I can verify that it allows multiple accounts on both the debit & credit sides in the same transaction. I've entered "double-split" entries like that mentioned above numerous times. I'm using 1.8.12 at the moment, but I don't think it's a new feature.
Are you sure your hands are closer together when using a laptop? Most laptops today (excluding the mini-laptops) seem to have standard-size key spacing.
DTMF is the technology that makes touch tones work. ANI is Automatic Number Identification, functionally very similar to Caller ID (but implemented very differently). It is commonly used for 911 calls, and may be used by calltakers in telemarketing firms.
On certain older versions of Linux, destroying/var/lib/nfs on reboots was considered the norm. I'm not sure this was ever a good idea, but it was the default (in some cases!).
Inside of server-side/var/lib/nfs live rmtab (server's view of currently-in-use filesystems, not necessarily accurate), xtab (list of exported directories & permissions), and a few other things. Together, these files preserve the state of the NFS server across reboots.
You may have been able to prevent your problems by modifying the startup files on your NFS server to NOT delete your NFS state files on startup.
http://www.linuxpowered.com/HOWTO/NFS-HOWTO/inde x. html
might be a good resource for more current information.
Put simply, "Smashing the stack" is a method of overwriting variables within a program (which are located on "the stack") with malicious CPU instructions. When done properly, the vulnerable application will jump to those malicious instructions and do Bad Things(tm).
Preventing the CPU from executing code located on the stack will in many/most cases prevent these malicious instructions from ever running (because they're located on the stack).
Take a look here for more info on PICMG if you're not familiar with it. It's basically a dumb ("passive") board containing a bunch of slots, with nearly all of the traditional "motherboard" logic moved to the daughtercard (which is what is being shown in this article). Neat concept, but more expensive than standard motherboards with no real benefits for home use.
>Doe sthis mean if I have a newer system with 64 bit PCI slots I can slap this bad boy in...
Absolutely not. This board is designed for passive backplane systems rather than the (much) more common motherboard-based PCs most of us are familiar with.
A "passive backplane" is basically a motherboard with the chips removed -- a "passive" "backplane" of interconnected ISA/PCI slots -- nothing more. The funny thing is these passive backplanes cost more than many (most?) motherboards.
Passive backplanes are typically used in industrial applications where cost isn't as important, or where the ability to do a complete "motherboard-equivilent" swap in the field without removing 2 dozen screws is important.
In short, this isn't something that concerns the average/. reader. Sorry.
Linux and NFS are gradually maturing, but there still seems to be some incompatibilities lurking around. Following the NFS mailing list is a good way to keep on top of things, and would be the best place to post this question if none of the web pages answer your question.
root_squash provides "no" real security benefits. Keep in mind any user with root priviliges has the ability to change their UID to any other, completely bypassing root_squash.
* "no" meaning no "absolute" benefits -- it only keeps out the really stupid users for very long, and even then not very long.
I just checked the site. In order to purchase anything, you must have an MVP account. In order to obtain one, you must give them your MS ID number (which you get when you pass one of the MS certification programs).
Too bad -- it would've been worth $5 to put them in the microwave and melt them a little...
Potential use for some MSCP: Buy a bunch of these and resell them to slashdot readers. (I'm only half joking.)
There's a reason for that "magic" number of 1023. Years ago, 1023 and below were designated as reserved ports, and only root was allowed to bind to them (under UNIX anyway). They are also called well-known ports, with IANA-assigned names.
This allowed, for example, rsh/rlogin to provide transparent interhost authentication to users without opening up HUGE security holes (at the time).
As I understand it, NT has never made this distinction (reserved vs. non-reserved ports). Windows 98 & older (and all other OSes without integrated "security") are simply not capable of blocking the lower ports from normal users, as normal users are also superusers.
Why NT would now be blocking ports *above* 1023 is incomprehensible. I suspect MS is just blocking one type of access (RAW), which can have security consequences. Blocking RAW support would be consistent with common UNIX security practices.
(The above may contain some factual errors -- but the basics are true.)
"AND, proposing that a NT admin would give Domain Admin rights to its users is plain NONSENSE."
Why must everyone equate Domain Admin rights to Local Admin rights? I keep seeing this over and over again. In this case [Lotus], Local Admin rights are needed, *NOT* Domain Admin rights. There's a *HUGE* difference.
