Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

SDN Switches Not Hard To Compromise, Researcher Says

Posted by timothy on from the onie-contrary-as-they-say-in-bawlamer dept.

alphadogg writes: Software-defined switches hold a lot of promise for network operators, but new research due to be presented at Black Hat will show that security measures haven't quite caught up yet. Gregory Pickett, founder of the Chicago-based security firm Hellfire Security, has developed several attacks against network switches that use Onie, the Linux-based Open Network Install Environment that competes with OpenDaylight. Being able to exploit the vulnerability to put malware on SDN switches would have full visibility into all of the traffic running through the switch, enabling large-scale spying.

105 comments

  1. Not Supprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I recall thinking "Oh, no" when I saw the first HP presentation on the subject...

    1. Re:Not Supprising by Mikkeles · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So long as "features" count for more than security, this will continue.

      --
      Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
    2. Re:Not Supprising by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1, Interesting

      So long as "features" count for more than security, this will continue.

      So long as people waste their time and resources guarding wires rather than systems this will continue. Most of the need for SDN in the first place originates with fools continuing to pursuit castle defense during the space age.

      --
      "Finally, we will access, disclose and preserve personal data, including your content (such as the content of your emails, other private communications or files in private folders), when we have a good faith belief that doing so is necessary."

  2. Bye by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Did you just write "large-scale spying" in a frontpage post? I just deleted my Slashdot user before comenting, cya.

  3. SDN is not a smart idea at this time... by gweihir · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If and when the human race learns to code software that is very hard or impossible to compromise, SDN may have a place, but before that, it is an exceptionally bad idea. It is also not a new bad idea, but an old one that has been renamed. For example, "Active Networking" did try this thing before.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:SDN is not a smart idea at this time... by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      If and when the human race learns to code software that is very hard or impossible to compromise, SDN may have a place, but before that, it is an exceptionally bad idea. It is also not a new bad idea, but an old one that has been renamed. For example, "Active Networking" did try this thing before.

      No system or network is perfectly secure and a SDN can be protected just like any other sensitive and imperfect infra can be protected.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    2. Re:SDN is not a smart idea at this time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not a program it's a hostfile maintained by a "looney tune".

    3. Re:SDN is not a smart idea at this time... by gweihir · · Score: 2

      Who let the insane one in here again?

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    4. Re:SDN is not a smart idea at this time... by Luthe_Faydwire · · Score: 2

      You do understand that all networks are running software today right? More importantly big networks are incredibly hard to upgrade in a timely fashion; primarily due to the problem that in most cases you have to take part of the network offline. Even in fully redundant networks the politics slow the whole upgrade process down. I look forward to the time when we can run a cluster of controllers and upgrade them in service.

    5. Re:SDN is not a smart idea at this time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, so SDN is going to magically correct the "politics" of an upgrade, like notifying customers of possible disruptions of service and getting approvals? Wow, how does it do that?

    6. Re:SDN is not a smart idea at this time... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      after you gave apk crap on his program

      Talking about yourself in the third person makes many a psychiatric warning light go off...

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    7. Re:SDN is not a smart idea at this time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      News flash: "Programmable things are programmable".

      Anything that we've had an ability to code on has been compromised in some sense. Note that even vendor gear can be compromised and most vendor gear has probably already been compromised thanks to efforts from various governments (viz. the NSA). Vendor gear is also compromised (sometimes unknowingly and unwittingly) by their own employees when they make bad security decisions or add support backdoors.

      So what there's a hacking toolkit for switches? There's also Metasploit. This is by no means unique to switches.

    8. Re:SDN is not a smart idea at this time... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      You might still be able to follow Hoare's maxim and make a system so that there are obviously no deficiencies in it.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    9. Re:SDN is not a smart idea at this time... by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      No, it cannot. It does require a complete lack of understanding how networks can and cannot be protected to make such a claim however.

      Is that so?

      Since you are confident enough to make such a statement, I invite you to explain why it is not possible.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    10. Re:SDN is not a smart idea at this time... by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      Incidentally, lack of any detailed and coherent response from you will only confirm that you are just another overly arrogant and obnoxious person on this website whose mouth spits out comments that they make out of ignorance and cannot actually back up with anything substantial.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    11. Re:SDN is not a smart idea at this time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      gweihir's unable to code & merely a blowhard politician http://news.slashdot.org/comme... so as you can see gweihir's all talk, no action, and a bullshit artist talker.

    12. Re:SDN is not a smart idea at this time... by gweihir · · Score: 0

      Nice, self-serving BS. There is absolutely no point in explaining anything to you as you are convinced you already have the absolute truth, while you clearly do not even understand the basics. I encourage you to look up the Dunning-Kruger effect though, and try to understand what it means to be on the left side of the graph.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    13. Re:SDN is not a smart idea at this time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Understand gweihir's the biggest poseur/fake on /. who apk also spanked http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    14. Re:SDN is not a smart idea at this time... by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      Nice, self-serving BS. There is absolutely no point in explaining anything to you as you are convinced you already have the absolute truth, while you clearly do not even understand the basics. I encourage you to look up the Dunning-Kruger effect though, and try to understand what it means to be on the left side of the graph.

      I am not convinced that I know the absolute truth (should such a thing even exist). Hell I could even be wrong and I'd love to learn from whatever you could teach me. I invited you to explain your point to me.

      As I suspected from reading your other posts, you were unable to actually put forth anything to substantiate your casually obnoxious statement.

      Maybe you're right and I have a complete lack of understanding here.

      Maybe,

      Personally I think you opened your mouth and said something that you are incompetent to deliver on.

      My qualifications include the CCIE and the JNCIE, both very low number and neither of them paper, though you probably don't know what I mean by that. Look it up.

      I've spent more than twenty years in securing networks and supporting infrastructure for customers including but not limited to ISPs, banks and phone companies.

