDA with an arbitration clause prior to disclosing (or attempting to disclose) confidential network data, in order to get an estimate of how much you "owe" them. The NDA and the arbitration clause could be intended for any vendor that would like to give an estimate and could include a "third party", such as a governmental agency, that could handle any legal problems, such as IP violations or unregistered software.

      Or maybe the defendant could ask the judge to allow legal fees to be placed in escrow by the SCO group in case they lose?

      Whether or not the DDOS attacks continue, The SCO Group is in a very bad place right now and the future looks pretty bleak for that organization. DDOS attacks are just making an already pothetic situation even worse. I wonder what's going to happen when they finally go poof? The license reverts back to Novell?

  11. The Fault of the Apache Server by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, if their server had been running proper licensed SCO code then it would not only have survived the continual DoS, but would have shot down the attacking machines in droves...

    ...but no, they just want to demonstrate how crap Apache & Linux is, especially since it is stolen perversion of all of SCO's IP. And what an effective demonstaration it is, why that must be propping up the stock value by about 99%

    ;-)

  12. It just so happens... by cerebralsugar · · Score: 3, Funny

    That the concept of DOS attacks is owned by SCO! SCO developed this technology very early on.

    All those running worms/shell scripts used in DOS attacks can license the IP behind it now! Only $799! (Special Introductory Price).

    --
    Easy guys, I put my pants on one leg at a time. The difference is after I put on my pants I make gold records!
  13. A hyperlink for the lazy by Hatta · · Score: 4, Funny
    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:A hyperlink for the lazy by helix400 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Is it just me, or does SCO's motto "SCO Grows Your Business" sound too much like spam emails?

    2. Re:A hyperlink for the lazy by xmedh02 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Actually, when you search for smoking crack", the first link says: SCO smoking crack. :-)

  14. Re:DOS? or DoS? by genericacct · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yes, MS-DOS was created in Redmond.

    Yes, I am a pedantic geek.

    Please use DoS for Denial of Service, and DOS for Disk Operating System. "of" shouldn't be capitalized.

    Too bad the Deptartment of Transportation had to screw up my little world with DOT. Quit shouting "dot!"

  15. Eh? by MrKinkade · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  16. ca-ching... by donnz · · Score: 5, Funny

    Another US$100k to the senior VP on Tuesday last week.

    Makes it One Million Dollarsin two months.

    Reginald C. Broughton...come on down!

    (so it's OT, but keep watching these bastards).

    --
    -- Free software on every PC on every desk
    1. Re:ca-ching... by donnz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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
    2. Re:ca-ching... by Mesaeus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, what did you expect ? A typical shareholder these days has but ONE thing on his mind. MONEY. How he gets it, doesn't really matter. Insider schemes, pump and dump, or just plain guessing. The important thing for that guy is just to buy low/sell high. And SCO stock happens to be moving quite a lot the last couple of months. Forget about those kinds of losers, they would take stock in Hell itself if that was possible and it was low enough. Trading in SCO stock these days is just another verion of musical chairs. Once the music stops and Darl has to show his 'evidence', there are going to be some greedy bastards that get stuck with the check. That's life, that's how the stock exchange works. Just don't try to interpret SCO ownership as anything else than an attempt to enrich yourself. That's all it is and all it will be.

  17. Bad publicity by stretch0611 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Even though SCO is pretty scummy for its lawsuit, that does not give us the right to attack it with a DoS.

    Eventually SCO will go broke trying to win its laughable lawsuit. IBM has the resources to fight the case and the Open Source Community shouldn't worry about a few lost revenues in the meantime. One of the reasons why Linux has been able to take on Microsoft is the fact the M$ can't undermine the open source revenue stream when it is practically non-existant.

    In the meantime, is there any reason why we should stoop to SCO's level?

    --
    Looking for a job?
    Want your resume written professionally?
    DON'T USE TUNAREZ!!!
  18. Question by Gzip+Christ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Who exactly isn't an innocent bystander here, besides SCO and IBM? SCO has been harming a massive number of innocent bystanders throughout this whole process (for example, the 1,500 Linux-using companies that they sent letters to, costing them legal time at the very least). No, two wrongs don't make a right and it sucks that the DOS attacks are harming innocent bystanders, but why is eWeek focusing on that when SCO is harming so many more innocents?

