Slashdot Mirror


Security Update 2004-09-07

sizemoresr writes "Security Update 2004-09-07 delivers a number of security enhancements and is recommended for all users of Mac OS X 10.2.8 and later. This update includes the following components: CoreFoundation, IPSec, Kerberos, libpcap, lukemftpd, NetworkConfig, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, PPPDialer, rsync, Safari and tcpdump."

77 comments

  1. Post Install Experiences Here... by commodoresloat · · Score: 3, Funny
    ... guinea pigs!

    ;^)

    1. Re:Post Install Experiences Here... by Hes+Nikke · · Score: 1

      works fine :P

      --
      Don't call me back. Give me a call back. Bye. So yeah. But bye our, well, but alright we are on a shirt this chill.
    2. Re:Post Install Experiences Here... by inio · · Score: 4, Informative

      Downloaded.
      Installed.
      Optimized................ .
      Restarted.
      Checked email.
      Posted comment.

      (dual 1.8 G5)

    3. Re:Post Install Experiences Here... by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 5, Funny

      It seemed to install correctly on my iBook, but on rebooting the Apple logo morphed into a deep red pentagram. Flames then started belching from the optical drive, the screen became a window into the lower reaches of hell, sulphurous fumes vented from the keyboard and all the cables caught fire.

      So, seems to be working okay - haven't noticed any other differences, and it's just as stable as it was before. Kind of disappointing, really...

      --
      Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
    4. Re:Post Install Experiences Here... by jaoswald · · Score: 5, Funny

      So you're saying the interface seems snappier?

    5. Re:Post Install Experiences Here... by ManxStef · · Score: 1, Funny

      Been playing Doom 3 much lately, have we? ;)

      (Yes, I know it's not out for OS X yet; some of us have Apple laptops and PC desktops.)
    6. Re:Post Install Experiences Here... by transient · · Score: 3, Funny

      Only after he zapped his PRAM and rebuilt his desktop.

      --

      irb(main):001:0>
    7. Re:Post Install Experiences Here... by hawaiian717 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think you're posting under the wrong topic. This is Security Update 2004-09-07 for Mac OS X, not Windows XP Service Pack 2.

      --
      End of Line.
    8. Re:Post Install Experiences Here... by macthulhu · · Score: 3, Funny
      Sooo.... somehow you managed to install Windows on an iBook? And it works, you say? Sweet. Now I can go to Wal Mart and buy all the great software titles that are 'Windows Only'!

      Attention Windows-Lovin' Flamers and Trolls:

      This is a joke. Maybe not a super funny joke, but a joke. So, don't get your shorts in a twist over it. Take a deep breath...Hold it...Keep holding it....Aaaaaand release.

      --

      Someday a real rain is gonna come...

    9. Re:Post Install Experiences Here... by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 1

      This is a joke. Maybe not a super funny joke, but a joke. So, don't get your shorts in a twist over it. Take a deep breath...Hold it...Keep holding it....Aaaaaand release.

      *PAAARRRP!!!*

      Ooops!

      --
      Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
    10. Re:Post Install Experiences Here... by raider_red · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Downloaded, installed, restarted. Didn't notice anything different.

      --
      It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
    11. Re:Post Install Experiences Here... by kirk26 · · Score: 1

      No, just hold your breath windows users....

      --
      Linux sucks. It is an underground OS that is completely unstandardized. Linux geeks, get the fuck over yourselves.
    12. Re:Post Install Experiences Here... by teamhasnoi · · Score: 1

      How did you get Doom 3 running on OS X?!?

    13. Re:Post Install Experiences Here... by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 1

      "It seemed to install correctly on my iBook, but on rebooting the Apple logo morphed into a deep red pentagram. Flames then started belching from the optical drive, the screen became a window into the lower reaches of hell, sulphurous fumes vented from the keyboard and all the cables caught fire."

      Doom4 is available already?

      and for the mac?

    14. Re:Post Install Experiences Here... by Ayaress · · Score: 1

      He's obviously not talking about SP2, becaue he said it installed correctly, and implies he was able to reboot thereafter. I've never gotten both those things to happen at the same time with SP2.