      Have a nice day :-)

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
  4. Onie =! OpenDayLigth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As far as I'm concerned, OpenDayLight is not a bare-metal OS installed on the network assets running the Data Plane... ODL is an SDN controller running on the Management Plane. "SDN Ready" switches in general are just regular switches compatible with OpenFlow... the article doesn't make much sense. Let see...

  5. Security updates by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    Given the amount of security updates we had on Linux servers those days, it is not surprising a lot of vulnerabilities exists in embedded Linux systems.

    It would require a lot of work from distribution maintainers and system administrators to keep that stuff ahead of the vulnerability curve?

  6. This is what happens when you move the control... by Zondar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... plane outside the confines of the device and make it communicate over a common (not hardened and not separate) channel/network.

  7. Yep by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2

    I recall thinking "Oh, no" when I saw the first HP presentation on the subject...

    Yep.

    If you can software define the entire switch (or other network device), you can software design an invisible-to-the-rest-of-it tap component for it. B-b

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Yep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You can do this as well for current 'hardware defined' network components. All switch fabric ICs that I know of can transfer packet data to the host cpu, this is normally used to implement the high end L3 features (and of course to allow access to the management CLI/GUI). If you can update the host CPU firmware with a tap component it will be as invisible as this SDN hack. I even know of one ASIC where you could in theory make it capture all data, put ETH/IP/UDP header before it and then send it out. The host cpu would not need to be involved except for setting the initial configuration,

      There is quite some information on the internet about the internals of Cisco and other firmware. Adding 'execute magic packet payload' functionality to most devices would not require much skills.

      The trick is preventing access, rather than using an obscure invisible firmware.

      BTW: Did you know that some Realtek switch chips allow you to update their register values via ethernet? Normally this is used (on 1 port) so you can connect multiple switches to a single managed switch controller. Many unmanaged switches have it enabled by default on all ports.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realtek_Remote_Control_Protocol

  8. The trick is only permiting access... by Karmashock · · Score: 2

    ... to the control interface from a specific port. And then you plug that port into one of your servers that is deep in your security bubble by default... and then you VNC or RDP into that when you want to access the SDN.

    Its when you allow access through any port that things become stupid.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    1. Re:The trick is only permiting access... by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      And then you leave the root keys, and the details on how to access and configure the server, on a trivially accessable wiki, especially with root keys stored unencrypted by developers and admins by policy "because we trust the people we work with" and "because we have a firewall".

    2. Re:The trick is only permiting access... by Karmashock · · Score: 2

      No... The only people that can touch the server are people that are hand picked and trusted. Can they do bad things? Sure. You have to trust someone. But a senior admin betraying you is not the same thing as a shithead hacker walking into your operation and writing "I WAS HERE" with his urine.

      The trick is to backstop exposed systems to the security of secured systems. Where in the security is not actually breached unless the secure systems are breached. And then you make breaching those a matter of certain people needing to be compromised or certain physical machines being physically touched by people or hardware of ill intent. Then you control those people and that hardware. And then breaching THAT security is uncommon. Examples of it failing would be Snowden or the Iran Stuxnet situation. Snowden was given access, downloaded files, and walked off with them. I can think of ways to make that harder. And the Stuxnet thing happened because people were taking thumb drives from unsecured systems to secured systems and not running it through a protocol shift that would filter out rootkits or other nonsense designed to compromise windows or linux systems.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    3. Re:The trick is only permiting access... by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      > No... The only people that can touch the server are people that are hand picked and trusted.

      You seem to be _extremely_ optimistic about most security enviromments. I don't deny that your guidelines are sensible and appropriate, or that they are rigorous and thoughtful. But they're violated, in practice and in policy even in most so-called "secure" environments. As most networks grow and mature, there are extremely frequent holes drilled and policies violated for the ease and convenience of the administrators and developers, for access by those who pay salaries, Even when technologies exist to provide access more safely and rigorously, the attempt to turn off the favorite access tool of a critical developer is the sort of thing that gets people fired.

      Edward Snowden is actually a good example of where policy was being ignored, namely the policy for the NSA not to commit criminal acts against US citizens. He _repeatedly_ reported criminal abuse by the NSA to his own superiors, and tried to use the chain of command to address ongoing criminal activity. He was stonewalled, and repaid the trust placed in him by very correctly whistleblowing. The man deserves a pardon, a medal, and to be on the staff of the US representative to the UN Security Council. His was precisely the kind of case where human involvement in security paid enormous dividends over blind technological obedience.

      Stuxnet was a different situation. It's well known that in a large group of employees, some of them will be security careless, and that a significant number of them will violate the security principles you advocate. They're good principles, but there are going to be violations of them. It's why the most effective security I've worked with is multi-layer: it includes robust backups, regular upgrades, security scans, changes in access credentials, access auditing, sensible password policy, and other tools.

    4. Re:The trick is only permiting access... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um.. Something "deep in your security bubble" is reachable via VNC? .... Neat.

    5. Re:The trick is only permiting access... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to trust someone.

      Slap some bitcoin tech on top of it...problem solved!

    6. Re:The trick is only permiting access... by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      Depends on the implementation, no?

      Many of them are encrypted, proprietary, and sufficiently uncommon that there isn't an off the shelf hack for it.

      That said, I take your point. I'm just trying to point out that you can shield one thing with another. Ideally for the deep deep stuff you need to walk up and touch it to get access. But most people aren't willing to deal with that.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  9. What exactly is a SDN, anyway? by swb · · Score: 2

    It kind of seems cloud-ish in its specifics.

    Is it a generic switching backplane that allows arbitrary software loads and more elaborate centralized configuration, perhaps enabling more exotic topologies?

    How far are we away from this now? Most switches anymore seem like specialist PCs with a zillion NICs that boot some variant of linux or bsd and allow for pretty exotic topologies as it is, limited only by the interconnect hardware they have.

    Or is it something tied to virtualization where its meant to describe networks that only exist in hypervisor clusters?

