As I've said before, it is not relavant for these purposes to scan inside the perimiter (public IPs or not) of a private network, corporate or not. There are few good reasons for mapping a network that you don't own, and they aren't very profitable. Grwon up script kiddies sounds about right.
It is not necessary to go beyone perimiter routers of a company or individuals network. Those performance issues are of no importance to the rest of the Internet.
NO! Netcraft and Google are not doing these types of scans. I think you are confusing Layers 3 and 4 with Layer 7. A ping sweep is much more invasive than a web spider or an HTTP GET request. These ping sweeps are mapping networks, not following links. I consider my network private property and anyone attempting to scan it (for whatever reason) is trespassing.
I've read Practical UNIX and Internet Security. I didn't get the impression I now see. The man is a nazi. He talks of P3P, a protocol for collecting information on people who visit web sites (more detailed than DoobieClick), and banning Telnet. This guy is crazy. What college whould ban telnet? Many of them use telnet for student services. The internet was built on free use of protocols like and including Telnet. If we begin to ban them (especially where most of the internet was created, colleges), technological growth would undoubtedly be stunted.
I think this is flamebait. If he posted the same message to alt.fan.windows (joke:), i'd let it go, but posting this on Slashdot is asking for trouble.
It's availible at http://z.trapezoid.com in the top news article. Ignore the username and password, that's for user prefs (if it's annoying, hit 'Login/out'.)
I parse news from many sites to incoporate in my site. I have a battery of perl scripts that go out every half-hour and parse headlines from the likes of Yahoo! News, NPR, Slashdot, and Wired. My system has access to a T1, but it doesn't need it. All I do is grab text files and parse them for headlines which I use to link to the stories on their respective sites. This works well, I am a student who can't support those costs. I also parse CNN FN stock quotes for a more personalized experience.
Hmm, so than what you're saying is that I'm exceptionally smarter than most people (including most programmers)? It's funny, though, my teachers and parents have said the same thing, but I still don't see what the big deal is! Either way, I thank you greatly for the compliment, and wish the best to you too.
Side note: I think the previous reply to my message is flaimbait. However, I do thank the AC, and Crutcher for reading my post and actually considering the points I made (even if it was to argue them). That's what makes Slashdot kick so much ass.
First off, when I get moderator stats again, I'm gonna mod this POS down!!!
BASIC is an excellent language for children. I started programming in 2nd grade on the Apple-IIs in school and the C64 at home. IMHO, a programming language should not force a programmer to think in a certain way, rather, the language should allow the programmer to write progs the way he/she thinks. I am a programmer because I like to make my computer do things, not because I think in a structured way (I DON'T!!!)
My end goal is to write programs using assembler. That, or machine code. The only real fields that still use this are (I think) embedded programming (cars, blenders, cell phones). Yeah, that'd be cool.
The guys at Heroine Virtual have developed XMovie with deCSS built in. Although the current version does not have it (due to GPL violations), the older ones do. The average slashdotter should be able to find older version. XMovie can play MPEG2 video, and with the deCSS in it, it can decode DVD too.
I DO NOT RECCOMMEND THAT ANYONE USE SOFTWARE THAT VIOLATES A LICENSING AGREEMENT
Am I mistaken (probably!) in my thinking that almost everything we use (especially/.ers) has had roots in a government/academic research program? For example: THE INTERNET!!! The Internet has become a major part of America's economy and daily life, and it was started by four universities and the DoD.
Conversly though, the Internet is based on open standards, and it is still able to be insanely profitable. These DNA-easy-bake-ovens should be costly (I'm sure they're worth every penny), but the engineering (technological and biological) should be made public. This includes schematics on the hardware, and of course, the human genome.
Anyone can become a member! You don't need to be an employee, researcher, et cetera. I, Joe Q. Public can go out, buy the CD, and become a member. That's public access.
The public library is public access, but you need a card to check out books (membership). Anyone can get a card!!!
MP3.COM was acting as a library/archive! Section 108 of the US Copyright Law protects entities acting as a library or archive open to the public. Arguing fair use is stupid! They're not even subject to fair use requirements because they are not the end recipient of the works. Furthermore, if someone downloads from MP3.COM and illegally distributes the songs, MP3.COM is NOT LIABLE (sect. 108-f-2). They are so far within their rights, it's not even funny.