    15. Re:Post Install Experiences Here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easy. It was in a box labelled "Marathon" and it was available 10 years ago.

  2. Apple's forced upgrade plans by ZackSchil · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can't believe Apple would do something like this to 10.2 users! I paid $120 for Mac OS X v10.2 and now Apple refuses to fix critical security flaws in my OS, which is not yet 2 years old. I refuse to pay this annual Apple tax! And what's with the one mouse button, overpriced, non-upgradable hardware, combustible batteries, and abnormally long file copy times. I mean come on my 486 box with... wait, what?

    The update IS for 10.2 and 10.3 users? Oh. Good then. I don't really feel like deleting the other stuff I wrote. Good to get it out of the way anyway, I guess.

    Thanks Apple!

    1. Re:Apple's forced upgrade plans by ZackSchil · · Score: 4, Funny

      Dearest Mods,

      Please read comments before moderating them.

      Thanks,

      Someone with a sense of humor

    2. Re:Apple's forced upgrade plans by snuffdiddy23 · · Score: 1

      Exactly, both a textbook GNAA post and also wrong. The link to the kbase article mentions mac os x 10.2.8 as one of the covered operating systems.

    3. Re:Apple's forced upgrade plans by MarsDefenseMinister · · Score: 5, Funny

      I can't believe Apple would do something like this to 10.2 users!

      I can't believe that Apple has 10.2 users. Nice to see that they are expanding the user base.

      --
      No weapon in the arsenals of the world is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men.-Ronald Reagan
    4. Re:Apple's forced upgrade plans by Chris_Jefferson · · Score: 1

      While you laugh.. they still aren't fixing 10.1 and 10.0.. I remember people complaining at microsoft for stopping windows 95 support in 2001, thats a heck of a lot better than apple have managed.

      --
      Combination - fun iPhone puzzling
  3. AH. Refreshing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two security updates in less than a month's time. Doesn't look like a panic job either.
    Nor did they publish a list of applications that won't work after you install.

    Think different... [than micr0s0ft]

    1. Re:AH. Refreshing. by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well there is a big difference in security fixes. OS X and OSS OS's tend to have a lot of little low level security risks that take a quick little patch to fix. While Windows Security Modle is so flawed they are trying crazy to fix things and there solutions are rather complex because there software and other 3rd Party used these security holes to get around other problems in the system that never worked right. Most of the security holes in OSS are little things like buffer overflows where the programmer needs to put a limit on some pointers and arrays. While Microsofts has that too but the know every thime that is affected they have administer rights.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:AH. Refreshing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Insightful? That was completely biased and ill informed opinion and nothing more!

      The fact that there were 15 (FIFTEEN!) security flaws found in OSS software that has been in used for years, sometimes more than a decade should be highly alarming in itself.

    3. Re:AH. Refreshing. by CountBrass · · Score: 1

      Insight is obtained by listening to a persons views even if you do not agree with it. -Me

      Perhaps, if a little pretentious.

      However it seems that 'insightful' is something that can be obtained by simply reciting some platitudes utterly lacking in insight that pander to the mods' prejudices.

      I really can't see that your post added anything very much at all to the discussion.

      --
      Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
  4. It's 3 o Clock and all's well by mojoviper · · Score: 5, Funny

    At least so far. Nothing's tripping up, no "Shock and Awe"-worthy problems. And most importantly, my Ti-book (10.3.5) still doesn't work like a windows machine.

    --
    Si hoc legere scis nimum eruditionis habes sed iliud latine dici non potest.
  5. Worth noting this time... by danamania · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...s that the update is provided for two Panther releases, 10.3.5 AND for 10.3.4.
    From apple's Security Announce list:

    Given the relatively recent release of the Mac OS X v10.3.5 Software
    Update, this security update is available for both Mac OS X v10.3.4
    and Mac OS X v10.3.5. Customers who are still evaluating Mac OS X
    v10.3.5 for large-scale deployment can apply the security update for
    Mac OS X v10.3.4 to increase the security of their systems during the
    evaluation period. After updating to Mac OS X v10.3.5, Security
    Update 2004-09-07 should be installed onto Mac OS X v10.3.5 even if it
    was previously installed on a Mac OS X v10.3.4 system.

