Oops, missed that. Thanks. But still, if the worm somehow depends on those ports, wouldn't a firewall keep it from fulfilling its purpose (i.e., "accepting remote commands")? I can't imagine the worm opens those ports and then doesn't need them.
I'm waiting for a worm that determines you're behind, say, a Linksys firewall, then does sustained dictionary attacks against 192.168.1.1 (username = blank, couldn't be easier!) and opens up the needed ports to the infected machine.
one more thing: accorting to the not-very-fine article, the exploit requires one of the following ports listening: UDP 7111, UDP 7222.
So, once again, a firewall that blocks EVERYTHING, EXCEPT things you want open (like 80 and 22) will prevent this, right? Seems to me that slapper (which affected Apache with mod_ssl and 443 open, IIRC) was much more dangerous.
"Identified security issues in Internet Explorer could allow an attacker to compromise a Windows-based system... This affects all computers with Internet Explorer installed (even if you don't run Internet Explorer as your Web browser)."
And since MS included IE by default, enabled it by default, and made it almost impossible to uninstall, all you MS defenders are invited to take a long walk off a short pier. BTW, that update is less than 2 years old, so it's not like I'm really digging in the crates to find that one or making "OMG teh BSOD!" Win98 jokes.
No sense mentioning that Linux was ten years old at that point (and the Free Software movement was even older) and both* had literally thousands of developers and features and apps by then, whereas MS was just starting to dabble in OSS at that point. "Sure, Picasso is a big name in art and is known worldwide, but 4 years ago, no one had heard of him, and we just bought a tube of paint and one of those sticks with hair on the end."
After all, what's a ten-year headstart in the computer industry, anyway?
* note that they're blurring the line between Linux in particular and OSS in general to make its history seem even shorter and less significant.
I agree, the differences in how video and audio are experienced means video will never be as big as audio, but there's still lots of growth to come in this segment. If I rode the bus, I'd be all over this. Wait another 6-12 months--when video-playing iPods cost as much as game systems--and then look on any bus that serves a high school. I bet there will be tons of them.
Even more then video games, video is easily sharable. By that I don't mean swapping shows, I mean more than one kid can experience it at once. All you need to do is each wear one earbud and you can both watch a show with nothing more than what came in the box. Get a splitter and up to three can watch a show. No, it's not ideal viewing, but what else is there to do on a bus? When I was in high school, getting home was a 45-minute ride followed by a 25-minute ride.
It took me a while to get used to mice with acceleration, but I did. Maybe you will, too. If not, oh well. The scroll wheel is, for me, a billion times better than a thumbwheel like Dell or Sony uses that can only scroll a little at a time. As for star ratings, yes, they're a bit of a pain, you just have to get used to moving veeeery slowly. I think going from 0-5 stars from 12 to 3'oclock on the wheel is dumb. It should take half the wheel for the 5 ratings--0, 45, 90, 135, and 180 degrees.
Actually, Disney started not-sucking in 1989 with The Little Mermaid and continued not-sucking through the 1990s, starting with 1991's Beauty and the Beast--years before 1995's Toy Story. Granted, some movies were better than others, and the Pixar ones are mostly great, but at least Disney wasn't in its 1980s suck-out-loud state anymore.
I know the guy who used to admin RedHat's FTP servers. He had the server(s) set up so if anyone was using a download accelerator, it'd kill *all* transfers to that IP address.
dammit! 'preview', not 'submit'! a longer list would have shown more repeats, like so: cat.bash_history | awk '{print $1}' | uniq -c | sort 2 sudo 2 sudo 2 tail 2 tail 2 top 2 uuidgen 2 which 3 curl 3 curl 3 echo 3 grep 3 grep 3 grep 3 grep 3 ls 3 ls 3 ls
Trying this: cat.bash_history | awk '{print $1}' | uniq -c | sort I get output like this: 3 telnet 3 telnet 3 uuidgen 4 cd 4 ps 4 ssh 4 tar 7 cat Something's not right... it seems like it's performing 'uniq' on the whole command, not just the single word that pops out of 'awk.'