I'm a freakin junior in a crappy high school (never taken a law class) and I can make a better defence than their big shot lawyers!!!
Please go and read Section 108. Judge for yourself with the real facts.
If Microsoft used Kerberos code from MIT (which is distributed under a BSD-style license) then they must say that it is based on Kerberos. To not do so, would be in violation of the license.
However,
This is not necessarily the case for original code written to comply with an IETF standard (look at IIS, based on several RFCs, but not a derivitive work). If Microsoft wrote their own Kerberos code from scratch, but claims that it is compatible with the IETF Specification, that may be breaking some rules.
By the way, IANAL. If there are any lawyers reading this, please correct any errors I have made.
Fortunately, there is a project working on the antithesis of that. Internet2 is (currently) limited to educational institutions and (I think, could be wrong about this) a few commercial organizations. I don't know the facts here, so don't quote me.
I believe what you're referring to is the "Symantec Web" (no relation to the company). Berners-Lee describes this toward the end of the book, as part of his ideas for the future.
Besides that, my argument is that as the original creator of the web, and Chairman of the W3C his opinion counts. You say "If we were still using Tim Berners-Lee's web" as if he died. Although I recognise that the reccomendations are designed by third parties, he IS the chariman of the W3C, he's not totally abstracted from the current state of affairs.
And another thing, going off on a tangant to try and discredit my ideas just to give you a feeling of self worth is an aweful way to win the fight for our side. It doesn't take a good actor to spot a bad one, thus, discrediting me does not make you any smarter than I am. Remember this: An enemy of my enemy is my friend. We're on the same side here, we don't need to be fighting each other.
How come, in all of the hoopla, controversy, mahem, and mainstream news articles, no one asks Tim Berners-Lee (inventor of the Web) what his opinion is. IMHO, his thoughts should play a major role in the legal judgments made about linking in general, and deep-linking inparticular. If I were a judge, this would be the first question to ask.
The issue of linking - it's original design, is well described in "Weaving The Web", Tim's book about the web. The sort of links we're dealing with in this issue are more formally described as "Soft Links" because there's no hard relationship between the two documents, just an informal pointer: Check this out too kinda thing.
The idea of illegalizing this is as absurd as the notion of outlawing citations, or bibliographic entries in a book. Or, more specifically, forcing you to say "World Book Encyc. 1999" in place of "World Book Encyc. 1999 Vol. 13 Pg. 231 Par. 4"
No offense, but, you're obviously not familiar with radio.
Usually, with ham radio at least, you'd use a TNC to convert from serial data to RF for a radio to transmit. The faster the data rate, the higher the bandwidth. Why do you think they call cable "High Bandwidth"? 'Cause you can't do 6 megabits over 560kHz (AM Broadcast), you need Higher Bandwidth.
Ask youreself: What kind of line quality do you need for voice? To answer this, think in terms of an MP3. A radio recording of a talk show only needs Mono/22kHz/8bit/96bps. That is fine for radio, but for data (especially for full-duplex) you're gonna need some serious improvement. You may be asking "But doesn't the audio get digitized first?" Yes (probably) but it still only requires a 14.4-class data rate to transfer.
References... TAPR: These guys are the IETF of packet radio. Guerilla.net: An underground alternative to the wired Internet.
P.S. TNC is a "Terminal Node Controller". Could be described as a radio-modem.
Well, YES! I have attacked Coca-Cola when I was in middle school. They were approved by the principal to set up a truck outside of the cafeteria and distribute SURGE, their newest drink. This pissed me off. Commercializing the school and taking advantage (monetarily) of the student body. I'll call it crack tactics (weed is too ubiquitous) - give it out free, then get 'em hooked so they buy more. When I asked the principal about this, she said that Coca-Cola was a partner of the Dade County Public Schools, and that she was away at a meeting when they were there.
Also, to the other replies... I have sysadmind at this school, and yes, it does suck. However, I stand by my statement that this is not the result of real trouble, but rather the percieved notion that "all-kids-are-crackers."
Slashdot Mirror
I have taken measures to secure my network. Duh! That's why it'd be trespassing to come inside.
-------
As I've said before, it is not relavant for these purposes to scan inside the perimiter (public IPs or not) of a private network, corporate or not. There are few good reasons for mapping a network that you don't own, and they aren't very profitable. Grwon up script kiddies sounds about right.
