Let's check the candidates registrar, web hosting provider and server platform. This should be interesting. Maybe not meaningful, however. (Speaking of not meaningful...the lameness filter doesn't want lists of facts for comparison so I have to add length to the lines.)
First, let's look at Obama (he's the magical negro, the man not from Hope but offering hope to America, the ethical campaigner compared to ruthless Clinton):
(Obviously going for the "Fabulous" vote there...)
Web host: Saavis
Server: Apache
Saavis -- expensive. No game playing here. Says Apache, but doesn't say what the OS is. Smart move.
Now, McCain (the Hero, the maverick republican who shares a platform more like Clinton than other Republicans, he's the anti-establishment establishmentarian):
Domain Name: JOHNMCCAIN.COM
Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.
(Going for the "home vote" and GoDaddy.com, while it sucks ass, is indigenous to AZ)
Web host SMARTECH CORPORATION.
Server: Microsoft-IIS/6.0
Never heard of them... Bold move, Mr. McCain -- using a web host no one's heard of.
Now, Romney, the Northeastern governor (the Mormon who was, until recently, pro-choice; son of a one time popular Republican; good-looking but flip-flopping candidate):
Domain Name: MITTROMNEY.COM
Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.
(He's Mormon so perhaps UT has not registrars so he's pandering to the regional vote by using AZ-based GoDaddy?)
Web host Rackspace.com, Ltd.
Server: Apache/2.0.52 (Red Hat)
Rackspace! Heavy advertiser on Slashdot, employer of more RHCEs than Red Hat,... tech savvy move! And running on LAMP. Nice.
Now, Clinton (the Senator who offers 8 more years of old-time change-- huh? A return to the future that was 1992-2000. Another opportunity for Bill to get some intern love in the Oval Office; a chance to catch Osama Bin Laden and correct a mistake from the last Clinton presidency):
The establishment candidate using the establishment registrar, I see. (Change is... hard to find with HRC).
Web host Rackspace.com, Ltd. - sub-assignment of IPs to Paul Holcomb
Server: Microsoft-IIS/6.0
So, also Rackspace, but made to look like Paul Holcomb...kind like a lot of the positions HRC takes -- looks like this but really is that. no surprise. Oh, even though at Rackspace using a Microsoft solution. Always playing both sides doesn't she?
And, of course, what about Ron Paul (he's the Libertarian that is really, really a Republican this time, Ok?; the pro-legalizing drugs, anti-war on terror candidate; the one who says things worth cheering and jeering in the same debate)?
Domain Name: RONPAUL2008.COM
Registrar: SCHLUND+PARTNER AG
Awesome. Using a Germany/EU registrar. How...Godwin of him...
Web host Rackspace.com, Ltd., with IPs sub-assigned to Terra Eclipse Media Design
Server: Apache/2.0.52 (Red Hat)
Also at Rackspace! And, obfuscating the netblock owner like Hillary. Interesting...but boldly announcing Apache and Red Hat as the platform.
Let's not forget Huckabee...(oh that we could, though, forget this Kevin Spacey look-a-like)
Domain Name: MIKEHUCKABEE.COM
Registrar: DOMAINPEOPLE, INC.
Sounds populist. I wonder if DOMAINPEOPLE are evangelicals?
Web host HostMySite
Server: Microsoft-IIS/6.0
Sounds...like a $5/mo web host. Huh. And running on IIS. Wonder if its a s
There is no indication that the parent post read the article, or even the summary; just from the title one could compose such a post. The same post could be made on articles panning/praising any product -- just change the subject of the last sentence from "iPhone2" to "Vista 09" or "OLPC 2.0", etc.
Those not $SITUATON are disgruntled against those who $SITUATION.
Anyway... I worked remotely, telecommuting, since 1996. Eventually I went full-time telecommuting -- even when I would come to "the office" I would be in a conference room, lunch area, etc., free to sit where I wished and work how/when i wanted (unless there was a specific meeting in progress). Last year I went to work in an office to do shift work as a system admin for a hosting company. Love it.
I still work on little projects and am planning that "big project" in my spare time, but my *work* is 10 hours a day, four days a week AT THE OFFICE.
