These guys were pushing hardcore porno spam, from what I read. How about going after the domain owners as well? There's a lot of information that could be useful to know about the people they were whoring out spam for:
Who owns/owned the domain(s) that were spamvertised?
Where were the domains registered?
Where were the domains hosted?
Who was involved in the actual porn? Some people are suggesting kiddie porn?
This information can help to determine if other laws were broken, and I'd suspect other laws were. If this operates like the usual internet drug scams that we see all the time, there were likely a large number of domains involved that were spamvertised. If we know where the domain owners were residing, they may also have committed crimes (particularly if they were selling kiddie porn). Similarly, if we can find this, we can see if the registrars that they purchased the domains from may have also been knowingly working with criminals (if they sold many, many, domains that served the same purpose). And did the ISP(s) hosting the domain(s) know what was being done? Who kept the WHOIS records?
Likely the scam goes further than just these lame spammers. Whether or not the case will go any further, though, is anyone's guess.
I think one could just as easily argue that the constitutional authors made that choice due to their lack of trust for the commoner.
Also consider the differences in communication between today and 250 years ago - it was extremely difficult to even get democratic information from Virginia to Philadelphia or New York back then. Now getting information across the continent is trivial in terms of time elapsed.
Where it was said that 20% of IT costs are security related. But if Dell is at or near the top of PC sales, and they're seeing increased Linux sales, then what is this security money going for?
The simcity 2000 give you more power
I apologize in advance if English is not your first language, but I have no idea what you are trying to say. Apparently someone understands this sentence, since it picked up at least 1 mod point.
And yes, I have played simcity 2000 enough to reach microwave power and build those wonderful power sources with the fringe benefit of being able to toast your own city.
and require a full name (and only a full name) to make a reservation.
That is actually an interesting point, that people might not be familiar with. A couple months after we got married, my wife and I needed to fly somewhere together. She took my last name when we got married, so I (somewhat absent-midedly) booked our tickets under my last name. However, she had not yet obtained any "permanent" identification (driver's license, etc...) in her new name by that point.
I figured that the time to get said identification would exceed the remaining time between when we realized that and when we were to fly. So I called the site we booked through (orbitz, IIRC) to see if we could update it. No go. I called the airline as well. No go. Aparently your tickets are absolutely non-transferable, no matter what. If your name was somehow typo'ed on the ticket, you're SOL. Even though making the reservation of course requires no identification whatsoever, it is set in stone once its made.
Thankfully, we discovered that the state we moved to after getting married actually has a lot less beauracracy for such things than the state we lived in before. We managed to get her driver's license, etc, for flying well enough in advance that it wasn't a problem. But it was still rather tense.
I would say I think that keeping reservations under name, and name only, is pretty idiotic. And this was in 2005!
Don't forget that Bush & Cheney were nominated last year for the award. But I guess the fact they were passed over that time around isn't significant, since the winner wasn't a democrat that year. But this year, now that Rush was nominated, and it instead went to a democrat, that is obviously a travesty.
The peace price has always been the red headed stepchild of the whole Nobel thing. Nobel started with the peace prize, so that his fortunes from TNT could be used to acknowledge contributions to peace. Indeed, the peace prize is awarded in Oslo, Norway - while Nobel himself was a Swede. The peace prize was so important to him that he didn't want his fellow countrymen to make the wrong choice on this award.
So you can say what you want about the current award participant, but you are dead wrong about the peace prize being in any way inferior to the other Nobel prizes.
As long as we're using a system that allows people to send messages without being traced, and without putting anything on the line, that system will have spam.
I'll say I actually do agree with that statement. Spam has a tremendous profit margin for the spammers, as it has close to zero cost per potential customer.
However, I don't agree that the spam problem lies in the hands of those who are spammed. The problem is in the middlemen that make it work. There are too many complacent people that make the whole enterprise work - registrars, ISPs, etc... Likely becuase they are of course getting a cut of the action as well.
As I've said before, spam will be brought down by an economic shift. Spam will cease when it is no longer profitable to spam.
Even if this spammer really was killed by the Russian mafia (and I severely doubt it), it wouldn't make squat for difference. Considering there are other spammers who are known to operate with the Russian mafia, at best this just created a power vacuum for Russian spam.