-------
You're tracerouting their web server(s). Those are probably not the same systems used to do the network mapping. Thus, not the same IP addresses.
-------
I know it's bad, but it sounds so good.
-------
It is not necessary to go beyone perimiter routers of a company or individuals network. Those performance issues are of no importance to the rest of the Internet.
-------
NO! Netcraft and Google are not doing these types of scans. I think you are confusing Layers 3 and 4 with Layer 7. A ping sweep is much more invasive than a web spider or an HTTP GET request. These ping sweeps are mapping networks, not following links. I consider my network private property and anyone attempting to scan it (for whatever reason) is trespassing.
-------
I've read Practical UNIX and Internet Security. I didn't get the impression I now see. The man is a nazi. He talks of P3P, a protocol for collecting information on people who visit web sites (more detailed than DoobieClick), and banning Telnet. This guy is crazy. What college whould ban telnet? Many of them use telnet for student services. The internet was built on free use of protocols like and including Telnet. If we begin to ban them (especially where most of the internet was created, colleges), technological growth would undoubtedly be stunted.
-------
I think this is flamebait. If he posted the same message to alt.fan.windows (joke :), i'd let it go, but posting this on Slashdot is asking for trouble.
-------
It's availible at http://z.trapezoid.com in the top news article. Ignore the username and password, that's for user prefs (if it's annoying, hit 'Login/out'.)
-------
I parse news from many sites to incoporate in my site. I have a battery of perl scripts that go out every half-hour and parse headlines from the likes of Yahoo! News, NPR, Slashdot, and Wired. My system has access to a T1, but it doesn't need it. All I do is grab text files and parse them for headlines which I use to link to the stories on their respective sites. This works well, I am a student who can't support those costs. I also parse CNN FN stock quotes for a more personalized experience.
-------
Hmm, so than what you're saying is that I'm exceptionally smarter than most people (including most programmers)? It's funny, though, my teachers and parents have said the same thing, but I still don't see what the big deal is! Either way, I thank you greatly for the compliment, and wish the best to you too.
Side note: I think the previous reply to my message is flaimbait. However, I do thank the AC, and Crutcher for reading my post and actually considering the points I made (even if it was to argue them). That's what makes Slashdot kick so much ass.
-------
First off, when I get moderator stats again, I'm gonna mod this POS down!!!
BASIC is an excellent language for children. I started programming in 2nd grade on the Apple-IIs in school and the C64 at home. IMHO, a programming language should not force a programmer to think in a certain way, rather, the language should allow the programmer to write progs the way he/she thinks. I am a programmer because I like to make my computer do things, not because I think in a structured way (I DON'T!!!)
-------
My end goal is to write programs using assembler. That, or machine code. The only real fields that still use this are (I think) embedded programming (cars, blenders, cell phones). Yeah, that'd be cool.
-------
The guys at Heroine Virtual have developed XMovie with deCSS built in. Although the current version does not have it (due to GPL violations), the older ones do. The average slashdotter should be able to find older version. XMovie can play MPEG2 video, and with the deCSS in it, it can decode DVD too.
I DO NOT RECCOMMEND THAT ANYONE USE SOFTWARE THAT VIOLATES A LICENSING AGREEMENT
-------
Exodus sounds cool, but I'm a big fan of Level(3)!!! They just kikz azz.
-------
Am I mistaken (probably!) in my thinking that almost everything we use (especially /.ers) has had roots in a government/academic research program? For example: THE INTERNET!!! The Internet has become a major part of America's economy and daily life, and it was started by four universities and the DoD.
Conversly though, the Internet is based on open standards, and it is still able to be insanely profitable. These DNA-easy-bake-ovens should be costly (I'm sure they're worth every penny), but the engineering (technological and biological) should be made public. This includes schematics on the hardware, and of course, the human genome.
-------
Anyone can become a member! You don't need to be an employee, researcher, et cetera. I, Joe Q. Public can go out, buy the CD, and become a member. That's public access.
The public library is public access, but you need a card to check out books (membership). Anyone can get a card!!!
-------
MP3.COM was acting as a library/archive! Section 108 of the US Copyright Law protects entities acting as a library or archive open to the public. Arguing fair use is stupid! They're not even subject to fair use requirements because they are not the end recipient of the works. Furthermore, if someone downloads from MP3.COM and illegally distributes the songs, MP3.COM is NOT LIABLE (sect. 108-f-2). They are so far within their rights, it's not even funny.