    From memory some of the other security updates could be put on before the release they came with, but I wouldn't trust just my memory as far as I could throw it. Anyway, it's specifically noted this time.

    1. Re:Worth noting this time... by kgp · · Score: 4, Interesting
      This is the first time I recall Apple doing a security update that didn't just apply to the current minor version of Mac OS X and the last version of the "legacy OS" 10.2.

      So Apple have released a security update for both 10.3.4 and 10.3.5 which might imply (either/or):
      1. there is a major customer who has not moved to 10.3.5 and they need these security fixes
      2. perhaps they recognize that many xServe admins have not moved up to 10.3.5 yet.
      3. Apple recognizes there is a reason people are not moving from 10.3.4 to 10.3.5 (what might that be?)
      Anyone know the real answer? Inquiring minds and all that.
    2. Re:Worth noting this time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      since the 10.5 update my B&W G3 450 tower, is all screwy. I get about a 1% read from the internal DVD rom, and my external firewire CD-RW only reads when I first turn the power on to the drive enclosure. Camino crawls, seems to read the cach constantly, Safari is working fine. The entire system seems to run a little more slowly. I started to notice issues with 10.4, had hped 10.5 would fix it....nope. This is what I get for not making a system backup.

    3. Re:Worth noting this time... by feloneous+cat · · Score: 1

      "You are standing in an open field west of a white house, with a boarded front door."

      Open mailbox.

      The mailbox is open.

      Examine mailbox.

      You see a letter inside the mailbox

      Read letter.

      Congratulations! You installed the security fix and nothing broke!

      Shrug shoulders. Get on to other computer related stuff.

      --
      IANAL, but I've seen actors play them on TV
  6. Safari bug still there by setesh · · Score: 5, Informative
    Still does not fix the bug where if you load a page that changes a cookie and then immediatelly quit Safari the cookie change is not saved.

    Thought you logged out of your super secret intranet page - no you didnt...

    1. Re:Safari bug still there by MadMoses · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I didn't hear of this bug before. Any more infos? (E.g. define "immediately") Thanks!

      --

      Do not be alarmed. This is only a test.
    2. Re:Safari bug still there by BlueLightning · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That doesn't sound like a security bug to me...

    3. Re:Safari bug still there by oscarmv · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's a Safari bug that hopefully will be corrected in a Safari revision (there's one coming for both Panther and Tiger).

      Should be out in a few weeks I think.

    4. Re:Safari bug still there by setesh · · Score: 1

      Within 5 seconds by my testing

    5. Re:Safari bug still there by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Thought you logged out of your super secret intranet page - no you didnt...

      Surely your server isn't as security unconscious as to trust the client to know whether or not it is still logged in. The server should be tracking that itself.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    6. Re:Safari bug still there by justMichael · · Score: 1
      Still does not fix the bug where if you load a page that changes a cookie and then immediatelly quit Safari the cookie change is not saved.

      Thought you logged out of your super secret intranet page - no you didnt...
      If the developers of your "super secret intranet" are using persistent cookies to track logins they should be shot. Merely quitting your browser application (not closing a window and leaving Safari running) should be sufficient to terminate a logged in session.
    7. Re:Safari bug still there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Still does not fix the bug...

      It's fixed in the soon to be released 1.3.

    8. Re:Safari bug still there by transient · · Score: 1

      Your "super secret intranet page" has its own security problems if it isn't destroying sessions on the server end.

      --

      irb(main):001:0>
  7. Webpages not rendering correctly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Just go ahead and update and try FedEx.com or DirectTV.com

    You may just want to wait a bit

    Keep on Folding! Team MaC OS X rocks! Join Us!