Just take a look at Leo Kuvayev / "BadCow" / "Alex Rodrigez". Three names (out of many) for one evil man who pumps tons of spam. He's largely suspected to have ties to the mafia.
So while people can celebrate this possible murder, its meaningless at best. There's an equal chance it will just up the collaboration between the spammers and the mob, which would be all the worse for all of us poor bastards that are being endlessly pounded with offers for discount v!@gr4.
From that list, anti-spam could be under almost any of them. I'd expect by now we've all seen the hardware spam filters ("technology product purchases"), which of course need updating from time to time ("training"). And pretty much any anti-spam installation needs to be tested to adjust for things like false positives ("assessments"). And then of course there are people who are so obnoxiously proud of their anti-spam installations ("certification").
But then of course are the realists to know that filtering doesn't accomplish squat for the real problem (we'd place it under "other items") but pursue anti-spam just to appease their users.
Unless they count a UPS, RAID and tape drives as security, there is no way that security can eat up that much of the budget, except maybe if the surveyed all use Windoze...
And why would that surprise you? Like it or not (I certainly don't), windoze is the most common OS in the world - be it desktops, workstations, laptops, file / app / print / web servers... Which of course leads to it having the largest number of security faults per cost.
Some people, honestly, seem to be untrain-able in that regard. I once had a coworker who not only used 'manager' as his password, but told damn near everyone in the company that was his password.
You guessed it, even the people he managed new it...
Since we now have a way to track security expenditures, we should have some way to track money spent on anti-spam measures. Considering how well the anti-spam hardware and software sells, I'll venture its a nontrivial expense, as well.
Even if you're just running some spiffy implementation of spam assasin, it still gets your time at some frequency to update the rules, amongst other things.
From the summary:
corporate engineering culture know as 'the HP way. The article, off course does not elaborate on this
Thats three typos in two sentences, taking up barely a full line of text. Is that a new record for a lousy summary?
I will also say, though, this thread may be a new low-water mark here:
Original post: -1, redundant
First reply: -1, troll
reply to first reply: -1, troll
And of course several AC posts on the same thread auto-modded 0 since then. Oh, if your keeping track, feces man is actually the troll that replied to the troll that replied to the redundant post. And they were all AC posts as well, IIRC.
I think thats not even the first time that story has shown up in a slashdot forum this week. Obviously I'm not about to read it word-for-word, but I recall seeing a painfully long posting not long ago about some guys obsession with library poo.
Some of the stranger spam I've seen, I'll say. Apparently whoever is behind that one doesn't know how to work the slashdot url tag?
Is it because the guys in Redmond seem to think that every system in operation should have 4 Ghz dual-core CPUs with mutliple gigs of RAM, several terabytes of storage, and beyond-bleeding-edge graphics cards (which of course have to all be maxed out by the time firefox has started)?
While on the other hand, some people seem to realize that indeed, file servers should only need to serve files (hence the name!) and therefore shouldn't be expected to have thousands of dollars worth of RAM and video options.
Interesting comparison, except for the fact that the POSIX standard for access control was never formally adopted - and as far as I've ever seen, never been implemented in anything out of the box, and similarly, implementing ACL in windows is non-trivial.
The permissions for netware, on the other hand, are all done server side, are very easy to set up (being as the server OS is made to do it), and virtually transparent to the user. In a good windoze / netware environment, the user doesn't even know when they're transitioning from a local HD to a netware mount, aside from perhaps slightly slower access times.
Undelete was unquestionably the single greatest feature of netware (circa the 3.1 days) that I've not seen anywhere else. Actually, I have to confess I have seen undelete elsewhere - DOS 6.x. Maybe even DOS 5.0?
There is a good reason to keep netware on a network, if its already there, and its not just laziness or fear.
Actually, two things come to mind immediately - TCO, and the netware permissions.
From my experiences when I ran netware servers, a system could be thrown together for about $5-600 (thats hundreds, not thousands...) that could serve directory services, files, and print jobs to 200 clients simultaneously without batting an eye, and do it nonstop for months. Its hard to get anything else to match those numbers for that little $$.