  19. Server Stats and relevance by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 5, Funny

    Next McBribe will be showing off a server stats chart to stock holders as proof of sco's growing relevance in the high tech world.

  20. Net packet loss by pknut · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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?

    1. Re:Net packet loss by suss · · Score: 3, Funny

      Checking on Xaffire Inc.'s Internet Average it's obvious that there are a few problems.

      Slashdotting a site about internet statistics via a link on a thread about DDoS...

      Now, *that's* Irony for ya, Alanis! (I hope you get it now)

  21. Re:SCO owns DOS too? by gl4ss · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.
  22. Re:I Disagree by Hatta · · Score: 4, Informative

    LSD more often sparks insight or provides a novel point of view rather than causing outright delusions. Cocaine and amphetamines on the other hand can cause outright schizophreniform psychosis if taken for too long. This and the correlation between D2 receptor antagonism and antipsychotic potency is why schizophrenia is thought to be a largely dopaminergic disorder. Though it's becoming clear that glutaminergic and cholinergic systems play a significant role.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  23. There is 0 justification for DOS'ing SCO by tarranp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is absolutley no justification for DOS'ing SCO.

    DOS attacks are the internet equivalent of standing outside someones home playing heavy metal at 140 dB.

    I'm puzzled as to what the guys making the attack hoped to accomplish.

    To punish them for lying about linux? Their reputations are already in the toilet. Only ignorant fools are buying into their claims anyway.

    To protect Linux? If one thinks about it, SCO has not harmed Linux in any meaningful way! The free distro's are there, and will be there for a long time. All they've done is slowed down adoption by the more clueless managers, which is really no big deal. Their legal claims about the GPL being invalid are such arrant nonsense: they won't stand in court. No matter what happens there will always be a GPLed kernel we can use.

    To let them know we think they suck? Well, considering the increasingly defensive and irrational stances that they are taking, I think they already know that. The rest of the world is not buying into their claims. Even if their claims of hundreds of "licenses" sold are not wildly exagerated, that would mean 1% adoption rate.

    To prevent people from doing business with SCO? I think that's pretty unethical. If people want to do business with SCO, let them. It's their choice if they want to throw good money away on vapor-ware of bad product. Would you prevent a stranger from buying cigarettes with his own money?

    I know alot of people think using force to shut people up who say things you don't like is OK. But those people should take a look at the impression this gives to the non-geek world. They just reinforced the impression that OSS proponents are whiny immature people.

    I think the guys behind the attacks scored an own goal.

  24. Not Exactly Innocent... by yoyoboy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  25. Sheesh by xihr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Are people really naive enough to think that DOS attacks don't almost always harm innocent bystanders?

  26. Good excuse... by EverDense · · Score: 3, Funny

    Our corporate e-mail was out for a couple of days earlier this week.
    I'm blaming SCO for it.

    "Sir, looks like a friendly fire incident"

    --
    http://jesus.everdense.com/
  27. www.darlmcbride.com also fine by kjj · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This site seems to be working fine as well.

  28. Re:Innocent? by pclminion · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Center7 is, in my opinion, a legit target.

    The same way the customers in Israeli cafes are a legit target of suicide attacks?

    If they don't want to be blown up, they should just stop supporting Israeli occupation of Palestine! It doesn't matter what their personal opinions are, they are guilty by association!

    Don't be a psychopath. It is not okay to blackmail or extort or terrorize people in order to force them to see things your way. Damaging innocent third parties in an effort to get those parties to put pressure on your enemy, is basically what terrorism is all about.

  29. Canopy is their hosting company... by kuwan · · Score: 2, Informative

    Well, sort of anyway. Center 7 is actually their hosting company, but Center 7 is one of Canopy's main companies, in fact it may be one of the only ones that really makes money which Canopy then uses to fund all the other ones.

    So while Centershift may want to change ISPs, Canopy will probably sue them if they do. Hell, they may even sue them if they don't. That's what seems to happen to anyone that has a contract with a Canopy company.