    1. Re:Webpages not rendering correctly by inblosam · · Score: 2, Informative

      Was this problem here before? Looks like both sites have the exact same issue, but from my quick HTML glance I couldn't tell what was causing it.

      Mason-powered site showcase: Utah Homes Now.com

      That was my sig.

    2. Re:Webpages not rendering correctly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes macslash has some coverage of this. My own experiments indicate that the problem is localized to Safari; the mozilla suite (Camino, Mozilla, Firefox) seem all to work fine.

      --MW

    3. Re:Webpages not rendering correctly by Gogo+Dodo · · Score: 4, Informative

      This was a "Security Update", not a general bug fix release, so I don't expect any bugs in Safari got fixed except the security issue.

    4. Re:Webpages not rendering correctly by mark-ss · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What's supposed to not happen with these pages? Fedex.com opens just fine for me (10.3.5, Safari 1.2.3).

    5. Re:Webpages not rendering correctly by cjsnell · · Score: 1

      Mason-powered site showcase: Utah Homes Now.com [utahhomesnow.com]

      That was my sig.


      That's not much of a showcase, bro.

  8. rsync? by numbski · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You mean rsync runs correctly in both user and daemon mode????

    On 10.2?

    Yay! I've been trying to get BackupPC to backup our XServe with no luck at all to this point. Finally! I had tried compiling from sources and from Fink and both failed miserably. Something about an OS-specific bug. w00t!

    --

    Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

    1. Re:rsync? by eLoco · · Score: 5, Informative

      I use the rsync available here because it includes support for HFS+ volumes, meaning it will preserve resource forks. It installs to /usr/local/bin so it doesn't overwrite the existing rsync at /usr/bin. You need to have it installed on all OS X machines that you are syncing between.

      To rsync data that includes files with resource forks from a remote server to a local server via ssh, use something like this:

      /usr/local/bin/rsync -ave ssh --delete --eahfs --rsync-path=/usr/local/bin/rsync \
      <user>@<remoteserver>:<path> <localpath>

      The --eahfs switch is what tells it to preserve resource forks.

      --
      sig != null
  9. killed incoming ftp by ACmtd · · Score: 5, Informative

    This update apparently "secures" the FTP daemon in quite an original way, by rendering it completely inoperable.

    There are a few reports about it on Apple's discussions site.

    The workaround suggested in the above link is to revert to the original ftpd supplied with Panther/Jaguar using the OS X install discs and a tool like Pacifist - though I'm trying to look at the glass as half-full and use this as the kick in the pants I need to start using sftp instead..

    1. Re:killed incoming ftp by mgs1000 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yep, same thing happened to me. So, I just installed PureFTPd, partially because there is a pretty god (and free) management frontend out there for it.

    2. Re:killed incoming ftp by Dahan · · Score: 4, Informative
      Hmm, well that sucks.

      Looks like ftpd was compiled with /usr/etc as its configuration directory, rather than /etc. If you create /usr/etc and copy /etc/ftpusers to /usr/etc/ftpusers, it seems to work.

    3. Re:killed incoming ftp by Dahan · · Score: 4, Informative
      You can also patch the binary to use /etc by running this as root:

      cd /usr/libexec && cp -p ftpd ftpd.orig && printf '/etc\0' | dd of=ftpd bs=1 seek=100252 conv=notrunc

    4. Re:killed incoming ftp by Dahan · · Score: 1

      Oh, I suppose I should mention that the binary patch is for 10.2.8. No idea about 10.3.x.

    5. Re:killed incoming ftp by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 3, Informative
      Even better, ln -s /etc /usr/etc

      Then, you just get a symbolic link (alias) to the path at the other location, and it will pick up any future updates that come your way.

    6. Re:killed incoming ftp by Dahan · · Score: 3, Informative
      Well, I'm expecting that Apple will release a fixed ftpd shortly, so that I won't permanently need a /usr/etc/ftpusers file. Symlinking the entire /etc directory seems like overkill for a workaround for one program, but sure, that's fine too :)

      (Actually, I'm using my patched ftpd, so I don't need /usr/etc in any case).