    1. Re:What exactly is a SDN, anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You know how something like a Cisco 6k L2/L3 switch/router can route and switch, and when it routes the first packet in a flow it can then store the decision out on the blades so that subsequent packets simply get switched, and that routing decision is done using routing logic on a generalized processor in the supervisor module while the switching is done by ASICs? Now imagine that the same thing happens but where the control-plane decision happens using some off-board service that controls all the switches (including perhaps virtual ones in compute hypervisors). Now add in not just ACLs but also firewalls and other networking esoterica.

      That's SDN.

    2. Re:What exactly is a SDN, anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      As I understood it, just a few months ago, only a few SDNs actually were switching on the ASICS, and they were not the freebies.

      Have things changed, and is it now possible to use the ASICs from most SDN projects ?

    3. Re:What exactly is a SDN, anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Depends what you want to do. Most current not extremely-high-end switch fabric ASICs can do approximately what an expensive L2/L3 managed switch can do. This gets you there for 99.9% of traffic. Some exotic configuration can probably not be handled by the ASIC, but these few packets then go through the CPU. As long as you are switching streams (eg, wait for trigger packet, update asic config) the performance loss is minimal. If you are doing heavy per packet things then they all have to go through the CPU. Even then, the performance is not that bad for what you get.

    4. Re:What exactly is a SDN, anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like a great way to introduce risk into a network.

    5. Re:What exactly is a SDN, anyway? by Crazy+Taco · · Score: 1

      How far are we away from this now? Most switches anymore seem like specialist PCs with a zillion NICs that boot some variant of linux or bsd and allow for pretty exotic topologies as it is, limited only by the interconnect hardware they have.

      And that's just the switches. Have a look at a really advanced network device, like the F5 Big-IP load balancer. That loads Linux plus a proprietary real time OS called TMOS, is a full proxy for most common traffic types like TCP, and as a full proxy it can intercept and edit anything that comes through it. And if you don't like the gazillion options it gives you, you can write iRules in the TCL language and apply them to any listener. The iRule is basically just a TCL program, and it can edit the packets and their payload in any way you want as they come through. And all these BigIPs can be remotely controlled by BigIQ, which is F5s centralized controller.

      So in theory, if you compromised the F5 you already had pretty much the same kind of control over traffic the blackhat people are highlighting. But, not everything in your network would run through an F5. I think the big difference today is that everything DOES run through a switch somewhere.

      --
      Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it.
  10. Re: LMAO - I know the feeling... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Why did you downvote the guy? This is his first post that makes sense

    because he's a known spammer and generally a douche. in his own eyes he is always right and anybody who disagrees with him has some sort of personal grudge or jealousy against him. that's the way he is - no dissent is ever legitimate. everything is somehow personal, even things like system configuration and web browsers. you can't argue with people like him, and if you sincerely try, he just convinces himself he's being "persecuted" and pats himself on the back for his unquestioning dedication.

    if you've ever met a religious fanatic, it's not exactly the same thing but it's similar. apk wants to prove to everyone how clever and correct he is, how much smarter he is than anyone who disagrees with him in the slightest. when that doesn't work it's like some kind of bitter defeat, a societal failure to recognize how special he is and how flawless his solutions are. he's known to throw temper tantrums in the form of personal attacks and massive spamming sprees. his hostfile program is his favorite thing to spam us with, sometimes dozens of posts in a single discussion, each one several pages long. he must have a lot of proxies to get around the posting limits as easily as he does.

    in short he's a nuisance and a pest, the kind of person who resists learning and, in all likelihood, has nothing better to do.

  11. Re:This is what happens when you move the control. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, really? And where did you think BGP happened at? Secret encrypted tunnels on dedicated 64Kbps signalling trunks riding physically diverse T1s? Nope (subtract encryption and you have SS7). It's spaced in between your netflix traffic!

  12. Re:This is what happens when you move the control. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not sure that's a good example. From what I've heard BGP is one of a suite of core Internet protocols that only stays intact, despite absolutely frightening naivety and insecurity, because nobody (outside the IETF) knows about it, and the few who do recognize a "Woa, I do NOT want to crash this, even for the lulz" situation when they see it.

  13. ah yes - the new Corporate Buzzword by ruebarb · · Score: 1

    word came down a few months ago from on high - we need to learn how to do SDN and become experts at it - we have none of it in our environment and no one knows how to support it or what our use for it would be - and we're the network guys but Cisco must be trying to sell us something

    or Somewhere...someone...got their hands on a Network Week magazine - one of our dumbass Level 1 phone dorks musta left it in the john.

    --

    ----------
    ah honey, we're all resplendent - Bill Mallonee
    1. Re:ah yes - the new Corporate Buzzword by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Worse still, management might get the idea that the current staff have no clue about SDN, can not ever learn SDN, are therefore now worthless and need to be replaced by consultants. After all, everyone knows that consultants always know their stuff perfectly and are always superior to regular staff. If only the consultants weren't so much more expensive...

    2. Re:ah yes - the new Corporate Buzzword by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Worse still, the management might hire an overseas consultant that manages their client networks through SDN practices.

      After all, this consultant manages the networks for all of the company's competitors.

  14. Software-defined switches .. by nickweller · · Score: 1

    Software-defined switches .. a solution in search of a problem .. discuss ...

    1. Re:Software-defined switches .. by coofercat · · Score: 1

      I don't get it either. I can understand wanting to dynamically open firewall ports here and there (which is also dangerous, and another subject), but I don't get why you'd need to mess with vlans and such like dynamically. When I worked on massive scale, the architects talked about "data centre holes" where you had space available but couldn't use it because of limitations in the network. I assume SDNs solve that problem, but then so does HAProxy instead of using hardware load balancers.

      Either way, I could really use a good explanation of why SDNs are required in a "few hundred" server setup (which lets face it, most of the world works with). Surely you just put a bunch of VM hypervisors on each of your vlans and then start up the VMs on the right hypervisors. If you've got spare hypervisors on one VLAN and none on another, you physically move them (or manually alter the switch vlans). Why you *need* that to be dynamic is still a mystery to me. Anyone know?