Curl is *not* a wget clone. That is a common misconception. Never, during curl's development, have we intended curl to replace wget or compete on its market. Curl is targeted at single-shot file transfers.
Mine: (flawed commands removed) cal cat cd cdd random text to get past lameness filter - isn't this why we have mods? size does matter! chmod clear cp crontab curl du echo grep random text to get past lameness filter - isn't this why we have mods? size does matter! gunzip head kill killall links locate ls lynx mkdir mv random text to get past lameness filter - isn't this why we have mods? size does matter! open pbpaste pico pine ps rm rmdir scp screencapture random text to get past lameness filter - isn't this why we have mods? size does matter! ssh su sudo tail tar telnet top touch unzip uptime which
I wouldn't dream of trying a new flavor of *BSD...
on
OpenBSD 3.8 Released
·
· Score: 2, Funny
... until I read a review of it on Slashdot. You know, one where someone who has never used it before gives it a spin for two days and writes a 5 page review: 3 pages on the installation, 1/2 page talking about how the default theme looks, 1 1/2 pages complaining that it didn't work with his sound card or run his monitor at the right resolution, and then concluding by saying Mac OS X is better.
Yeah, because obviously Wikipedia is run by a bunch of incompetent retards who wouldn't think of *reviewing* the content before printing. Besides, the dynamicness of Wikipedia is just *one* of its advantages. A printed Wikipedia is still a great product, especially for people in the developing world, where this project is aimed. Or did you not even RTFS?
Like any OSS project, Wiki will soon reach a point where some articles are reviewed and frozen--for the 99% of the stuff in there that isn't current events, this will be pretty easy. (Well, not *easy*, but... you know... doable.) Then updates will not go right into the live page but rather to a "sugestions for the next build" page. Then they'll probably change the structure so articles default to displaying the frozen page, with a "Click here for current version - caution, may be inaccurate" link leading to a live page, and hopefully an option to have differences highlighted. Once vandals' contributions are not immediately world-visible, malicious edits will drop by about 99%.
In short, development of Wikipedia is not dead. It's not stuck in it's current model, condemned to have the "Douche" page vandalized and cleaned 20 times and hour for all eternity. It will adapt and become even better than it is now.
I pay $40/year for my local Sunday paper, mostly for the ads. I buy enough gadgets through the year that the paper pays for itself a few times over. (I buy things when the price is good, and the occasional great sale means I can get a hard drive or whatever for less than I could online. Plus: no shipping, easier returns, see it in person before I buy it, get it the same day, etc etc etc.)
That said, I always end up finding a few things to read and usually wind up spending a couple hours with it. It's quiet and calm and a nice change not to be sitting up looking at a screen for another couple hours. Sure, it may not be great for up-to-the-second news, but I don't care about that anyway. There's always some neat articles about local stuff, vacations, homes, etc. Browsing slashdot and the rest gets old after a while and it's a nice change of pace to find some unexpected neat thing that *doesn't* have to do with technology, Google, MS, Apple, or My Rights Online--and to do it in a nice, quiet, analog fashion.
Oh yeah, one other great thing about newspapers: no animated ads.:-)
A CS degree to make game soundtracks? No way. All you need are musical skillz, industry contacts, and luck. MOST industries are "hard to break into." There are more major movies released in a year than major video games--you've got better odds in Hollywood.
Here's all you need to do: spend 10 years making soundtracks for free or cheap for every game you possibly can until someone "discovers" you. Alternately, move to where video games are made, take any job at any company so you can get in the building and find out who does what, and go from there. But a CS degree? No way.
Slashdot Mirror
No More Science on the ISS Until Further Notice
Guess they'll just have to have sex then.
Oops, missed that. Thanks. But still, if the worm somehow depends on those ports, wouldn't a firewall keep it from fulfilling its purpose (i.e., "accepting remote commands")? I can't imagine the worm opens those ports and then doesn't need them.