    7. Re:killed incoming ftp by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1
      This update apparently "secures" the FTP daemon in quite an original way, by rendering it completely inoperable.

      A subsequent reissue of the Security Update fixes this (and the Safari problem with sites using OpenCube's menu stuff). (That page refers to the 10.3.4 client version of OS X, but it later says "Security Update 2004-09-07 v1.1 is available for Mac OS X v10.2.8, Mac OS X v10.3.4, Mac OS X v10.3.5, Mac OS X Server v10.2.8, Mac OS X Server v10.3.4, and Mac OS X Server v10.3.5".)

  10. Er, duh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course, that's the link in the article. Got too used to looking for it in the comments... :-P

  11. Does IPSecuritas still work? by cipher+chort · · Score: 1

    I saw the IPSec update and that makes me a little bit fearful for stability of third-party IPSec tools...

    --
    Someone is WRONG on the Internet!
  12. My dog can't take all these updates by davester666 · · Score: 0, Troll

    He can barely get well enough from the beating the last update gave him when the next one comes around and does it to him again. Next time, I'll see about putting him in a kennel just so the update will leave him alone... Other than the dog, the only other problem I had with the update was that it formatted my HD.

    --
    Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    1. Re:My dog can't take all these updates by davester666 · · Score: 0, Troll

      ...that was a 17" 1.5Ghz PB, running 10.3.5 that was reformatted.

      Heck, after the reinstall, everything seems snappier(tm) as well!

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  13. Not recommended for G4 users, G5 seems ok... by curtlewis · · Score: 4, Informative

    Most of the problems I've encountered are with Safari. The following sites all have similar problems and are entirely unusable with Safari after applying the patch:

    http://www.fedex.com/
    http://www.compusa.com/
    http://www.bestbuy.com/

    I'm sure there are many others. G5 systems do not appear to be affected. G4s are.

    As noted on http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=617 98 :

    Component: Safari
    CVE-ID: CAN-2004-0361
    Available for: Mac OS X 10.2.8, Mac OS X Server 10.2.8
    Impact: A JavaScript array of negative size can cause Safari to access out of bounds memory resulting in an application crash.
    Description: Storing objects into a JavaScript array allocated with negative size can overwrite memory. Safari now stops processing JavaScript programs if an array allocation fails.
    This security enhancement was previously made available in Safari 1.0.3, and is being applied inside the Mac OS X 10.2.8 operating system as an extra layer of protection for customers who have not installed that version of Safari. This is a specific fix for Mac OS X 10.2.8 and the issue does not exist in Mac OS X 10.3 or later systems.
    ----

    This particular fix is specific to 10.2.8 and NOT 10.3 or later, yet appears it may install with the 10.3.x update. This could well be the cause of the problems. This is further supported by the fact that all of the known sites that fail to render properly use JavaScript 1.2 extensively.

    Word is the Safari team is aware of the problem and working on it.

    1. Re:Not recommended for G4 users, G5 seems ok... by Guy+Harris · · Score: 4, Informative
      Most of the problems I've encountered are with Safari. The following sites all have similar problems and are entirely unusable with Safari after applying the patch:

      ...and if those sites update the version of OpenCube's QuickMenu Pro that they're using, to fix the browser type/version check, they'll probably be usable again. See the 9/8/04 item on this site and a 9/8/04 item on this site.

    2. Re:Not recommended for G4 users, G5 seems ok... by curtlewis · · Score: 3, Interesting

      UPDATE:

      The problem exists in QuickMenuPro, a javascript suite that many big sites use. The company that makes it has already posted a patch which, I'm sure, the affected sites will take months to deploy.

      With this latest information in mind, it is probably safe to go ahead and install the security patch on a G4... at least as long as you can wait for any of the affected sites to post the patch. If you can't, hold off until they do.