    2. Re:Software-defined switches .. by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      There are actually uses. a robust virtualization server can support an SDN to set up a completely internal testing network. This can be far faster, and far cheaper, than bringing in new switches and new cabling and new configuration environments.

    3. Re:Software-defined switches .. by swb · · Score: 1

      You can do this now with VMware, create a vSwitch with no NICs attached and connect machines that can only talk to each other. I think distributed vSwitches can carry this further and extend these across nodes, although as a more expensive licensed feature people usually map these internal test networks to an isolated VLAN so they can span nodes.

    4. Re:Software-defined switches .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A solution : separating the control plane (routing s/w) from the forwarding plane (packet processing asics).

      A problem: bundling them allows Cisco to charge a boat load of money to provide what should be a generic gadget.
      A problem: bundling them makes evolving how the network operates happen only how and when Cisco wants.

    5. Re:Software-defined switches .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think programmable shading. How good were graphics before the first vertex and pixel shaders?

      Programmable things are more versatile - you can do more things and different things with them. You can make them do things we hadn't thought about. It's a good platform for learning new ideas.

    6. Re:Software-defined switches .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Enterprise network guy here. There are a number of potential benefits but a lot has to be hashed out yet. Where it is now is such that moving the control plane to a central location for all your network devices allows you to make tedious checks and changes very rapidly. So say you had 100 sites, and they all had the basic setup. In theory you then manage them all very easily through one control plane, such that a change to all would just be a simple change on the control plane rather than going in each switch of the 100 sites and making the change. In practice any change deployment that requires even a little bit of though behind it is hard to do this way. Sure you can change the NTP server at each site, but you can't really deploy a route map this way yet. So, as it stands, datacenter guys are more excited about this currently. If you just have racks and racks of interconnected switches and servers you can do things like put in design overlays so that networks between the interconnected datacenter devices and just sort of spring to life.

      Eventually where this hopes to end up is where each device no longer has to rely on dynamic protocols to learn routes, and spanning trees and everything else that goes in it. Instead of each devices being it's own thing where people like myself would configure the protocols on said device, it would look to a controller to learn what it is supposed to do. EGPs like BGP might still have a place between autonomous systems, but the routing done within would be handled by the SDN controllers.

  15. Re: LMAO - I know the feeling... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, then he's a typical slashtard.

  16. Re: LMAO - I know the feeling... apk by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

    Because even when the thought makes sense, the presentation is worse than the work of a brain-damaged third-grader?

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  17. Re: LMAO - I know the feeling... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's because apk told the truth of things around slashdot is why.

  18. Poor K.S. Kyosuke: Still running? Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: All you've got is name calling + running from http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    "Because even when the thought makes sense, the presentation is worse than the work of a brain-damaged third-grader?" - by K. S. Kyosuke (729550) on Thursday August 06, 2015 @10:03AM (#50262505)

    Right (sarcasm) - now, stfu, & keep "crying in your cereal" there, K.S. Kyosuke!

    Since, face facts:

    * YOU DON'T EVEN POSSESS THE INTELLIGENCE & EDUCATION OF A 3rd grader apparently as I got the best of you SO damn easily in that link above & you RAN, "Forrest"...!

    APK

    P.S.=> You say that's what I am? Ok - Well, I definitely see you "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" from validly technically proving every point wrong I put out in that link above & there's NO DENYING IT, you fool... apk

  19. You sure ran from my "flawed solution" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject, K.S. Kyosuke posting ac & this post to you http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    * Says it all, lol...

    "how flawless his solutions are. he's known to throw temper tantrums in the form of personal attacks and massive spamming sprees. his hostfile program is his favorite thing to spam us with, sometimes dozens of posts in a single discussion, each one several pages long. he must have a lot of proxies to get around the posting limits as easily as he does." - by K. S. Kyosuke (729550) on Thursday August 06, 2015 @10:03AM (#50262505)

    No proxies required (too slow) - & like vs. my points on hosts files, YOU'RE TOO DAMN STUPID TO FIGURE OUT HOW I DO IT - period, lol... & as usual for you!

    (It's not MY fault you're an undereducated unskilled cretin you know!)

    APK

    P.S.=> You're "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" since you can't prove my points wrong in that link... lol, & you say "my solutions are flawed"? R O T F L M A O!

    Ok - then if they're flawed, then WHY ON EARTH CAN'T YOU VALIDLY PROVE THOSE POINTS WRONG THEN, K.S. Kyosuke?

    Oh, trust me:

    We ALL truly KNOW why, "Forrest" Kyosuke (keep running, boy)... apk

    1. Re:You sure ran from my "flawed solution" by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      I haven't written that comment, despite being in agreement with it. But I guess that this public statement is kind of redundant, because 1) you will never get it into your thick skull and 2) everyone else already understood that anyway.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:You sure ran from my "flawed solution" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who're ya bs'ing but yerself Forrest http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... ? Not us.

    3. Re:You sure ran from my "flawed solution" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hahaha! K.S. Kyosuke's shames palpable as Apk pounds him into the ground. K.S. Kyosuke's run dry of his sockpuppeteered downmods to try to hide it too like the little trolling worm he is.

  20. K.S. Kyosuke, tell you what (again): by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Prove these points wrong, ok? Can ab+ do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (past ads)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C communique
    3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C communique
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C communique
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
    6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam
    9.) Protect vs. phish
    10.) Protect vs. caps
    11.) Get you past a dnsbl
    12.) Keep you off dns request logs
    13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
    14.) Work on anything webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
    15.) Give you easily controlled data
    16.) Do all that & block ads better than addons more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

    * ANSWER ="NO" to each above on ab+ doing it + hosts = already on every device natively.

    APK

    P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

    Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).

    +

    ClarityRay defeats it by dumping addons in use in a browser via native browser methods!

    +

    Ab+'s paid to not do its job http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

    Ab+ adds complexity from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

    What's best?