I'm waiting for a worm that determines you're behind, say, a Linksys firewall, then does sustained dictionary attacks against 192.168.1.1 (username = blank, couldn't be easier!) and opens up the needed ports to the infected machine.
one more thing: accorting to the not-very-fine article, the exploit requires one of the following ports listening: UDP 7111, UDP 7222.
So, once again, a firewall that blocks EVERYTHING, EXCEPT things you want open (like 80 and 22) will prevent this, right? Seems to me that slapper (which affected Apache with mod_ssl and 443 open, IIRC) was much more dangerous.
From the best MS technote EVAR:
"Identified security issues in Internet Explorer could allow an attacker to compromise a Windows-based system... This affects all computers with Internet Explorer installed (even if you don't run Internet Explorer as your Web browser)."
And since MS included IE by default, enabled it by default, and made it almost impossible to uninstall, all you MS defenders are invited to take a long walk off a short pier. BTW, that update is less than 2 years old, so it's not like I'm really digging in the crates to find that one or making "OMG teh BSOD!" Win98 jokes.
Isn't BSD supposed to be secure by default?
Um, yeah, and AFAIK, part of that includes not having the webserver on by default. You turn it on, you're at risk.
No sense mentioning that Linux was ten years old at that point (and the Free Software movement was even older) and both* had literally thousands of developers and features and apps by then, whereas MS was just starting to dabble in OSS at that point. "Sure, Picasso is a big name in art and is known worldwide, but 4 years ago, no one had heard of him, and we just bought a tube of paint and one of those sticks with hair on the end."
After all, what's a ten-year headstart in the computer industry, anyway?
* note that they're blurring the line between Linux in particular and OSS in general to make its history seem even shorter and less significant.
I agree, the differences in how video and audio are experienced means video will never be as big as audio, but there's still lots of growth to come in this segment. If I rode the bus, I'd be all over this. Wait another 6-12 months--when video-playing iPods cost as much as game systems--and then look on any bus that serves a high school. I bet there will be tons of them.
Even more then video games, video is easily sharable. By that I don't mean swapping shows, I mean more than one kid can experience it at once. All you need to do is each wear one earbud and you can both watch a show with nothing more than what came in the box. Get a splitter and up to three can watch a show. No, it's not ideal viewing, but what else is there to do on a bus? When I was in high school, getting home was a 45-minute ride followed by a 25-minute ride.
Hmm, or maybe the problem is that it's 14 years old and has 170k miles on it?
It took me a while to get used to mice with acceleration, but I did. Maybe you will, too. If not, oh well. The scroll wheel is, for me, a billion times better than a thumbwheel like Dell or Sony uses that can only scroll a little at a time. As for star ratings, yes, they're a bit of a pain, you just have to get used to moving veeeery slowly. I think going from 0-5 stars from 12 to 3'oclock on the wheel is dumb. It should take half the wheel for the 5 ratings--0, 45, 90, 135, and 180 degrees.
Actually, Disney started not-sucking in 1989 with The Little Mermaid and continued not-sucking through the 1990s, starting with 1991's Beauty and the Beast--years before 1995's Toy Story. Granted, some movies were better than others, and the Pixar ones are mostly great, but at least Disney wasn't in its 1980s suck-out-loud state anymore.
e y_feature_films
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_notable_Disn
Mine:
.zsh_history | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | head -10
;-)
$ awk '{print $1}'
1 bash
I know the guy who used to admin RedHat's FTP servers. He had the server(s) set up so if anyone was using a download accelerator, it'd kill *all* transfers to that IP address.
dammit! 'preview', not 'submit'! .bash_history | awk '{print $1}' | uniq -c | sort
a longer list would have shown more repeats, like so:
cat
2 sudo
2 sudo
2 tail
2 tail
2 top
2 uuidgen
2 which
3 curl
3 curl
3 echo
3 grep
3 grep
3 grep
3 grep
3 ls
3 ls
3 ls
This is why I love slashdot. :-)
.bash_history | awk '{print $1}' | uniq -c | sort
Trying this: cat
I get output like this:
3 telnet
3 telnet
3 uuidgen
4 cd
4 ps
4 ssh
4 tar
7 cat
Something's not right... it seems like it's performing 'uniq' on the whole command, not just the single word that pops out of 'awk.'
