It seems all photographers here (and most others) assume the photographer has an absolute right to copy/sell all photo's taken at the wedding.
But what about embarassing photos/films? I mean, sometimes things go wrong (hopefully not at your wedding:), and you don't want others to see it afterwards.
So, if a for example a dress breaks down, does the photographer have the right to sell the resulting photo's to Playboy, with the bride powerless to stop it?
Removing the compiler wouldn't help, anyway - presumably most systems with public shell access also have some sort of ftp access. You could even rig up something to echo the binary to a file through a terminal, I'm sure.
Right. The only thing that might help is to use a noexec mount option while mounting the filesystems the untrusted users have write access to.
But the website has changed layout recently. From
April 27, 1999 through to
June 21, 2003,, the website has looked very simmilar, untill today (Website down), or the last google cache visit.
For example I can't get a Hotmail email account because of my name
That's OK, 'cause any may you would have sent using that From: Graham-Cumming@hotmail.com header would have been filtered away anyway by the recipient's SPAM filters.
In related news, it is anounced that the author of the virus
has sent letters asking $699 from every windows-PC-owner who
illegally installed the virus in his/her computer.
With about one million illegally installed copies of the virus,
windows users are massively abusing copyrights.
Furthermore, each of these 1M PC's have made an estimated
1000 ilegal copies of the virus, contributing to a total
pirated amount of 699 billion dollars, dwarfing the SCO lawsuits.
Yes, the real pirates are the windows users!
Asked how the virus author fiels about the damage the virus
does to the world-economy, the reply is "the pirated copying
of my IP is causing me much more damage than whatever damage
may be done to any economy".
Since when do you have to d/l special software to use MSN search?
I believe at some point, MSN barred users of other browsers than IE. So, in order to use MSN, I would have had to install IE and a whole different OS to run it.
But anyway, as far as I'm aware, Mozilla users aren't barred from MSN anymore, so I could switch now without installing anything.
If we filter domains from a URL in confirmed spam, then its almost certain any other email referencing such domain is spam as well.
OK, the first spammer that wants to irritate you can thus easily block anyone from ever hearing about your website (by running a "joe-job" with your website's URL in it).
But I think it'd be much funnier if someone found a hole in SCO Unix, and wrote a worm to DDOS sco.com
Remember, DDOS means Distributed DOS. As there cannot be much more than one, two SCO UNIX systems around the world, the most they could do is a simple DOS.
If the zombies are sending out mail that claims to be from an AOL adress, then mailservers worldwide can now check the SPF records in the AOL.com domain, and decide it's SPAM, even before they read the full message.
If the zobies are sending out spam claiming to be from another domain, then AOL adding SPF records to AOL.com doesn't help mutch -- but it may cause the owner of the forged domain to add SPF records.
I noticed/etc/motd was world-writable on our univ suns, so I typed
echo 'hacker alert' >/etc/motd
A couple of hours later, the sysadm came running to me, shocked and very angry. Wasn't suspended, though.
Right now, they have a couple thousand relays that can each send millions of emails per day. Cutting each of them down to 8,000 emails per day would still make a dent in spam
`a couple of thousand relays' times 8000 emails/day,
how many emails a day is that? So, it wouldn't help much.
Why don't they have a couple of moderately safe distributed around the world? Each site could be orders of magnitude cheaper, and by the time the desaster is so big all sites around the world are destroyed, no-one is interested in the data anymore anyway.
A few years back, analysts were predicting numbers of programmers to skyrocket. They were wrong. Now they predict them to go down. Why should I believe them this time?
To me it looks like they just take the trend of the past 2 years, extrapolate it to 2015, think of a few pages worth of `reasoning' why the numbers go so much down/up, and, hey presto, a new raport available!
Re:How does this reduce spam in any shape or form?
on
SPF Design Frozen
·
· Score: 1
The big ones (yahoo, hotmail) are on board already; that's going to put some fierce pressure on ISPs to use this.
Are they? I don't see any txt records for hotmail nor yahoo, and the checking tool" doesn't see them eighter.
Ahm, I've just added my domain, was easy to do with the SPF wizzard, you just answer the questions, and it tells you what to enter into you bind config files. (And even explains what it means you're adding).