    3. Re:Not recommended for G4 users, G5 seems ok... by darkstream · · Score: 1

      I'm seeing odd icons on my page that weren't there before the update. I'd like to know if others see the same. Just under the tagboard there will be a column of isolated media control icons that don't do anything. They aren't in my code. I'm thinking Safari is having a problem with the tag now. A quick peek at my site with IE 5, OmniWeb 5, and Camino shows that only Safari displays the mystery icons... http://www.cootey.com/fractals/

      --
      Fun with Inkwell | www.coo
    4. Re:Not recommended for G4 users, G5 seems ok... by darkstream · · Score: 1

      Should have previewed... dirty darn! LOL That would be the iframes tag that I believe is giving Safari fits now.

      --
      Fun with Inkwell | www.coo
  14. Swap file bug not fixed? by jeffasselin · · Score: 2, Informative

    I couldn't find anything so far about the swap file password reveal being fixed or not.

    That's a serious issue that I expected to be fixed soon.

    --
    If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
  15. rsyncX by Cbs228 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The latest Security Update has (predictably) broken my rsyncX install. I was able to fix this by overwriting /usr/bin/rsync (Apple's rsync) with /usr/local/bin/rsync (which is where rsyncX installs by default). However, be sure to RTF-security information first the version of rsync that rsyncX uses (2.6.0) is not secure in daemon mode (use SSH mode instead).

    --
    At our school, we don't earn a degree when we graduate—we earn pi/180 radians
  16. OpenCube's Visual QuickMenu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Looks like that Safari is not correctly rendering some sites that use OpenCube's Visual QuickMenu http://www.opencube.com/
    Other sites that aren't rendering correctly:
    http://www.subaru.com/
    http://www.memcorpinc.com/

    1. Re:OpenCube's Visual QuickMenu by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1
      Looks like that Safari is not correctly rendering some sites that use OpenCube's Visual QuickMenu...

      A subsequent reissue of the Security Update fixes this (and the FTP daemon problem). (That page refers to the 10.3.4 client version of OS X, but it later says "Security Update 2004-09-07 v1.1 is available for Mac OS X v10.2.8, Mac OS X v10.3.4, Mac OS X v10.3.5, Mac OS X Server v10.2.8, Mac OS X Server v10.3.4, and Mac OS X Server v10.3.5".)

  17. Web site display is not Apples fault, see here!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    I did some sleuthing today on a Safari bug that came up just after this latest security update, and the problem is not Apple's fault. It's the fault of OpenCube's QuickMenu Pro product, used by FedEx, CompUSA, Best Buy and others. It causes all kinds of garbage menu text to appear before rendering the rest of the page. I reported the error to OpenCube along with the offending line of code in their tdqm_loader.js file.

    update: They wrote me back that they have a fix for it available on their updates page. Of course, it's not me, but the above websites which need to apply the update. (OpenCube lists several places that use this product on their front page on the left, so if anyone wants to email them to update their software, please do. I've got to get to other things tonight.)

    To verify that this isn't a Safari problem, put this identity string into any browser of your choice: "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/125.4.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/125.9" and go to one of the above sites. The "4" in the WebKit number trips up QuickMenu Pro.


    http://osx.hyperjeff.net

    Good catch Jeff!!
  18. I broke my FTP Access by espek · · Score: 1

    This update changed something in FTP and now I can't FTP into my computer. Any help for this would be greatly appreciated.

  19. mod parent up by cipher+chort · · Score: 2, Informative

    Ahh, at least the culprit is named and shamed!

    --
    Someone is WRONG on the Internet!
  20. FTP fux by steeviant · · Score: 4, Informative

    go to a terminal prompt and type

    sudo ln -s /etc /usr/etc

    As someone pointed out above, Apple mucked up the ftpd compile and made the ftp daemon look in /usr/etc instead /etc for it's config.

  21. Long user names in FTP...? by Inuchance · · Score: 0, Troll

    Just installed this patch, and FTP seems to have broken itself...

    220 inuBook.inuchance.net FTP server (tnftpd 20040810) ready.
    Name (localhost:inuchance):
    331 Password required for inuchanc.

    Also, note that before you start trying to FTP into this server, that it's behind a NAT router.

  22. yo! by theolein · · Score: 1

    whoooooooosaaaaaa!