Though one of the true hallmarks of netware is the permissions set that it has, that I really haven't seen an equal to in anything else. IIRC, there were 8 different permissions that could be set in netware, as opposed to the 3 in *nix. It is particularly valuable if you want to use directory structure as part of your workflow - for example a user could have a directory where they could write, read, but not modify or delete. I ran this for a newspaper, and the utility of this should be quite apparent.
So just to answer it for all those people who are speculating why netware is still relevant - yes, it is. There are plenty of good reasons for people to keep it around. Though I'll admit it will likely become yet another good product killed by the micro$oft marketing machine.
Slashdot Mirror
- Who owns/owned the domain(s) that were spamvertised?
- Where were the domains registered?
- Where were the domains hosted?
- Who was involved in the actual porn? Some people are suggesting kiddie porn?
This information can help to determine if other laws were broken, and I'd suspect other laws were. If this operates like the usual internet drug scams that we see all the time, there were likely a large number of domains involved that were spamvertised. If we know where the domain owners were residing, they may also have committed crimes (particularly if they were selling kiddie porn). Similarly, if we can find this, we can see if the registrars that they purchased the domains from may have also been knowingly working with criminals (if they sold many, many, domains that served the same purpose). And did the ISP(s) hosting the domain(s) know what was being done? Who kept the WHOIS records?Likely the scam goes further than just these lame spammers. Whether or not the case will go any further, though, is anyone's guess.
Look at the picture of "triton" and think at first it was a picture of a system that itself was slashdotted?
The Senator On-Line party would meet the voter apathy parry. I predict not much would happen.
The real question is how the results of this would then actually differ from our current establishment.
I think one could just as easily argue that the constitutional authors made that choice due to their lack of trust for the commoner.
Also consider the differences in communication between today and 250 years ago - it was extremely difficult to even get democratic information from Virginia to Philadelphia or New York back then. Now getting information across the continent is trivial in terms of time elapsed.
When I saw this article, I remembered this one from last week:
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/10/2233218
Where it was said that 20% of IT costs are security related. But if Dell is at or near the top of PC sales, and they're seeing increased Linux sales, then what is this security money going for?
I apologize in advance if English is not your first language, but I have no idea what you are trying to say. Apparently someone understands this sentence, since it picked up at least 1 mod point.
And yes, I have played simcity 2000 enough to reach microwave power and build those wonderful power sources with the fringe benefit of being able to toast your own city.
That is actually an interesting point, that people might not be familiar with. A couple months after we got married, my wife and I needed to fly somewhere together. She took my last name when we got married, so I (somewhat absent-midedly) booked our tickets under my last name. However, she had not yet obtained any "permanent" identification (driver's license, etc...) in her new name by that point.
I figured that the time to get said identification would exceed the remaining time between when we realized that and when we were to fly. So I called the site we booked through (orbitz, IIRC) to see if we could update it. No go. I called the airline as well. No go. Aparently your tickets are absolutely non-transferable, no matter what. If your name was somehow typo'ed on the ticket, you're SOL. Even though making the reservation of course requires no identification whatsoever, it is set in stone once its made.
Thankfully, we discovered that the state we moved to after getting married actually has a lot less beauracracy for such things than the state we lived in before. We managed to get her driver's license, etc, for flying well enough in advance that it wasn't a problem. But it was still rather tense.
I would say I think that keeping reservations under name, and name only, is pretty idiotic. And this was in 2005!
Don't forget that Bush & Cheney were nominated last year for the award. But I guess the fact they were passed over that time around isn't significant, since the winner wasn't a democrat that year. But this year, now that Rush was nominated, and it instead went to a democrat, that is obviously a travesty.
So you can say what you want about the current award participant, but you are dead wrong about the peace prize being in any way inferior to the other Nobel prizes.
I'll say I actually do agree with that statement. Spam has a tremendous profit margin for the spammers, as it has close to zero cost per potential customer.
However, I don't agree that the spam problem lies in the hands of those who are spammed. The problem is in the middlemen that make it work. There are too many complacent people that make the whole enterprise work - registrars, ISPs, etc... Likely becuase they are of course getting a cut of the action as well.
As I've said before, spam will be brought down by an economic shift. Spam will cease when it is no longer profitable to spam.
Even if this spammer really was killed by the Russian mafia (and I severely doubt it), it wouldn't make squat for difference. Considering there are other spammers who are known to operate with the Russian mafia, at best this just created a power vacuum for Russian spam.
