Don't need to inspect your packets. Set up an organization that monitors the sources of spam and then informs the ISP. If the ISP takes no action then they can be fined or disconnected until they do take action. That would enthuse them greatly to take action against spam. Yes, that would probably get the ISPs attention. As for the monitoring agency - that would be a full-time job requiring endless resources and storage databases, possibly equivalent to the CIA.
one of the simplest solutions is to block outgoing on port 25. Blocking outgoing on port 25 is fine for the average home user (zombie bot central), but for us others it would cause unacceptable problems.
Re: 2007 in Security
on
2007 in Security
·
· Score: 3, Informative
"Educating these users of what their Windows boxes may be barfing out 24/7 is they key to correcting the problem"
No, the key is to make the ISPs legally liable for preventing the viruses getting on/off your desktop and making an OS that don't get viruses from clicking on a URL or opening an attachment. Making ISPs legally liable for viruses and regulating a users software is just one step closer to having "Big Brother" control our lives (this is one of MS's favorite games). I don't want my bandwidth throttled for packet inspection due to legalities caused by some other idiot surfing a pron site and blaming his ISP for the resulting problems. BTW, that OS you are talking about (that don't get viruses from clicking a URL...) is called Unix.
True, most ISPs don't care what transmits on the end-user's bandwidth. Why should they? A user pays for a service which an ISP provides. What a user transmits should be his choice. Educating these users of what their Windows boxes may be barfing out 24/7 is they key to correcting the problem. In reality, most people don't know or care - until performance issues are apparent.
My HP Pavilion dv5000 laptop came with XP preinstalled. The first time I fired it up it, the system wanted me to "agree to the terms" before XP would work. I blanked-out the hard drive anyway, I'm a Linux user. I can't remember where I heard it from, but I think I was told that if you don't agree to the terms & don't install XP, then you can get a refund for the cost of XP. Does anyone know anything about this?
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds good to me. Could you possibly get a grant to start the project? Could be worth millions is successful. :)
No, the key is to make the ISPs legally liable for preventing the viruses getting on/off your desktop and making an OS that don't get viruses from clicking on a URL or opening an attachment. Making ISPs legally liable for viruses and regulating a users software is just one step closer to having "Big Brother" control our lives (this is one of MS's favorite games). I don't want my bandwidth throttled for packet inspection due to legalities caused by some other idiot surfing a pron site and blaming his ISP for the resulting problems. BTW, that OS you are talking about (that don't get viruses from clicking a URL...) is called Unix.
True, most ISPs don't care what transmits on the end-user's bandwidth. Why should they? A user pays for a service which an ISP provides. What a user transmits should be his choice. Educating these users of what their Windows boxes may be barfing out 24/7 is they key to correcting the problem. In reality, most people don't know or care - until performance issues are apparent.
Yea, that's it. Thanks.
My HP Pavilion dv5000 laptop came with XP preinstalled. The first time I fired it up it, the system wanted me to "agree to the terms" before XP would work. I blanked-out the hard drive anyway, I'm a Linux user. I can't remember where I heard it from, but I think I was told that if you don't agree to the terms & don't install XP, then you can get a refund for the cost of XP. Does anyone know anything about this?
If you don't like it, then don't use it :)
Correct, WPA is crackable :)
Take a look here -> http://www.aircrack-ng.org/doku.php Most of the doc/usage info is here also.
RTFM
WPA is very crackable in the hands of a knowledgeable linux user, it just takes a little more time than a 30 sec WEP job. :)