It's a freeing change for me.
One day (well, over several years) I realized that the problem with me working at home or away from the office is that whenever I was home or away from the office I would work. Even when traveling 1500 miles for Thanksgiving...I worked 10 to 12 hour days.
Stupid.
So, because I'm a workaholic, I only drink, er, work, at specified times in specified places. Sure, I may have a single "email check-in" session at home, but no prolonged working. If I need to cover a co-workers' shift, I go in to the office (if possible). No more working at home alone. Work, for some, is intoxicating.
I have a prescription for Provigil and take it regularly. I am a third shift Linux System Admin over thousands of individually configured Internet-facing servers. I also share day duties (when off work) with my wife to care for our children. Switching from Day to Night and Night to Day schedules is not only easy but actually possible because of modafinil (Provigil®).
Usually I have a 24 hour break between finishing my work-week (4 10 hour days) and starting my day-time responsibilities. However, sometimes I need to start day-time responsibilities immediately. On those occasions I take a pill after my shift and then I am good until 10 to 12 hours later. However, I then need serious sleep time. While needing to be awake I am well served by Provigil -- on 5 hours of sleep and having 2 Provigils spaced 12 hours apart I am awake and alert without amphetamine jitters for 30 hours straight. Not bad.
And the effects of Provigil when on normal schedule are enough to keep me prescribed. Acuity, alertness, focus, and ability to recall is fantastic. A real "smart pill."
I was not including new-machine OS installations as "sales"; I was referring to a news report I heard driving to work (NPR or CBS/WSJ...not sure) that direct OS sales (that is, boxed copies of the OS, not included with a machine) of XP is still higher in concurrent volume than Vista. One reason stated for boxed sales of XP these days was to rekick new Vista-ladden PCs with XP.
I knew that the general consensus that Vista sucked was not just a "anti-MS" sentiment when I received an advertisement from CompUSA touting their back-to-school specials and leading off with, "We've got Windows XP Pro computers in-stock and ready to take you back to school".
That said, OS X Leopard's delay is bad, no doubt, but a buggy, featured-reduced release would have been worse. And if Apple had to choose between getting the new iPhone out on time and the latest update to their stellar OS X, choosing the iPhone's debut to focus on was the better choice.
Lastly, Leopard isn't out yet; when it is, Vista will still suck and people can begin being Wow'ed for real.
Why not just allow arbitrary TLDs? Keep registration requirements to avoid collision and provide for consistency, but otherwise just open the TLD up to who-so-ever will.
Instead of ibm.com, ibm.biz, ibm.net, ibm.org, ibm.info... just...
Serious prostrate problems at Fundie.org, it appears... I'm looking forward to plugging this in to sysstat for some over-utilized servers I manage....
What are the biggest threats to /. success?
on
Ask Rob Malda
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Slashdot is successful by any measure. You've certainly pioneered many things we now take for granted. Many "slashdot killers" have been attempted and failed or found a different niche. What are the biggest threats to/. success today and going forward?
I am a supporting system administrator for Linux/UNIX servers at a large hosting company. I have come across many Linux servers that are compromised and being used to host phishing scams, spamware, IRC servers, etc. Rarely, however, do I see a "root'ed" server -- that is, a server on which an unauthorized person or program has gained root privileges illicitly. In fact, having root access is not necessary to host web content, send mail or provide other Internet-facing services.
All that is needed is the privilege to put content served by the web server in place. That could be a script for server-side execution, page or fragment for browser- (client-) side execution, etc. If you can upload to the web content (DocumentRoot or include) directories and the web server automatically servers that content, you, too, can host a phishing scam or illicit media for download.
If a directory in the DocumentRoot tree on a web server can be written to by the web server (the apache or nobody system account) then it is easy to inject one's illicit content on that server. OS is irrelevant at that point. In fact, if a web server has world- or apache-writable directories in the web content area the OS *must* allow any web client to upload whatever they desire to that server. It is the responsibility of the owner of the server to restrict who gets to upload what content to his/her server.