Just take a look at Leo Kuvayev / "BadCow" / "Alex Rodrigez". Three names (out of many) for one evil man who pumps tons of spam. He's largely suspected to have ties to the mafia.
So while people can celebrate this possible murder, its meaningless at best. There's an equal chance it will just up the collaboration between the spammers and the mob, which would be all the worse for all of us poor bastards that are being endlessly pounded with offers for discount v!@gr4.
Perhaps if they do another generations movie, he can play data instead?
Ummm, didn't they say they wanted a 27 year old Kirk? Come on, I think Shatner is closer to 127... His youth has already boldly gone!
From that list, anti-spam could be under almost any of them. I'd expect by now we've all seen the hardware spam filters ("technology product purchases"), which of course need updating from time to time ("training"). And pretty much any anti-spam installation needs to be tested to adjust for things like false positives ("assessments"). And then of course there are people who are so obnoxiously proud of their anti-spam installations ("certification").
But then of course are the realists to know that filtering doesn't accomplish squat for the real problem (we'd place it under "other items") but pursue anti-spam just to appease their users.
And why would that surprise you? Like it or not (I certainly don't), windoze is the most common OS in the world - be it desktops, workstations, laptops, file / app / print / web servers
Some people, honestly, seem to be untrain-able in that regard. I once had a coworker who not only used 'manager' as his password, but told damn near everyone in the company that was his password.
You guessed it, even the people he managed new it...
Since we now have a way to track security expenditures, we should have some way to track money spent on anti-spam measures. Considering how well the anti-spam hardware and software sells, I'll venture its a nontrivial expense, as well.
Even if you're just running some spiffy implementation of spam assasin, it still gets your time at some frequency to update the rules, amongst other things.
Thats three typos in two sentences, taking up barely a full line of text. Is that a new record for a lousy summary?
- Original post: -1, redundant
- First reply: -1, troll
- reply to first reply: -1, troll
And of course several AC posts on the same thread auto-modded 0 since then. Oh, if your keeping track, feces man is actually the troll that replied to the troll that replied to the redundant post. And they were all AC posts as well, IIRC.I think thats not even the first time that story has shown up in a slashdot forum this week. Obviously I'm not about to read it word-for-word, but I recall seeing a painfully long posting not long ago about some guys obsession with library poo.
Some of the stranger spam I've seen, I'll say. Apparently whoever is behind that one doesn't know how to work the slashdot url tag?
While on the other hand, some people seem to realize that indeed, file servers should only need to serve files (hence the name!) and therefore shouldn't be expected to have thousands of dollars worth of RAM and video options.
I'm sure all the other netware guys out there have already seen this story:
http://www.informationweek.com/story/IWK20010409S0001
But nonetheless, some older servers run circles around the newest from m$ because:
Interesting comparison, except for the fact that the POSIX standard for access control was never formally adopted - and as far as I've ever seen, never been implemented in anything out of the box, and similarly, implementing ACL in windows is non-trivial.
The permissions for netware, on the other hand, are all done server side, are very easy to set up (being as the server OS is made to do it), and virtually transparent to the user. In a good windoze / netware environment, the user doesn't even know when they're transitioning from a local HD to a netware mount, aside from perhaps slightly slower access times.
There is a good reason to keep netware on a network, if its already there, and its not just laziness or fear.
Actually, two things come to mind immediately - TCO, and the netware permissions.
From my experiences when I ran netware servers, a system could be thrown together for about $5-600 (thats hundreds,
not thousands...) that could serve directory services, files, and print jobs to 200 clients simultaneously without batting an eye, and do it nonstop for months. Its hard to get anything else to match those numbers for that little $$.
Though one of the true hallmarks of netware is the permissions set that it has, that I really haven't seen an equal to in anything else. IIRC, there were 8 different permissions that could be set in netware, as opposed to the 3 in *nix. It is particularly valuable if you want to use directory structure as part of your workflow - for example a user could have a directory where they could write, read, but not modify or delete. I ran this for a newspaper, and the utility of this should be quite apparent.
So just to answer it for all those people who are speculating why netware is still relevant - yes, it is. There are plenty of good reasons for people to keep it around. Though I'll admit it will likely become yet another good product killed by the micro$oft marketing machine.