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    ... apk

  21. K.S. Kyosuke, tell you what (& again): by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Prove these points wrong, ok? Can ublock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C communique
    3.) Protect vs. dyndns botnets + stop C&C communique
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C communique
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (4 reliability)
    6.) Protect vs. redirect poisoned dns
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam
    9.) Protect vs. phishing
    10.) Protect vs. caps
    11.) Get you by dnsbl
    12.) Keep you off dns request logs
    13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded favs
    14.) Work on anything webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
    15.) Give you easily controlled data
    16.) Do those & block ads better than addons more efficiently in cpu + memory use

    * ANSWER ="NO" to each on UBlock doing it as well or @ all!

    APK

    P.S.=> UBlock does less than hosts less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

    Ublock's NOT as efficient:

    Hosts @ 3mb-11mb w/ current data vs. threats + ads - test yourself using my program.

    UBlock uses 63++ MB -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...

    SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

    +

    ClarityRay detects + blocks it by dumping addons in use in a browser via native browser methods!

    +

    UBlock adds complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

    What's better?

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    ... apk

  22. K.S. Kyosuke, tell you what (yet again): by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Prove these points wrong, ok? Can ghostery do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
    3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (reliability)
    6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam
    9.) Protect vs. phishing
    10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
    11.) Get you by a dnsbl
    12.) Keep you off dns request logs
    13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
    14.) Work on anything webbound (e.g. stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
    15.) Give you easily controlled data
    16.) Block ads more efficiently in cpu + memory use vs. addons

    * ANSWER ="NO" to each on Ghostery doing all that let alone as well as hosts do!

    APK

    P.S.=> Addons do less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

    Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

    Addons add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

    ClarityRay DETECTS browser addons like Ghostery & blocks them (not hosts) via native browser methods.

    What's better than ghostery by FAR?

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    ... apkb

    1. Re:K.S. Kyosuke, tell you what (yet again): by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I now crown you King Troll.

    2. Re:K.S. Kyosuke, tell you what (yet again): by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incorrect but better than being "Forrest Gump" like you K.S. Kyosuke http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    3. Re:K.S. Kyosuke, tell you what (yet again): by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apk didn't start it. Look at links apk put up. KSKyosuke n' gweihir did. Posts parent to apk's links to prove it easily. Apk just finished both of them off with facts they can't prove wrong.

  23. K.S. Kyosuke = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & see you @ these 3 fair challenges to you http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... and http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... as well as this one too http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    WHICH YOU'RE GOING TO RUN FROM AS USUAL FOOL - since there's NO WAY to validly technically disprove those points of mine & you KNOW it - or you would've done so by now, & you can't to date (nobody can, truth & fact from reputable sources is like that, moron).

    * :)

    (Yes, I do take GREAT PRIDE in exposing untalented blowhard IMBECILES such as yourself this way... lol!)

    APK

    P.S. => It's great fun seeing you "RUN", Forrest - & every SINGLE TIME you pull this b.s., lol... apk

    1. Re:K.S. Kyosuke = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      I have absolutely no idea what "ab+" is, nor do I care, nor do I understand how it could possibly fix your incomprehensible and borderline psychotic diction if it hasn't done so yet.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:K.S. Kyosuke = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Third person again...

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:K.S. Kyosuke = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" by gweihir · · Score: 0

      He seems to be under the delusion that he has "challenged" me, when I could not care less about him or his "views". Some kind of megalomania, I think. That he posts as AC probably shows that he is at Karma-minimum because most people immediately notice the insanity dripping from his posts.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    4. Re:K.S. Kyosuke = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hahaha! All the weak loser K.S. Kyosuke has is downmods to hide that post apk.

    5. Re:K.S. Kyosuke = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Evidently you do care gweihir, why else reply? Apk spanked you badly here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and from what I read, you began it with him to your dismay, often only able to spout illogical ad hominem attacks his way in response but always running from proving him wrong on his points on hosts' abilities and proving your clear inability to write decent code yourself. That link's where I caught it, reading more in your post history leading me to you here to state this. In much of your post history, you sure talk a lot on coding but when it came down to it, you couldn't show a decent ware you've done compared to apk. You've failed badly on all levels and shouldn't attempt to take on your clear betters in the computer sciences that have done far more of worth than you have.

  24. Apk's right about you gweihir by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All you have's stale illogical ad hominem attacks vs http://news.slashdot.org/comme... and you prove apk's right in that alone by itself in addition to your poor antics "politician" talker!

  25. WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since when does Onie (basically PXE installation for switches) and OpenDaylight (an SDN controller) compete? They do not even remotely compete as they serve completely different purposes.

  26. Again: K.S. Kyosuke = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & keep running K.S. Kyosuke from -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    * :)

    (I love seeing you SQUIRM & pull "evasive maneuvers" you puny little pitiful unskilled + undereducated little troll... lol!)

    APK

    P.S.=> It TRULY "makes my day"... apk

  27. Re:gweihir by ac, Love the +5 you got... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hahahahaha! All the weak loser gweihir has is downmods to hide that post apk.

  28. ac gweihir: On your sockpuppet self-given +5 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: I love it exposing you Forrest -> http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

    * :)

    Additionally: Do you REALLY honestly think you're fooling anyone that it's not you posting by anonymous coward vs. your registered LUSER account on /. now?

    (Hell, no, lol... Get real - it's about as honest as the SOCKPUPPET ADMINISTERED +5 YOUR USELESS POST HAS AFTER YOU GAVE IT TO YOURSELF VIA YOUR SOCKPUPPETS!)

    By the way, moron:

    It IS a program - An excellent one that gives users more speed, security, reliability, + anonymity online doing FAR MORE than crippled weak browser addons yet with FAR LESS resource consumption on many levels ->

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    Which, again (lmao) YOU certainly prove to be true that It's FAR BEYOND YOUR LIMITED MEANS TO CREATE, you mere blowhard "politician", lol...

    APK

    P.S.=> Call me all the names you like but YOUR "SELF-ADMINISTERED +5 BY SOCKPUPPET OF YOURS 'MODERATION'" ALLOWS EVERYONE TO SEE YOU "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" vs. that link above & the challenge put to you which you RUN FROM to NO end... lmao! apk

  29. ac gweihir: On your sockpuppet self-given +5 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: It exposes you Forrest -> http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

    * :)

    Additionally: Do you REALLY honestly think you're fooling anyone that it's not you posting by anonymous coward vs. your registered LUSER account on /. now?