I try to explain to web designers that granting write access to the apache/nobody user is BAD, but often I hear back: "Ya, but, I can't make the script work without opening the permissions." Usually, this is done on PHP Content Management System portal sites that allow content to be uploaded directly from the web browser by arbitrary users. There is a little bit of effort required to make doing this difficult -- and it can be tricky to get right -- but forcing the script to work by removing world/apache write privileges is EASY:
$ sudo chmod -R 777/var/www/html
Ugh. Then, when that same customer is complaining that, "Hey! I've been hacked!" I respond, "no, you haven't. You been compromised. You allowed *anyone* to upload *anything* to your server and set apache to automatically server that content. You were trusting *everyone* on the Internet to behave. Your trust was broken and now your server is distributing phishing scams/malware/kidde porn/spam."
If you ever think you need to "open up" permissions so your PHP script will "run right" you either need a different PHP script or help making the script run "safely." It's harder than chmod'ing 777 but it's definitely worth doing.
One server I worked on had a lazy owner who allowed apache full write and execute access to his web content directories. He would not upgrade his PHP scripts to patched versions that plugged well-publicized holes. After repeated warnings I received a frantic call from him that his server was "hacked" and running a banking phishing scam. I checked the weblogs and found that 20,000 people had clicked the phishing scam links from their webmail inbox and retrieved the malware-ladden web pages with Internet Explorer -- meaning many of these people were sending their data right to the Russian/terrorist criminals for funding their illicit operations. The customer asked that I call the FBI to "find out who is responsible" and I said I didn't need to make that call to find out: he was responsible.
That customer is now fully-turned around and is complying with the necessary steps to ensure that his server is not used for illicit purposes any longer.
Root was never required for these compromises. Just poor administration.
Slashdot Mirror
1and1.com -- even worse!
... one füherer!
One web host and
(Godwin'ed myself!)
BTW, the "Magic Negro" reference to Obama in my post above is a reference to the original LA Times article on Obama's early campaign.
Registered at GoDaddy, hosted by Pair, running Server: Apache/1.3.37 to redirect http://barackobama.com/ to http://www.barakobamaa.com/ which is running Server: PWS/1.2.18.
PWS is supposedly Win98's Personal Web Server... which probably means Barack's web admins have a rich sense of humor.
First, let's look at Obama (he's the magical negro, the man not from Hope but offering hope to America, the ethical campaigner compared to ruthless Clinton):
(Obviously going for the "Fabulous" vote there...)
Saavis -- expensive. No game playing here. Says Apache, but doesn't say what the OS is. Smart move.
Now, McCain (the Hero, the maverick republican who shares a platform more like Clinton than other Republicans, he's the anti-establishment establishmentarian):
(Going for the "home vote" and GoDaddy.com, while it sucks ass, is indigenous to AZ)
Never heard of them... Bold move, Mr. McCain -- using a web host no one's heard of.
Now, Romney, the Northeastern governor (the Mormon who was, until recently, pro-choice; son of a one time popular Republican; good-looking but flip-flopping candidate):
(He's Mormon so perhaps UT has not registrars so he's pandering to the regional vote by using AZ-based GoDaddy?)
Rackspace! Heavy advertiser on Slashdot, employer of more RHCEs than Red Hat, ... tech savvy move! And running on LAMP. Nice.
Now, Clinton (the Senator who offers 8 more years of old-time change-- huh? A return to the future that was 1992-2000. Another opportunity for Bill to get some intern love in the Oval Office; a chance to catch Osama Bin Laden and correct a mistake from the last Clinton presidency):
The establishment candidate using the establishment registrar, I see. (Change is ... hard to find with HRC).
So, also Rackspace, but made to look like Paul Holcomb...kind like a lot of the positions HRC takes -- looks like this but really is that. no surprise. Oh, even though at Rackspace using a Microsoft solution. Always playing both sides doesn't she?
And, of course, what about Ron Paul (he's the Libertarian that is really, really a Republican this time, Ok?; the pro-legalizing drugs, anti-war on terror candidate; the one who says things worth cheering and jeering in the same debate)?