And a related question: Is there a "user right" of some sort that could be granted to users to allow them to bypass the port restrictions without being Local Admin or (shudder) Domain Admin? (I don't have convenient access to an NT box at the moment.)
Disclaimer: I am an experienced Unix system administrator, and greatly prefer any UNIX over any Windows. But I happen to be familiar with NT, and sick of all the false complaints out there -- NT's got enough true problems as it is. Wild statements claiming everyone must have "Domain Admin" rights is flat-out lying.
Question: How many people (Windows admins) have you met who think everyone using an NT workstation must be a member of the Local Admin group? If I had a dollar for every MSCE/MSCP/whatever I met who thought that... Scary.
Has anyone else noticed that by far most of the programs (excluding commercial apps) available for Linux are "free" as in free beer, compared to most of the programs for DOS/Windows, which are mostly shareware or crippleware?
basic text editors in general compilers / programming tools
This seems to represent a completely different state of mind between DOS/Win developers and Linux developers. I'd like to know why this trend has developed. Any opinions? (Wait a sec... This is slashdot. OF COURSE you have opinions!)
Found a fix for that annoying new "Shopping" button (under UNIX). It's also possible to disable the "Search" and "My Netscape" buttons (among others, I'm sure).
Add any or all of the below lines, as you see fit:
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, my local ATM runs Windows too. See the proof here: http://www.goodexperience.com/tib/archives/2004/08 /atm_running_win.html
[I can't decide is this is funny or sad....]
Do you mean market penetration or actual usage? Not everybody pays for their software.
And no, I haven't paid for Photoshop, but that's because I don't have it. I'll stick with The Gimp for my personal use until I find a need to switch.
I can verify that it allows multiple accounts on both the debit & credit sides in the same transaction. I've entered "double-split" entries like that mentioned above numerous times. I'm using 1.8.12 at the moment, but I don't think it's a new feature.
Are you sure your hands are closer together when using a laptop? Most laptops today (excluding the mini-laptops) seem to have standard-size key spacing.
DTMF is the technology that makes touch tones work. ANI is Automatic Number Identification, functionally very similar to Caller ID (but implemented very differently). It is commonly used for 911 calls, and may be used by calltakers in telemarketing firms.
And the required relevant link:
http://info-center.ccit.arizona.edu/~telcosvc/call eridfaq.shtml
On certain older versions of Linux, destroying /var/lib/nfs on reboots was considered the norm. I'm not sure this was ever a good idea, but it was the default (in some cases!).
/var/lib/nfs live rmtab (server's view of currently-in-use filesystems, not necessarily accurate), xtab (list of exported directories & permissions), and a few other things. Together, these files preserve the state of the NFS server across reboots.
e x. html
Inside of server-side
You may have been able to prevent your problems by modifying the startup files on your NFS server to NOT delete your NFS state files on startup.
http://www.linuxpowered.com/HOWTO/NFS-HOWTO/ind
might be a good resource for more current information.
Put simply, "Smashing the stack" is a method of overwriting variables within a program (which are located on "the stack") with malicious CPU instructions. When done properly, the vulnerable application will jump to those malicious instructions and do Bad Things(tm).
Preventing the CPU from executing code located on the stack will in many/most cases prevent these malicious instructions from ever running (because they're located on the stack).
For a detailed explanation, see Smashing the Stack For Fun and Profit by Aleph One.
Hah! Who says I'm going to "cd" into a directory before creating a file in it?
(Nitpicking? Nah... I consider this a valid, if minor, objection).
Take a look here for more info on PICMG if you're not familiar with it. It's basically a dumb ("passive") board containing a bunch of slots, with nearly all of the traditional "motherboard" logic moved to the daughtercard (which is what is being shown in this article). Neat concept, but more expensive than standard motherboards with no real benefits for home use.
>Doe sthis mean if I have a newer system with 64 bit PCI slots I can slap this bad boy in...
/. reader. Sorry.
Absolutely not. This board is designed for passive backplane systems rather than the (much) more common motherboard-based PCs most of us are familiar with.
A "passive backplane" is basically a motherboard with the chips removed -- a "passive" "backplane" of interconnected ISA/PCI slots -- nothing more. The funny thing is these passive backplanes cost more than many (most?) motherboards.
Passive backplanes are typically used in industrial applications where cost isn't as important, or where the ability to do a complete "motherboard-equivilent" swap in the field without removing 2 dozen screws is important.