I'm a freakin junior in a crappy high school (never taken a law class) and I can make a better defence than their big shot lawyers!!!
Please go and read Section 108. Judge for yourself with the real facts.
-------
This all depends...
If Microsoft used Kerberos code from MIT (which is distributed under a BSD-style license) then they must say that it is based on Kerberos. To not do so, would be in violation of the license.
However,
This is not necessarily the case for original code written to comply with an IETF standard (look at IIS, based on several RFCs, but not a derivitive work). If Microsoft wrote their own Kerberos code from scratch, but claims that it is compatible with the IETF Specification, that may be breaking some rules.
By the way, IANAL. If there are any lawyers reading this, please correct any errors I have made.
-------
Fortunately, there is a project working on the antithesis of that. Internet2 is (currently) limited to educational institutions and (I think, could be wrong about this) a few commercial organizations. I don't know the facts here, so don't quote me.
just trying to give some hope for the future.
I believe what you're referring to is the "Symantec Web" (no relation to the company). Berners-Lee describes this toward the end of the book, as part of his ideas for the future.
Besides that, my argument is that as the original creator of the web, and Chairman of the W3C his opinion counts. You say "If we were still using Tim Berners-Lee's web" as if he died. Although I recognise that the reccomendations are designed by third parties, he IS the chariman of the W3C, he's not totally abstracted from the current state of affairs.
And another thing, going off on a tangant to try and discredit my ideas just to give you a feeling of self worth is an aweful way to win the fight for our side. It doesn't take a good actor to spot a bad one, thus, discrediting me does not make you any smarter than I am. Remember this: An enemy of my enemy is my friend. We're on the same side here, we don't need to be fighting each other.
How come, in all of the hoopla, controversy, mahem, and mainstream news articles, no one asks Tim Berners-Lee (inventor of the Web) what his opinion is. IMHO, his thoughts should play a major role in the legal judgments made about linking in general, and deep-linking inparticular. If I were a judge, this would be the first question to ask.
The issue of linking - it's original design, is well described in "Weaving The Web", Tim's book about the web. The sort of links we're dealing with in this issue are more formally described as "Soft Links" because there's no hard relationship between the two documents, just an informal pointer: Check this out too kinda thing.
The idea of illegalizing this is as absurd as the notion of outlawing citations, or bibliographic entries in a book. Or, more specifically, forcing you to say "World Book Encyc. 1999" in place of "World Book Encyc. 1999 Vol. 13 Pg. 231 Par. 4"
2 words: Redundant Power Supplies
No offense, but, you're obviously not familiar with radio.
Usually, with ham radio at least, you'd use a TNC to convert from serial data to RF for a radio to transmit. The faster the data rate, the higher the bandwidth. Why do you think they call cable "High Bandwidth"? 'Cause you can't do 6 megabits over 560kHz (AM Broadcast), you need Higher Bandwidth.
Ask youreself: What kind of line quality do you need for voice? To answer this, think in terms of an MP3. A radio recording of a talk show only needs Mono/22kHz/8bit/96bps. That is fine for radio, but for data (especially for full-duplex) you're gonna need some serious improvement. You may be asking "But doesn't the audio get digitized first?" Yes (probably) but it still only requires a 14.4-class data rate to transfer.
References...
TAPR: These guys are the IETF of packet radio.
Guerilla.net: An underground alternative to the wired Internet.
P.S. TNC is a "Terminal Node Controller". Could be described as a radio-modem.
Well, YES! I have attacked Coca-Cola when I was in middle school. They were approved by the principal to set up a truck outside of the cafeteria and distribute SURGE, their newest drink. This pissed me off. Commercializing the school and taking advantage (monetarily) of the student body. I'll call it crack tactics (weed is too ubiquitous) - give it out free, then get 'em hooked so they buy more. When I asked the principal about this, she said that Coca-Cola was a partner of the Dade County Public Schools, and that she was away at a meeting when they were there.
Also, to the other replies...
I have sysadmind at this school, and yes, it does suck. However, I stand by my statement that this is not the result of real trouble, but rather the percieved notion that "all-kids-are-crackers."