Awesome. Using a Germany/EU registrar. How...Godwin of him...
Also at Rackspace! And, obfuscating the netblock owner like Hillary. Interesting...but boldly announcing Apache and Red Hat as the platform.
Let's not forget Huckabee...(oh that we could, though, forget this Kevin Spacey look-a-like)
Sounds populist. I wonder if DOMAINPEOPLE are evangelicals?
Sounds...like a $5/mo web host. Huh. And running on IIS. Wonder if its a s
What do the candidates say about these subjects?
... do you know?
US citizens
To read the historical analysis on the adoption rate of TCP/IP versus....??...is interesting to, well, um... you know, ... crap. No one.
Anyway, thank Gore we're not stuck in an X.25 world!
There is no indication that the parent post read the article, or even the summary; just from the title one could compose such a post. The same post could be made on articles panning/praising any product -- just change the subject of the last sentence from "iPhone2" to "Vista 09" or "OLPC 2.0", etc.
Yay, moderators.
Those not $SITUATON are disgruntled against those who $SITUATION.
Anyway... I worked remotely, telecommuting, since 1996. Eventually I went full-time telecommuting -- even when I would come to "the office" I would be in a conference room, lunch area, etc., free to sit where I wished and work how/when i wanted (unless there was a specific meeting in progress). Last year I went to work in an office to do shift work as a system admin for a hosting company. Love it.
I still work on little projects and am planning that "big project" in my spare time, but my *work* is 10 hours a day, four days a week AT THE OFFICE.
It's a freeing change for me.
One day (well, over several years) I realized that the problem with me working at home or away from the office is that whenever I was home or away from the office I would work. Even when traveling 1500 miles for Thanksgiving...I worked 10 to 12 hour days.
Stupid.
So, because I'm a workaholic, I only drink, er, work, at specified times in specified places. Sure, I may have a single "email check-in" session at home, but no prolonged working. If I need to cover a co-workers' shift, I go in to the office (if possible). No more working at home alone. Work, for some, is intoxicating.
I have a prescription for Provigil and take it regularly. I am a third shift Linux System Admin over thousands of individually configured Internet-facing servers. I also share day duties (when off work) with my wife to care for our children. Switching from Day to Night and Night to Day schedules is not only easy but actually possible because of modafinil (Provigil®).
Usually I have a 24 hour break between finishing my work-week (4 10 hour days) and starting my day-time responsibilities. However, sometimes I need to start day-time responsibilities immediately. On those occasions I take a pill after my shift and then I am good until 10 to 12 hours later. However, I then need serious sleep time. While needing to be awake I am well served by Provigil -- on 5 hours of sleep and having 2 Provigils spaced 12 hours apart I am awake and alert without amphetamine jitters for 30 hours straight. Not bad.
And the effects of Provigil when on normal schedule are enough to keep me prescribed. Acuity, alertness, focus, and ability to recall is fantastic. A real "smart pill."
Yep; My first thought was like yours--now the election can be thwarted in new ways!
/not serious
It would be so much easier just to go back to monarchy or dictatorship!
The deal breaker for me is the OS. OSX versus Vista/XP? Not even close!
Vista/XP is __SO__ 1990s.
I was not including new-machine OS installations as "sales"; I was referring to a news report I heard driving to work (NPR or CBS/WSJ...not sure) that direct OS sales (that is, boxed copies of the OS, not included with a machine) of XP is still higher in concurrent volume than Vista. One reason stated for boxed sales of XP these days was to rekick new Vista-ladden PCs with XP.
That Vista still is not surpassing XP in sales, benchmarks and buzz nearly (?) a year out from RTM of Vista is stunning.
Yet, I hear people wish they could still use Windows NT 3.51, Windows 2000 and may settle for XP.
How Now Failed WOW!
GPL FTW.
This is why Rackspace is moving to an abandoned shopping mall -- better to protect oneself against aggressors, ravenous zombies.