Just kidding.
http://curl.haxx.se/docs/faq.html
1.3 What is curl not?
Curl is *not* a wget clone. That is a common misconception. Never, during
curl's development, have we intended curl to replace wget or compete on its
market. Curl is targeted at single-shot file transfers.
And we've got proof!
cat .bash_history | awk '{print $1}' | sort
Mine: (flawed commands removed)
cal
cat
cd
cdd
random text to get past lameness filter - isn't this why we have mods? size does matter!
chmod
clear
cp
crontab
curl
du
echo
grep
random text to get past lameness filter - isn't this why we have mods? size does matter!
gunzip
head
kill
killall
links
locate
ls
lynx
mkdir
mv
random text to get past lameness filter - isn't this why we have mods? size does matter!
open
pbpaste
pico
pine
ps
rm
rmdir
scp
screencapture
random text to get past lameness filter - isn't this why we have mods? size does matter!
ssh
su
sudo
tail
tar
telnet
top
touch
unzip
uptime
which
... until I read a review of it on Slashdot. You know, one where someone who has never used it before gives it a spin for two days and writes a 5 page review: 3 pages on the installation, 1/2 page talking about how the default theme looks, 1 1/2 pages complaining that it didn't work with his sound card or run his monitor at the right resolution, and then concluding by saying Mac OS X is better.
Yeah, because obviously Wikipedia is run by a bunch of incompetent retards who wouldn't think of *reviewing* the content before printing. Besides, the dynamicness of Wikipedia is just *one* of its advantages. A printed Wikipedia is still a great product, especially for people in the developing world, where this project is aimed. Or did you not even RTFS?
Like any OSS project, Wiki will soon reach a point where some articles are reviewed and frozen--for the 99% of the stuff in there that isn't current events, this will be pretty easy. (Well, not *easy*, but... you know... doable.) Then updates will not go right into the live page but rather to a "sugestions for the next build" page. Then they'll probably change the structure so articles default to displaying the frozen page, with a "Click here for current version - caution, may be inaccurate" link leading to a live page, and hopefully an option to have differences highlighted. Once vandals' contributions are not immediately world-visible, malicious edits will drop by about 99%.
In short, development of Wikipedia is not dead. It's not stuck in it's current model, condemned to have the "Douche" page vandalized and cleaned 20 times and hour for all eternity. It will adapt and become even better than it is now.
That's been done.
I pay $40/year for my local Sunday paper, mostly for the ads. I buy enough gadgets through the year that the paper pays for itself a few times over. (I buy things when the price is good, and the occasional great sale means I can get a hard drive or whatever for less than I could online. Plus: no shipping, easier returns, see it in person before I buy it, get it the same day, etc etc etc.)
:-)
That said, I always end up finding a few things to read and usually wind up spending a couple hours with it. It's quiet and calm and a nice change not to be sitting up looking at a screen for another couple hours. Sure, it may not be great for up-to-the-second news, but I don't care about that anyway. There's always some neat articles about local stuff, vacations, homes, etc. Browsing slashdot and the rest gets old after a while and it's a nice change of pace to find some unexpected neat thing that *doesn't* have to do with technology, Google, MS, Apple, or My Rights Online--and to do it in a nice, quiet, analog fashion.
Oh yeah, one other great thing about newspapers: no animated ads.
All you need are the LDs, a player, an analog/firewire box, and a Mac. The results are worth the effort.
A CS degree to make game soundtracks? No way. All you need are musical skillz, industry contacts, and luck. MOST industries are "hard to break into." There are more major movies released in a year than major video games--you've got better odds in Hollywood.
Here's all you need to do: spend 10 years making soundtracks for free or cheap for every game you possibly can until someone "discovers" you. Alternately, move to where video games are made, take any job at any company so you can get in the building and find out who does what, and go from there. But a CS degree? No way.
After all, as we all know, 2005 is the year of Linux on the desktop!