  30. Groklaw skeptical about Dos by gvc · · Score: 5, Informative
    This piece in Groklaw makes a pretty good case that SCO's problems are unlikely due to DoS. Among their points:
    • SCO refraining from putting out a press release? Anything wrong with this picture?
    • One thing is clear, if it were a denial of service attack, it'd be one for the record books.
  31. I Got Sued By SCO...... by CoyoteGuy · · Score: 5, Funny

    and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt.

    --
    Slashdot.. Land of nerds, trolls, and FlameBait..
    1. Re:I Got Sued By SCO...... by CoyoteGuy · · Score: 2, Funny


      You suck. You suck purely because you didn't tell me where I can order one of those t-shirts at! :-)


      Well to get a T-shirt, just send a $699 introductory priced license fee for each T-Shirt to:

      Darl McBride
      123 SCO Lane
      Cayman Islands
      90210

      Better hurry, once the promotion is over, licensing fee for each t-shirt goes to $1399.

      --
      Slashdot.. Land of nerds, trolls, and FlameBait..
  32. What DDoS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    My company hosts at the same Data Center. That center is a professional setup. They have good redundant internet pipes from multiple providers. A DoS attack based on flooding would be quite difficult. Some other big players are there as well. No one has recieved this collateral damage. I believe CenterShift is having trouble with poor server administration, maybe even some problems with Sobig or variants and are trying to blame someone else for their down time. We keep a close eye on things and if something is happening to SCO it is not hitting other customers.

    On another note, the center is also owned by the Canopy Group and is very Linux friendly. Many of thier comercial offerings involve Linux and their monitoring is based on Cricket. I wonder how they (and other Canopy Group companies) are feeling about this whole mess.

  33. Re:I Disagree by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    "LSD more often sparks insight or provides a novel point of view rather than causing outright delusions. Cocaine and amphetamines on the other hand can cause outright schizophreniform psychosis if taken for too long. This and the correlation between D2 receptor antagonism and antipsychotic potency is why schizophrenia is thought to be a largely dopaminergic disorder. Though it's becoming clear that glutaminergic and cholinergic systems play a significant role."

    Could you please translate this for those of us that smoke crack?

  34. Re:I Disagree by vsprintf · · Score: 3, Funny

    That's exactly what I was telling Timothy Leary when I spoke to him the other day, and he agreed completely.

  35. Re:I Disagree by voudras · · Score: 2

    It would seem that you haven't done too much of either.

    i'll admit that you lost me after the second sentance - but i assume what follows them is supporting bable in erudite form.

    truth of the matter is that your first sentance (and thus the second) are difficult to prove, they can only be generalized,.. approximated (because of the difficulty of assembling an uncontaminated set of test "subjects").

    the first sentance is a real hoot tho - i gotta give you that.
    " LSD more often sparks insight or provides a novel point of view rather than causing outright delusions."

    problem (humor) with it being that ones "novel insight" would often be based on delusional concepts.(and thats not including the hallucinations)

    furthermore, the second sentance adds another "variable" - time.. ever pyramid window panes for 4 days?

    -v

    (p.s. im not *really* attacking your tongue-in-cheek responce to the other post - i just couldnt help saying somthing! =)

  36. Found on the SCOX yahoo msg board by earthforce_1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.
  37. Pattern Recognition by bninja_penguin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How much you want to bet it's niether SCO nor Script kiddies attacking, but a good ol' slashdotting?!?

    I mean, if they are hiring "pattern recognition" experts to determine if code has been copied or changed, a good and proper slashdotting sure has a lot of similarity to a DDoS attack.
    I figure, just by reading what those SCO people release to the press, they not only have trouble distinguishing truth from bull shit, but couldn't tell a slashdotting from a real DDoS attack. Soon, we'll get a press release that there must be IBM spies inside SCO, because everytime they have a press release, their website starts being "attacked" within hours of the release (about the time the story hits /.)

    --
    For those who describe their systems as 'boxen', do you order multiple 'boxen' of corn flakes also?
  38. Re:I Disagree by voudras · · Score: 4, Funny

    Translation:

    Encountering Police while zooted on cocaine is: Scary
    Obvious responce: run like hell

    Encountering Police while looped on stamps is: Scary
    Obvious responce: wet pants laughing

  39. serotonergic vs. dopaminergic fuckedupedness by rhombic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.
  40. Um, no... by msimm · · Score: 4, Funny

    DOS attacks are the internet equivalent of standing outside someones home playing heavy metal at 140 dB.