I knew that the general consensus that Vista sucked was not just a "anti-MS" sentiment when I received an advertisement from CompUSA touting their back-to-school specials and leading off with, "We've got Windows XP Pro computers in-stock and ready to take you back to school". That said, OS X Leopard's delay is bad, no doubt, but a buggy, featured-reduced release would have been worse. And if Apple had to choose between getting the new iPhone out on time and the latest update to their stellar OS X, choosing the iPhone's debut to focus on was the better choice. Lastly, Leopard isn't out yet; when it is, Vista will still suck and people can begin being Wow'ed for real.
Why not just allow arbitrary TLDs? Keep registration requirements to avoid collision and provide for consistency, but otherwise just open the TLD up to who-so-ever will.
Instead of ibm.com, ibm.biz, ibm.net, ibm.org, ibm.info... just...
ibm
gnu
slashdot
google
of course, amazondotcom, etc.
you know it fits.
Serious prostrate problems at Fundie.org, it appears... I'm looking forward to plugging this in to sysstat for some over-utilized servers I manage....
Slashdot is successful by any measure. You've certainly pioneered many things we now take for granted. Many "slashdot killers" have been attempted and failed or found a different niche. What are the biggest threats to /. success today and going forward?
I am a supporting system administrator for Linux/UNIX servers at a large hosting
/var/www/html
company. I have come across many Linux servers that are compromised and being
used to host phishing scams, spamware, IRC servers, etc. Rarely, however, do I
see a "root'ed" server -- that is, a server on which an unauthorized
person or program has gained root privileges illicitly. In fact, having root
access is not necessary to host web content, send mail or provide other
Internet-facing services.
All that is needed is the privilege to put content served by the web server in
place. That could be a script for server-side execution, page or fragment for
browser- (client-) side execution, etc. If you can upload to the web content
(DocumentRoot or include) directories and the web server automatically servers
that content, you, too, can host a phishing scam or illicit media for download.
If a directory in the DocumentRoot tree on a web server can be written to by the
web server (the apache or nobody system account) then it is easy to inject one's
illicit content on that server. OS is irrelevant at that point. In fact, if a
web server has world- or apache-writable directories in the web content area the
OS *must* allow any web client to upload whatever they desire to that server.
It is the responsibility of the owner of the server to restrict who gets to
upload what content to his/her server.
I try to explain to web designers that granting write access to the
apache/nobody user is BAD, but often I hear back: "Ya, but, I can't make
the script work without opening the permissions." Usually, this is done on
PHP Content Management System portal sites that allow content to be uploaded
directly from the web browser by arbitrary users. There is a little bit of
effort required to make doing this difficult -- and it can be tricky to get
right -- but forcing the script to work by removing world/apache write
privileges is EASY:
$ sudo chmod -R 777
Ugh. Then, when that same customer is complaining that, "Hey! I've been
hacked!" I respond, "no, you haven't. You been compromised. You
allowed *anyone* to upload *anything* to your server and set apache to
automatically server that content. You were trusting *everyone* on the Internet
to behave. Your trust was broken and now your server is distributing phishing
scams/malware/kidde porn/spam."
If you ever think you need to "open up" permissions so your PHP script
will "run right" you either need a different PHP script or help making
the script run "safely." It's harder than chmod'ing 777 but it's
definitely worth doing.
One server I worked on had a lazy owner who allowed apache full write and
execute access to his web content directories. He would not upgrade his PHP
scripts to patched versions that plugged well-publicized holes. After repeated
warnings I received a frantic call from him that his server was
"hacked" and running a banking phishing scam. I checked the weblogs
and found that 20,000 people had clicked the phishing scam links from their
webmail inbox and retrieved the malware-ladden web pages with Internet Explorer
-- meaning many of these people were sending their data right to the
Russian/terrorist criminals for funding their illicit operations. The customer
asked that I call the FBI to "find out who is responsible" and I said
I didn't need to make that call to find out: he was responsible.
That customer is now fully-turned around and is complying with the necessary
steps to ensure that his server is not used for illicit purposes any longer.
Root was never required for these compromises. Just poor administration.
if your slashdot id was higher than mine I would have bowed in aquiescence, but sine it is not, FUCK YOU! :-)
Live and learn.
has officially commenced.
And just want to say: thank you.