have you or any friends of yours taken part in SCO DDOS attack? If the overwhelming answer on Slashdot is no, then I guess we know the value of SCO's claims.
That's specious logic.
A single machine on cable or DSL can SYN flood a machine. The attacker sends a stream of SYN packets with forged source addresses, the victim machine replies back to the bogus IP and waits.. and waits.. and waits.. It takes negligible bandwidth to do this.
If it's true that SCO is lying or too inept to know what's
happening then somehow this has to make it to the mainstream
press. That would do more damage to their stock value than any DDoS.
This is going to be a giant windfall for the lawyers in all this
as there will have to be an overhaul of the patent laws and
system.
Here's a prediction too: after the "fecal matter hits
the rotary cooling device" in all this patent fiasco you'll see an
increase in the number of people going to law school. Mainly for IP
law, too. Don't laugh, remember how the non-geek masses took computer
science in the 90's because that's where the money was?
You can't upgrade ANYTHING in it (hard-disk, memory, gfx card, processor, NOTHING)
I had a ~3 year old eMachine (which my ex-wife now has. ha!) I put a second hard drive in it and extra memory just fine. There was no AGP slot so the only option for video upgrading was a PCI card. The processor was in a socket, I never did try a faster processor.
While WLAN equipment sold in China is required to comply with
this standard from Dec. 1, a transition period has been granted that
extends the compliance deadline for some WLAN products until June 1,
2004.
This sounds terribly rushed. How long have they been
working on GB15629.11-2003 for (the..-2003 may be a hint)? How well
has it been scrutinized by security people?
These questions
lead me to believe that there are two possibilities here:
A: This is a system that the Chinese government built
weaknesses into to spy on its people.
B: The Chinese
government is rushing to get beat the IEEE people to make this an
early standard which will make worldwide adoption easier. Now re-read
A and drop the "on its people". Tell me if you feel better.
That all said, you don't need to wait for these committees to
finish fighting to harden your wireless LAN. At work we use IPSec
over our 802.11[bg] stuff which is all VLAN'd and routed to an
outside interface of our Cisco PIX.
With Open Source the cream rises to the top. A project may split and goes separate ways but nothing is preventing the groups from incorporating good code from each other. Just look at the *BSDs.
How is a monolithic, closed system better again?..
OpenBSD's spamd actually tarpits the spammer down, then after a looooong held connection sends a 450 (by default) to the spammer to have the spammer-machine retry. I have it running with various autoupdated blackhole lists and very little spam sees my server anymore.
If they make money with this and other chip fabricators get on the open source boat then perhaps one day we'll see an entire open source chipset and motherboard combo. No "SecureThisBIOS" and "TrustedThatOS" needed.. That would be damn sweet.
Actually with most Unixish systems going to other password
formats such as MD5 and Blowfish I'd think that this goes to show
that (NSA notwithstanding) crypt() has had a long, healthy existance.
Rather than saying 'crypt() is dead' they should be saying 'it took
30ish years but crypt() is at the end of its useful life'.
Not many pieces of code will be able to boast that lifespan.
You can encrypt a message then hide the encrypted text within a file with steganography. Casual browsing wouldn't reveal the existance of the encrypted info.
Slashdot Mirror
Coming up in 2006 release of openserver: SYN flood protection...
What's that, a pair of SCO branded scissors to cut the CAT5?
have you or any friends of yours taken part in SCO DDOS attack? If the overwhelming answer on Slashdot is no, then I guess we know the value of SCO's claims.
That's specious logic.
A single machine on cable or DSL can SYN flood a machine. The attacker sends a stream of SYN packets with forged source addresses, the victim machine replies back to the bogus IP and waits.. and waits.. and waits.. It takes negligible bandwidth to do this.
If it's true that SCO is lying or too inept to know what's happening then somehow this has to make it to the mainstream press. That would do more damage to their stock value than any DDoS.
They're delivering it with your flying car next week.