    Obviously you missed the whole heavy metal thing. Standing outside of someones home playing heavy metal would be about picking up chicks (most likely the daughter of the family who's house your serenading). The SCO/DDOS equivalent would be something like driving around in a drunken stupor taking mailboxes off their posts with a baseball bat (or something equally annoying).

    --
    Quack, quack.
  41. DOS has nothing to do with Linux by penguin7of9 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The tactic of associating peaceful populations with the antisocial or criminal acts of a few militant people is standard behavior in international politics. Politically, it plays really well to one's own crowd to say "the others are evil terrorists, therefore we are justified in 'protecting' ourselves by any means possible".

    We don't assume that Microsoft endorses or orchestrates DOS attacks against Linux sites when attacks occur against Linux sites. Similarly, we shouldn't tie DOS attacks against SCO to the Linux community. People who are launching DOS attacks against anybody are just uncivilized script kiddies. If they happen to be Linux users as well, that's incidental.

    DOS attacks on SCO have nothing to do with Linux or the Linux community. SCO's legal attacks on Linux are outrageous and unfounded, but the Linux community is responding to them with facts and will, if ever presented with a real legal challenge, respond in court.

  42. Likewise... by siskbc · · Score: 2, Funny
    Linux users cannot be seen as a group of geeks with no respect for the law and proper buisness procedures.

    ...SCO can't be seen as an IT company* without a functioning web site. ;)

    Discalimer: yes, I know they're in the lawsuit business now. By reading this post, you acknoqledge that all joke replies are to at least be original.

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  43. We Got DoS'd by weston · · Score: 4, Informative

    I work for a small logo design and creative services shop in a Canopy Group office building (emphasis: we're not a Canopy company, we just rent office space here, because the combination of connectivity and nice space makes sense). A call to our ISP verified last Friday's attack was real; the effects were undeniable. We lost the ability to get in or out of the network for much of the day.

    That might not seem too significant, until I mention the fact that all our sales happen through the web -- not to mention most of our project management interaction with our customers. Hence, we were paralyzed pretty well by the attack. If Friday was going to be a typical day, we lost $4000-$5000 is sales. Not to mention lost money due to lost productive time on projects.

    I don't know how SCO's bottom line was hit, but that was ours, and because we don't have huge padded bank accounts or support of shell-game investors, we really can't afford that.

    Not to mention that the bad publicity is real. Sure, some of us here understand the situation and understand the childish folks who undertook the attack only represent a small portion of open source contributors, users, and supporters. But our VP of tech had some negative things to say about them.

    Moral of the story: yep, DoS attacks hurt innocent bystanders, even some slashdot fanboys who dislike SCO's tactics as much as the next guy but spent too much time unemployed last year and really don't want their current employer hurt. And transitively, DoS attacks hurt the rep of the Open Source community. Really. If you're one of the people inclined to do something like that, think twice.

  44. I agree with this analysis... by ebbomega · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But this begs the question: Uh... what have they been doing lately to prevent it? It seems every day that we keep hearing about DOS attacks on them... For crying out loud... If it's broken, FIX IT!

    No wonder they weren't making any money on their UNIX sales.

    --
    Karma: Non-Heinous
  45. Its just P0Rn by Pro_Piracy_Guy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Sorry, I'll stop downloading P0rn, the net should speed back up in a minute.

  46. SCO Source by El · · Score: 4, Interesting
    From the SCO website: SCOsource is a new business division to manage its UNIX(R) System intellectual property. The charter of the new division is to create new and innovative licensing programs to meet the changing demands of today's market and to protect its intellectual property asset.

    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

  47. No jobs at SCO by overbyj · · Score: 3, Funny

    Go to sco.com and take a look at the employment section. It says "There are currently no job openings at SCO." I wonder why. Aren't they going to be focusing on updating their products soon? Shouldn't they at least be hiring some movers to help clean out their stuff after the big fire sale once they are crushed?

    --
    No trees were harmed in the composition of this; however, numerous electrons were inconvenienced.
  48. Re:I Disagree by 1nsane0ne · · Score: 2, Funny
    LSD more often sparks insight or provides a novel point of view rather than causing outright delusions.

    See original BSD code.

