Full spectrum lights are NOT needed for most (very few, in fact) plants. I'm running under stock flourescents and have almost a dozen hanging baskets from the ceiling on rail hooks. The standing joke is comparing them to Audry from "Little Shop Of Horrors" because they are growing like Kuzu and threatening passers-by. They have no direct sunlight at all, but are growing like mad. I've got... Pothos, Heart Leaf Philodendron, Spider Plant (this monster is huge), Varigated Ivy, Purple Wandering Jew, Varigated Wandering Jew, String of Perls, and Boston Ferns.
What is important is irrigation and fertilizer. I've got a 16 ltr tank with a fountain pump on a timer feeding drip irrigation tubing. The thing gets two minutes of irrigation twice a day to all the plants using variable drippers adjusted to each plant. Once a month, they get fed a solution fertilizer. Filled to the top, the tank can last about two weeks (if I'm on vacation). By the time I'm done (plans to double the number of plants) that will be down to about a week of reserve and I'll have to come up with another plan.
Chose your plants for the lighting they will receive (filtered light and indirect light plants do best - avoid direct sunlight plants) and then water and feed them according to your preferred form of abuse. (You like to over water - don't chose a snake plant. Like to dry them out, don't do nerve plants or zebra plants. Like to fertilize, DON'T do carnivorous plants!) If you can tolerate the lighting, you can find plants that will do well and even give you foliage that will help deaden the noise level.
If you can survive the environment, there are plants that can. Chose the plants to fit your working environment. It will reward you well without creating a lot of work. Chosing the wrong plants can create a lot of work and misery and dead plants...:-/
Fine... Why in blue blazes did KMail run Wine in the first place. Why would KMail run any attachment? It's one thing to run a viewer on an image like a.jpg. It's a totally different sort of thing to run the attachment. What are they going to do if they get a foo.sh file. Run it under bash? That's basically what they've done here. This is exactly why Microsoft got in heat over these worms and why these things run rampant on MS systems even if the users are not admin on that system.
It's a security bug, a security hole, just like the ones in LookOut, and it ain't a Wine problem. This one belongs on bugtraq.
I'm afraid that ppdd is pretty much history. The author is not keeping it up to date with the 2.4 kernels and both loop-aes and linux-api are proving to be just as capable. In particular, loop-aes is capable of encrypting both the root file system and swap, which were major points with ppdd. There were some 2.4 ppdd patches but, AFAIK, they all had some fundamental problems. That's why I abandoned ppdd and switched to loop-aes. From discussions on the mailing lists, I don't think the author of ppdd is going to carry on at this point.
Ken Thompson's lecture proposed a hypothetical backdoor, it didn't reveal an existing backdoor.
AFAIK, It never existed and no-one, to my knowledge, ever implimented one in the wild. I may be wrong, but I don't even think Ken demonstrated a working model, himself.
It was great fun, back in those days, to set up something that looked like it might be the great Ken Thompson compiler backdoor, but never was.
It was a scheme and nothing more. Unless by "existence" you mean the existence of the possibility of a complier propagated backdoor that doesn't show up in the sources.
It would also have to be sophisticated enough as to hide the existance of the backdoor code in it's own binaries (where they could be found by string searches) since you would want it to be platform independent and couldn't depend on assembly or binary code.
It's worth remembering and always being on the lookout for.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Full spectrum lights are NOT needed for most (very few, in fact) plants. I'm running under stock flourescents and have almost a dozen hanging baskets from the ceiling on rail hooks. The standing joke is comparing them to Audry from "Little Shop Of Horrors" because they are growing like Kuzu and threatening passers-by. They have no direct sunlight at all, but are growing like mad. I've got... Pothos, Heart Leaf Philodendron, Spider Plant (this monster is huge), Varigated Ivy, Purple Wandering Jew, Varigated Wandering Jew, String of Perls, and Boston Ferns.
:-/
What is important is irrigation and fertilizer. I've got a 16 ltr tank with a fountain pump on a timer feeding drip irrigation tubing. The thing gets two minutes of irrigation twice a day to all the plants using variable drippers adjusted to each plant. Once a month, they get fed a solution fertilizer. Filled to the top, the tank can last about two weeks (if I'm on vacation). By the time I'm done (plans to double the number of plants) that will be down to about a week of reserve and I'll have to come up with another plan.
Chose your plants for the lighting they will receive (filtered light and indirect light plants do best - avoid direct sunlight plants) and then water and feed them according to your preferred form of abuse. (You like to over water - don't chose a snake plant. Like to dry them out, don't do nerve plants or zebra plants. Like to fertilize, DON'T do carnivorous plants!) If you can tolerate the lighting, you can find plants that will do well and even give you foliage that will help deaden the noise level.
If you can survive the environment, there are plants that can. Chose the plants to fit your working environment. It will reward you well without creating a lot of work. Chosing the wrong plants can create a lot of work and misery and dead plants...
It's a security bug, a security hole, just like the ones in LookOut, and it ain't a Wine problem. This one belongs on bugtraq.
I'm afraid that ppdd is pretty much history. The author is not keeping it up to date with the 2.4 kernels and both loop-aes and linux-api are proving to be just as capable. In particular, loop-aes is capable of encrypting both the root file system and swap, which were major points with ppdd. There were some 2.4 ppdd patches but, AFAIK, they all had some fundamental problems. That's why I abandoned ppdd and switched to loop-aes. From discussions on the mailing lists, I don't think the author of ppdd is going to carry on at this point.
AFAIK, It never existed and no-one, to my knowledge, ever implimented one in the wild. I may be wrong, but I don't even think Ken demonstrated a working model, himself.
It was great fun, back in those days, to set up something that looked like it might be the great Ken Thompson compiler backdoor, but never was.
It was a scheme and nothing more. Unless by "existence" you mean the existence of the possibility of a complier propagated backdoor that doesn't show up in the sources.
It would also have to be sophisticated enough as to hide the existance of the backdoor code in it's own binaries (where they could be found by string searches) since you would want it to be platform independent and couldn't depend on assembly or binary code.
It's worth remembering and always being on the lookout for. :-)