In short, this isn't something that concerns the average
I'd start at the following URL.
http://sourceforge.net/project/?group_id=14
Linux and NFS are gradually maturing, but there still seems to be some incompatibilities lurking around. Following the NFS mailing list is a good way to keep on top of things, and would be the best place to post this question if none of the web pages answer your question.
root_squash provides "no" real security benefits. Keep in mind any user with root priviliges has the ability to change their UID to any other, completely bypassing root_squash.
* "no" meaning no "absolute" benefits -- it only keeps out the really stupid users for very long, and even then not very long.
I just checked the site. In order to purchase anything, you must have an MVP account. In order to obtain one, you must give them your MS ID number (which you get when you pass one of the MS certification programs).
Too bad -- it would've been worth $5 to put them in the microwave and melt them a little...
Potential use for some MSCP: Buy a bunch of these and resell them to slashdot readers. (I'm only half joking.)
There's a reason for that "magic" number of 1023. Years ago, 1023 and below were designated as reserved ports, and only root was allowed to bind to them (under UNIX anyway). They are also called well-known ports, with IANA-assigned names.
This allowed, for example, rsh/rlogin to provide transparent interhost authentication to users without opening up HUGE security holes (at the time).
As I understand it, NT has never made this distinction (reserved vs. non-reserved ports). Windows 98 & older (and all other OSes without integrated "security") are simply not capable of blocking the lower ports from normal users, as normal users are also superusers.
Why NT would now be blocking ports *above* 1023 is incomprehensible. I suspect MS is just blocking one type of access (RAW), which can have security consequences. Blocking RAW support would be consistent with common UNIX security practices.
(The above may contain some factual errors -- but the basics are true.)
"AND, proposing that a NT admin would give Domain Admin rights to its users is plain NONSENSE."
Why must everyone equate Domain Admin rights to Local Admin rights? I keep seeing this over and over again. In this case [Lotus], Local Admin rights are needed, *NOT* Domain Admin rights. There's a *HUGE* difference.
And a related question: Is there a "user right" of some sort that could be granted to users to allow them to bypass the port restrictions without being Local Admin or (shudder) Domain Admin? (I don't have convenient access to an NT box at the moment.)
Disclaimer: I am an experienced Unix system administrator, and greatly prefer any UNIX over any Windows. But I happen to be familiar with NT, and sick of all the false complaints out there -- NT's got enough true problems as it is. Wild statements claiming everyone must have "Domain Admin" rights is flat-out lying.
Question: How many people (Windows admins) have you met who think everyone using an NT workstation must be a member of the Local Admin group? If I had a dollar for every MSCE/MSCP/whatever I met who thought that... Scary.
"But from 8 bucks to 100+, seems rather overwhelming."
Reread the earlier post. Up $8... *to* $100..., meaning it went up $8, *not* from $8 to $100.
Has anyone else noticed that by far most of the programs (excluding commercial apps) available for Linux are "free" as in free beer, compared to most of the programs for DOS/Windows, which are mostly shareware or crippleware?
Examples:
[dos/win - UNIX (description)]
pkzip/winzip - gzip/zip/bzip2 (file compression)
list - less (text viewers)
Ghost - dd (disk copiers)
4DOS - ksh/bash/tcsh (shells)
XTree Gold - mc (full-screen file managers)
basic text editors in general
compilers / programming tools
This seems to represent a completely different state of mind between DOS/Win developers and Linux developers. I'd like to know why this trend has developed. Any opinions? (Wait a sec... This is slashdot. OF COURSE you have opinions!)
Found a fix for that annoying new "Shopping" button (under UNIX). It's also possible to disable the "Search" and "My Netscape" buttons (among others, I'm sure).
Add any or all of the below lines, as you see fit:
Netscape*toolBar.search.isEnabled: false
Netscape*toolBar.destinations.isEnabled: false
Netscape*toolBar.myshopping.isEnabled: false
Hint to others trying to customize Netscape: Use the "strings" command on the netscape binary!
Funny. I can't get in through Netscape at all, but the Linux "ftp" command is very responsive. Downloading the Linux glibc2.0 version now!
Any news on a glibc2.1 version? (Anyone know if it really matters?)
It was announced in May that he *would* receive an Honorary Doctorate. This article is about the fact that he actually *received* it.