    Like there were people in Berkley in the 60's - 70's and not doing LSD?

  49. Whew! Not that DOS! by bombom · · Score: 2, Funny

    For a moment when I read the title of the story I thought SCO was claiming rights to good ol DOS :)

    --
    IOException - Can't Speak
  50. What is needed here is a *REAL* DoS attack by IBM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    What IBM should do here is be absolutely ruthless.

    Don't just go after The SCO Group, go after
    Canopy. IBM has more patents than God has
    shoestrings. They dug up four in short order that
    were being violated by SCO. Don't stop there.
    Find a patent for every product or service that
    every Canopy backed company sells. Start filing
    injunctions to stop them from selling all
    products and services that they produce.

    So come on, IBM:
    Show them what you can do to threatening little
    companies when you *really* get angry! I'll buy
    a new Thinkpad if you do!

  51. Re:I Disagree by scrote-ma-hote · · Score: 5, Interesting
    IAAMS (Med Student). Basically what he is doing is showing off. But more to the point.

    1. LSD doesn't normally cause delusions.
    2. Cocaine and amphetamines do. They work on a part of the brain, that has to do with the neurotransmitter (a chemical signal) called dopamine.
    3. The way that most anti-psychotic (i.e. anti-schizophrenia drugs work, is to block a type of receptor (the bit that gets the chemical signal), called the D2 receptor.
    4. From this, it is postulated that the delusions you get with schizophrenia are related to having too much dopamine acting on those receptors.
    5. Therefore, cocaine and amphetamines, which increase dopamine at the receptors, probably cause the same delusions as schizophrenia.
    6. There might be other chemicals involved too.

    That probably confused you just as much, but I hope that makes the gibberish make sense.

  52. Please STOP! by Maul · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I know that a lot of people are pissed off at SCO for all of their rampant BS, but DOS attacks do not do jack squat to "help" Linux, Open Source, or otherwise because it makes Linux users look like a bunch of criminals, which is exactly what SCO wants people to think.

    --

    "You spoony bard!" -Tellah

  53. Re:I Disagree by scrote-ma-hote · · Score: 2, Informative
    Had to get my notes out for this one. For a start, I have no idea what the song is on about. However, in general, L-Dopa (The L stands for Levo), is a treatment for Parkinson's disease, in which there is destuction of the dopamine producing cells in the brain. The idea being to top-up the dopamine which isn't being produced, therefore reducing the symptoms of Parkinsons.

    L-Dopa is not dopamine, but a close relative, which gets turned into Dopamine by a couple of enzymes, one of which is in the brain. The reason that you give L-Dopa instead of dopamine is that you have to give high doses to get across what is known as the blood-brain barrier, so it can get into the brain tissue. Dopmaine in the doses you'd need to give, will make you incredibly sick, L-dopa doesn't do this to the same extent.

    Therefore by giving L-Dopa to parkinson's patients, you can get the L-Dopa into the brain, get it converted to Dopamine, and let it work it's magic.

  54. Hosting company also owned by Canopy by mec · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The hosting company is Center 7, which is partially or fully owned by Canopy Group. Canopy Group is the largest shareholder in SCO.

    BTW, Center 7 and Canopy sued Computer Associates recently. They settled for $40 million. Those Canopy Group fuckers are sue-happy pricks. "Contracts are what you use against people you do business with", indeed.

    CA says settles Canopy Group, Center 7 litigation

  55. Their ISP? by base2_celtic · · Score: 2, Funny

    A comment in a recent article here pointed out that their upstream ISP seems to be IBM. I wouldn't want to be the IT guy at SCO who has to raise that issue.

    "Uh, hi... is this IBM?"
    Yes, it is; what can I do for you?"
    "Uh, this is, uh, [edited] at SCO. Someone's DOSing us, and..."
    [uproarious laughter from IBM rep]
    [CLICK]

    --
    Using the holy grail of OSes...
  56. News flash: SCO Changes it's mind again! by Cletus+the+yokel · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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 .sig - Apply here.
  57. SCO mess is actually raising awareness by CySurflex · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I know quite a few people who all of a sudden know a lot more about the GPL than they ever did, thanks to SCO. One of them even installed Linux for the first time, and realized what a great thing open source is.