    (Hell, no, lol... Get real - it's about as honest as the SOCKPUPPET ADMINISTERED +5 YOUR USELESS POST HAS AFTER YOU GAVE IT TO YOURSELF VIA YOUR SOCKPUPPETS!)

    By the way, moron:

    It IS a program - An excellent one that gives users more speed, security, reliability, + anonymity online doing FAR MORE than crippled weak browser addons yet with FAR LESS resource consumption on many levels ->

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    Which, again (lmao) YOU certainly prove to be true that It's FAR BEYOND YOUR LIMITED MEANS TO CREATE, you mere blowhard "politician", lol...

    APK

    P.S.=> Call me all the names you like but YOUR "SELF-ADMINISTERED +5 BY SOCKPUPPET OF YOURS 'MODERATION'" ALLOWS EVERYONE TO SEE YOU "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" vs. that link above & the challenge put to you which you RUN FROM to NO end... lmao! apk

  30. LMAO - I know the feeling... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: However, I won't resort to becoming like scum doing it, as you seem to be alluding to!

    WHY?

    Heck - That's EXACTLY what they want you to do, by dragging you down to THEIR LOW LEVEL so they can say "You're no better than me" etc. ...

    "IDIOTS ATTEMPT TO DRAG YOU DOWN TO THEIR LEVEL & BEAT YOU WITH EXPERIENCE..."

    (They're scum after all, & misery LOVES company).

    Me?

    Heh - I just "beat them @ their OWN game" & exhaust their modpoints on them, LETTING THEM BLOW THEM ALL DOING IT TO THEMSELVES!

    LMAO!

    I can easily, since I can post anonymously with NO LIMITS, so I just repost again (& again in perpetuity IF needed) until they "run dry" of their bogus modpoints... outsmarting the WEAK little dolts doing it.

    Want to know how?

    APK

    P.S.=> The "so-called 'moderation system'" that's EASILY SOCKPUPPET (fake accounts) CHEATED to "farm karma" to gain those modpoints to abuse with kowtowing posts to the 'hive mind' here (or from parties your posts *may* offend or threaten, especially their monies for inferior products they produce (as I do)).

    HOWEVER:

    There's a GOOD side - They don't have an UNLIMITED source of those bogusly used modpoints - it CAN be run out (I do it to them ALL THE TIME, lol), & guess what??

    THEN, you win & they're out of bullets with their SINGLE effete little 'weapon' in modpoints - yes, it's that SIMPLE...

    What makes me laugh most???

    For such a bunch of "FREEDOM OF SPEECH" loving people, I've often found those that preach that are the BIGGEST SINGLE ABUSERS OF IT THERE IS, which your comments tend to second & prove, in using their modpoints to attempt to hide others' posts, in some weak attempt to supress them... odd eh? Not - there's a pack of undereducated & unskilled neo-con cheaters around here that don't know shit other than how to cheat forums moderations... apk

  31. Re: LMAO - I know the feeling... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What crap! Apk's proven clever enough to run you out of here http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

  32. Re:This is what happens when you move the control. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As an SDN controller lead developer... who the hell would not use separate and hardened channels/networks?

  33. K.S. Kyosuke = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & see you @ these 3 fair challenges to you http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... , hhttp://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=7798507&cid=50262843 & http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    WHICH YOU'RE GOING TO RUN FROM AS USUAL FOOL!

    (Since there's NO WAY to validly technically disprove those points of mine & you KNOW it - or you would've done so by now, & you can't to date (nobody can, truth & fact from reputable sources are like that, moron)).

    * :)

    (Yes folks - I do take GREAT PRIDE in exposing untalented blowhard IMBECILES such as yourself, K.S. Kyosuke & especially this way, by turning you into "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!", lol... ESPECIALLY ONES like you THAT THINK THEY'RE THE "SiDeWaLk ShRiNk of /.", lol!)

    APK

    P.S. => It's great fun seeing you "RUN", Forrest - & every SINGLE TIME you pull this b.s., lol... apk

  34. K.S. Kyosuke = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & see you @ these 3 fair challenges to you http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... , http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... & http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    WHICH YOU'RE GOING TO RUN FROM AS USUAL FOOL!

    (Since there's NO WAY to validly technically disprove those points of mine & you KNOW it - or you would've done so by now, & you can't to date (nobody can, truth & fact from reputable sources are like that, moron)).

    * :)

    (Yes folks - I do take GREAT PRIDE in exposing untalented blowhard IMBECILES such as yourself, K.S. Kyosuke & especially this way, by turning you into "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!", lol... ESPECIALLY ONES like you THAT THINK THEY'RE THE "SiDeWaLk ShRiNk of /.", lol!)

    APK

    P.S. => It's great fun seeing you "RUN", Forrest - & every SINGLE TIME you pull this b.s., lol... apk

  35. gweihir = an all talk "politician" dolt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & his "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" vs. a fair challenge http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    APK

    P.S.=> Keep on shooting your blowhard done nothing in computing mouth off gweihir - I'll be RIGHT THERE AGAIN to expose your crap yet again (have fun with the shame you'll have to publicly endure here, lmao)... apk

  36. K.S. Kyosuke = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & see you @ these 3 fair challenges to you http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... , http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... & http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    WHICH YOU'RE GOING TO RUN FROM AS USUAL FOOL!

    (Since there's NO WAY to validly technically disprove those points of mine & you KNOW it - or you would've done so by now, & you can't to date (nobody can, truth & fact from reputable sources are like that, moron)).

    * :)

    (Yes folks - I do take GREAT PRIDE in exposing untalented blowhard IMBECILES such as yourself, K.S. Kyosuke & especially this way, by turning you into "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!", lol... ESPECIALLY ONES like you THAT THINK THEY'RE THE "SiDeWaLk ShRiNk of /.", lol!)