This is going to be a giant windfall for the lawyers in all this as there will have to be an overhaul of the patent laws and system.
Here's a prediction too: after the "fecal matter hits the rotary cooling device" in all this patent fiasco you'll see an increase in the number of people going to law school. Mainly for IP law, too. Don't laugh, remember how the non-geek masses took computer science in the 90's because that's where the money was?
Hire the handicapped, they're fun to watch.
Kermit Alive and Well on the Space Station
This place is starting to sound like the Weekly World News.
"Archie disappears, Veronica suspect! Gopher dug the hole far aWAIS!"
You can't upgrade ANYTHING in it (hard-disk, memory, gfx card, processor, NOTHING)
I had a ~3 year old eMachine (which my ex-wife now has. ha!) I put a second hard drive in it and extra memory just fine. There was no AGP slot so the only option for video upgrading was a PCI card. The processor was in a socket, I never did try a faster processor.
eMachines are poo.. Athlon64 is good.. eMachines are poo.. Athlon64 is good.. eMachines are poo.. Athlon64 is good..
If it has better security why isn't it a worldwide standard?
um.. Windows is a worldwide standard. You can't equate the robustness of the product with the number of users.
While WLAN equipment sold in China is required to comply with this standard from Dec. 1, a transition period has been granted that extends the compliance deadline for some WLAN products until June 1, 2004.
This sounds terribly rushed. How long have they been working on GB15629.11-2003 for (the
These questions lead me to believe that there are two possibilities here:
- B: The Chinese
government is rushing to get beat the IEEE people to make this an
early standard which will make worldwide adoption easier. Now re-read
A and drop the "on its people". Tell me if you feel better.
That all said, you don't need to wait for these committees to finish fighting to harden your wireless LAN. At work we use IPSec over our 802.11[bg] stuff which is all VLAN'd and routed to an outside interface of our Cisco PIX.Excellent comment, however I suspect there will be a knock at your door in.. three.. two.. one..
Bah humbug, fire the lot of them.
Firing these people would help security how exactly?
.. look at the bright side, while his jackboots are busy stomping out piracy, the world will again be safe for boozers, smokers and gun collectors.
It hurts me to say this but Microsoft let Win98 age to 5 years+ before giving it the knife.
What the fuck is "evolution"?
Apparently something your murky area of the genetic pond stopped doing generations ago.
With Open Source the cream rises to the top. A project may split and goes separate ways but nothing is preventing the groups from incorporating good code from each other. Just look at the *BSDs.
How is a monolithic, closed system better again?..
OpenBSD's spamd actually tarpits the spammer down, then after a looooong held connection sends a 450 (by default) to the spammer to have the spammer-machine retry. I have it running with various autoupdated blackhole lists and very little spam sees my server anymore.
A lot of what's floating in space runs with what we could consider antiquated hardware.
Old != Junk
If they make money with this and other chip fabricators get on the open source boat then perhaps one day we'll see an entire open source chipset and motherboard combo. No "SecureThisBIOS" and "TrustedThatOS" needed.. That would be damn sweet.
Using an old Pentium with two NICs for this is great, but the $699 licensing fee is a bit steep. Better stick to OpenBSD..
Obviously we just are not using enough power.
Yup, if they ran this on the 220-230V systems in Europe this would have taken only 40 minutes.
Actually with most Unixish systems going to other password formats such as MD5 and Blowfish I'd think that this goes to show that (NSA notwithstanding) crypt() has had a long, healthy existance. Rather than saying 'crypt() is dead' they should be saying 'it took 30ish years but crypt() is at the end of its useful life'.
Not many pieces of code will be able to boast that lifespan.
You can encrypt a message then hide the encrypted text within a file with steganography. Casual browsing wouldn't reveal the existance of the encrypted info.
Try seeing the message hidden in this image. It may take a few moments.. Please don't post the message here, let others figure it out for themselves.
Good luck!