But then, going back to the checking tool you mention, I get this:
Domain: uea.org
Record Found: "v=spf1 a a:co.uea.org include:cistron.nl -all"
Errors: Malformed or truncated domain 'co.uea.org' in 'a' declaration in rule part 3 (a:co.uea.org)
Malformed or truncated domain 'cistron.nl' in 'include' declaration in rule part 4 (include:cistron.nl)
No Warnings
No Notes
So I guess the checking tool is somewhat too strict (or the wizzard is sloppy.).
explains the reported errors, though.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, that should help you next time you try to convince your boss to try linux.
But what about embarassing photos/films? I mean, sometimes things go wrong (hopefully not at your wedding:), and you don't want others to see it afterwards.
So, if a for example a dress breaks down, does the photographer have the right to sell the resulting photo's to Playboy, with the bride powerless to stop it?
Right. The only thing that might help is to use a noexec mount option while mounting the filesystems the untrusted users have write access to.
But the website has changed layout recently. From April 27, 1999 through to June 21, 2003,, the website has looked very simmilar, untill today (Website down), or the last google cache visit.
But (nearly?) all dialects of Chinese use the same writing system, so your argument doesn't really hold.
That's OK, 'cause any may you would have sent using that From: Graham-Cumming@hotmail.com header would have been filtered away anyway by the recipient's SPAM filters.
The site seems to be down already here's a google cache link.
With about one million illegally installed copies of the virus, windows users are massively abusing copyrights. Furthermore, each of these 1M PC's have made an estimated 1000 ilegal copies of the virus, contributing to a total pirated amount of 699 billion dollars, dwarfing the SCO lawsuits.
Yes, the real pirates are the windows users!
Asked how the virus author fiels about the damage the virus does to the world-economy, the reply is "the pirated copying of my IP is causing me much more damage than whatever damage may be done to any economy".
I believe at some point, MSN barred users of other browsers than IE. So, in order to use MSN, I would have had to install IE and a whole different OS to run it.
But anyway, as far as I'm aware, Mozilla users aren't barred from MSN anymore, so I could switch now without installing anything.
The word "win" obviously is too close to the trademarked "windows", owned by Microsoft, so no-one else is allowed to do it. They had to win.
OK, the first spammer that wants to irritate you can thus easily block anyone from ever hearing about your website (by running a "joe-job" with your website's URL in it).
Correction: straight-A students are smart enough not to be caught breaking the law.
Remember, DDOS means Distributed DOS. As there cannot be much more than one, two SCO UNIX systems around the world, the most they could do is a simple DOS.
In that case, vpenis.c may help.
Yes, it's funny. But then again, maybe you were serious, and are using Debian's BSD or HURD port? Debian's BSD or HURD port?
or email"
Don't want to ruine your joke, but it's clear that the telephone number after the "is" was erased by the lucky reciever of the extortion note.
here's the .gif image again
Hey, and ./ has it's very own domain on
slashdot.mycrowsoft.com!
If the zobies are sending out spam claiming to be from another domain, then AOL adding SPF records to AOL.com doesn't help mutch -- but it may cause the owner of the forged domain to add SPF records.
[AOL]
Me Too!
[/AOL]
I noticed /etc/motd was world-writable on our univ suns, so I typed /etc/motd
echo 'hacker alert' >
A couple of hours later, the sysadm came running to me, shocked and very angry. Wasn't suspended, though.
`a couple of thousand relays' times 8000 emails/day, how many emails a day is that? So, it wouldn't help much.
Why don't they have a couple of moderately safe distributed around the world? Each site could be orders of magnitude cheaper, and by the time the desaster is so big all sites around the world are destroyed, no-one is interested in the data anymore anyway.
To me it looks like they just take the trend of the past 2 years, extrapolate it to 2015, think of a few pages worth of `reasoning' why the numbers go so much down/up, and, hey presto, a new raport available!
Are they? I don't see any txt records for hotmail nor yahoo, and the checking tool" doesn't see them eighter.
Ahm, I've just added my domain, was easy to do with the SPF wizzard, you just answer the questions, and it tells you what to enter into you bind config files. (And even explains what it means you're adding). But then, going back to the checking tool you mention, I get this:
Domain: uea.org
Record Found: "v=spf1 a a:co.uea.org include:cistron.nl -all"
Errors: Malformed or truncated domain 'co.uea.org' in 'a' declaration in rule part 3 (a:co.uea.org)
Malformed or truncated domain 'cistron.nl' in 'include' declaration in rule part 4 (include:cistron.nl)
No Warnings
No Notes
So I guess the checking tool is somewhat too strict (or the wizzard is sloppy.).
explains the reported errors, though.