    APK

    P.S. => It's great fun seeing you "RUN", Forrest - & every SINGLE TIME you pull this b.s., lol... apk

  37. virtualization by Chirs · · Score: 1

    Cloud computing tied to networking leads to the need to reconfigure the network very flexibly and potentially frequently. This is where SDN comes in.

    Suppose you have a big beefy virtualization host. You run a bunch of VMs on it, some of which might themselves be acting as full-fledged routers pushing gigabits/sec of packets. (Yes, this is possible right now.) You want to have strict control over which VMs can talk to which other VMs, you want to control which virtual networks can connect to which physical networks (or possibly which vlans/vxlans on which physical networks). Now combine this with SR-IOV or PCI passthrough where a given physical ethernet device can be logically switched between different customers depending on which VM it's attached to at any given time.

    1. Re: virtualization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SDN can be useful for virtual system mobility, just don't make silly security assumptions. The purpose of a network is to move data. Any systems attached to a network should be secure in their own.

    2. Re: virtualization by nickweller · · Score: 1

      Thanks all, I learned something new today, slashdot can still deliver the knowledge ...

  38. gweihir = all talk "politician" dolt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & his "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" vs. a fair challenge http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    APK

    P.S.=> Keep on shooting your blowhard done nothing in computing mouth off gweihir - I'll be RIGHT THERE AGAIN to expose your crap yet again (have fun with the shame you'll have to publicly endure here & YOU STARTED IT WITH ME YOU USELESS TROLLING LOSER WITH NO SKILLS BUT LOTS OF MERE "TALK", lmao)... apk

  39. gweihir = an all talk "politician" dolt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & his "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" vs. a fair challenge http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

    APK

    P.S.=> Keep on shooting your blowhard done nothing in computing mouth off gweihir - I'll be RIGHT THERE AGAIN to expose your crap yet again (have fun with the shame you'll have to publicly endure here & YOU STARTED IT WITH ME YOU USELESS TROLLING LOSER WITH NO SKILLS BUT LOTS OF MERE "TALK", lmao)... apk

  40. gweihir, you're a limited menial techie, lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" vs. a fair challenge http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

    * See my subject above? Thanks for proving it via evasion...

    You've proved you're merely a dime-a-dozen MENIAL techie THAT COULDN'T CODE TO SAVE HIS LIFE, lol!

    (... & I've got your number down, weak little troll that you are (totally limited in his skills in computing, obviously, to the "Lowest of the LOW" - mere techie!)

    APK

    P.S.=> Keep on shooting your blowhard done nothing in computing mouth off gweihir - I'll be RIGHT THERE AGAIN to expose your crap yet again (have fun with the shame you'll have to publicly endure here & YOU STARTED IT WITH ME YOU USELESS TROLLING LOSER WITH NO SKILLS BUT LOTS OF MERE "TALK", lmao)... apk

  41. Anyone can talk a good game gweihir by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gweihir, apk fairly challenged you in coding. You ran. Malwarebytes sites recommend apk's code. Do they yours? Do you have any code we can see or use? Apparently not judging by how you ran. Later, I viewed your post history and you try play coder, talking big but showing nothing of worth, which any fool can do, but when the chips are down and you were asked to show you can or did better than apk has, you couldn't do it. He spanked you rightfully and he's right. You're nothing but a forums blowhard and limited techie network admin menial, nothing more.

  42. Don't you mean when YOU can code gweihir? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" vs. a fair challenge http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

    * I find it UTTERLY HILARIOUS seeing a bullshit artist mere talk TROLLING done zero loser like you has the NERVE to state what you did - especially after you RAN in that link above, gweihir... lol!

    FACT: You don't HAVE the ability to code & you have no evidence of any ware you've ever done, much less ones that have gone commercial or are highly esteemed as I have, e.g. MalwareBytes' folks HOSTING & RECOMMENDING my code even (even GOOGLE & BING don't show a DAMN THING for you, loser) & the link above FURTHER evidences it!

    FACT - You're a bullshit blowhard, nothing more - a MERE TECHIE MENIAL @ best/most!

    (FACT: Minus coders like myself, you TECHIE or NETWORK ADMIN MENIALS ARE HELPLESS - just as you've SHOWN yourself to be in that link above!)

    ABOVE ALL ELSE:

    When the likes of MalwareBytes' people host & RECOMMEND YOUR WARE (especially for security as mine is)?

    THEN, you can talk as a peer, you fucking pitiful hot-air windbag wannabe!

    I see you TRY to effetely & vainly play "coder" here, when I KNOW, for a FACT, you're merely a network tech/admin FUCKING MENIAL that merely uses tools that actual coders like MYSELF create for you, USER WITH A BETTER PASSWORD ONLY IN REALITY, merely use!

    Another FACT is you've been a NETWORK ADMIN/TECHIE ONLY FOR 15 FUCKING YEARS... lol, you're not intelligent OR SKILLED ENOUGH to get higher in this field, & the HIGHEST LEVEL OF EVOLUTION, skills-wise IS CODING - after all/again - minus us coders, losers like you can't work @ all!

    APK

    P.S.=> Keep on shooting your blowhard done nothing in computing mouth off gweihir - I'll be RIGHT THERE AGAIN to expose your crap yet again (have fun with the shame you'll have to publicly endure here & YOU STARTED IT WITH ME YOU USELESS TROLLING LOSER WITH NO SKILLS BUT LOTS OF MERE "TALK", lmao)... apk

  43. gweihir: That's "best ya got", blowhard? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" vs. a fair challenge http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

    It's truly UTTERLY HILARIOUS seeing a bullshit artist mere talk TROLLING done zero loser like you has the NERVE to state what you did in the post parent to that & then you RAN after that link above, gweihir... lol!

    FACT: You don't HAVE the ability to code & you have no evidence of any ware you've ever done, much less ones that have gone commercial or are highly esteemed as I have, e.g. MalwareBytes' folks HOSTING & RECOMMENDING my code even -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... (even GOOGLE & BING don't show a DAMN THING for you, loser) & the link above FURTHER evidences it!

    FACT: You're a bullshit blowhard reduced to illogical ad hominem attacks when cornered & nothing more - Why? LOL, you're a MERE TECHIE MENIAL @ best/most!

    FACT: Minus coders like myself, you TECHIE or NETWORK ADMIN MENIALS ARE HELPLESS (as you've SHOWN yourself to be in that link above!)

    FACT: You've been FROZEN as a NETWORK ADMIN/TECHIE ONLY FOR 15 FUCKING YEARS!

    (You're not intelligent OR SKILLED ENOUGH to get higher in this field, & the HIGHEST LEVEL OF EVOLUTION, skills-wise, IS CODING - after all/again - minus us coders, losers like you can't work @ all!)

    * ABOVE ALL ELSE:

    When the likes of MalwareBytes' people host & RECOMMEND YOUR WARE (especially for security as mine is)?

    THEN, you can talk as a peer, you fucking pitiful hot-air windbag wannabe!

    I see you TRY to effetely & vainly play "coder" here, when I KNOW, for a FACT, you're merely a network tech/admin FUCKING MENIAL that merely uses tools that actual coders like MYSELF create for you, USER WITH A BETTER PASSWORD ONLY IN REALITY, merely use!

    APK

    P.S.=> Shoot your blowhard mouth off gweihir & I'll be RIGHT THERE AGAIN to expose you again (shaming you publicly since YOU STARTED IT WITH ME YOU USELESS TROLLING LOSER WITH NO SKILLS BUT LOTS OF MERE "TALK", lmao)... apk

  44. gweihir, your problem's you're a poseur by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" vs. a fair challenge http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

    It's truly UTTERLY HILARIOUS seeing a bullshit artist mere talk TROLLING done zero loser like you has the NERVE to state what you did in the post parent to that & then you RAN after that link above, gweihir... lol!

    FACT: You don't HAVE the ability to code & you have no evidence of any ware you've ever done, much less ones that have gone commercial or are highly esteemed as I have, e.g. MalwareBytes' folks HOSTING & RECOMMENDING my code even -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... (even GOOGLE & BING don't show a DAMN THING for you, loser) & the link above FURTHER evidences it!

    FACT: You're a bullshit blowhard reduced to illogical ad hominem attacks when cornered & nothing more - Why? LOL, you're a MERE TECHIE MENIAL @ best/most!

    FACT: Minus coders like myself, you TECHIE or NETWORK ADMIN MENIALS ARE HELPLESS (as you've SHOWN yourself to be in that link above!)

    FACT: You've been FROZEN as a NETWORK ADMIN/TECHIE ONLY FOR 15 FUCKING YEARS!

    (You're not intelligent OR SKILLED ENOUGH to get higher in this field, & the HIGHEST LEVEL OF EVOLUTION, skills-wise, IS CODING - after all/again - minus us coders, losers like you can't work @ all!)

    * ABOVE ALL ELSE:

    When the likes of MalwareBytes' people host & RECOMMEND YOUR WARE (especially for security as mine is)?

    THEN, you can talk as a peer, you fucking pitiful hot-air windbag wannabe!

    I see you TRY to effetely & vainly play "coder" here, when I KNOW, for a FACT, you're merely a network tech/admin FUCKING MENIAL that merely uses tools that actual coders like MYSELF create for you, USER WITH A BETTER PASSWORD ONLY IN REALITY, merely use!

    APK

    P.S.=> Shoot your blowhard mouth off gweihir & I'll be RIGHT THERE AGAIN to expose you again (shaming you publicly since YOU STARTED IT WITH ME YOU USELESS TROLLING LOSER WITH NO SKILLS BUT LOTS OF MERE "TALK", lmao)... apk

  45. Re: LMAO - I know the feeling... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On religion: APK religiously splatters you ac troll asses every time.

  46. gweihir IS incompetent: READ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" vs. a fair challenge http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

    It's truly UTTERLY HILARIOUS seeing a bullshit artist mere talk TROLLING done zero loser like you has the NERVE to state what you did in the post parent to that & then you RAN after that link above, gweihir... lol!

    FACT: You don't HAVE the ability to code & you have no evidence of any ware you've ever done, much less ones that have gone commercial or are highly esteemed as I have, e.g. MalwareBytes' folks HOSTING & RECOMMENDING my code even -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... (even GOOGLE & BING don't show a DAMN THING for you, loser) & the link above FURTHER evidences it!

    FACT: You're a bullshit blowhard reduced to illogical ad hominem attacks when cornered & nothing more - Why? LOL, you're a MERE TECHIE MENIAL @ best/most!

    FACT: Minus coders like myself, you TECHIE or NETWORK ADMIN MENIALS ARE HELPLESS (as you've SHOWN yourself to be in that link above!)

    FACT: You've been FROZEN as a NETWORK ADMIN/TECHIE ONLY FOR 15 FUCKING YEARS!

    (You're not intelligent OR SKILLED ENOUGH to get higher in this field, & the HIGHEST LEVEL OF EVOLUTION, skills-wise, IS CODING - after all/again - minus us coders, losers like you can't work @ all!)

    * ABOVE ALL ELSE:

    When the likes of MalwareBytes' people host & RECOMMEND YOUR WARE (especially for security as mine is)?

    THEN, you can talk as a peer, you fucking pitiful hot-air windbag wannabe!

    I see you TRY to effetely & vainly play "coder" here, when I KNOW, for a FACT, you're merely a network tech/admin FUCKING MENIAL that merely uses tools that actual coders like MYSELF create for you, USER WITH A BETTER PASSWORD ONLY IN REALITY, merely use!

    APK

    P.S.=> Shoot your blowhard mouth off gweihir & I'll be RIGHT THERE AGAIN to expose you again (shaming you publicly since YOU STARTED IT WITH ME YOU USELESS TROLLING LOSER WITH NO SKILLS BUT LOTS OF MERE "TALK", lmao)... apk