Um, I beg to differ. The title seems pretty misleading, if you actually read the text...
Affected Products
This issue affects all Cisco devices running Cisco IOS software and configured to process Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) packets. Cisco devices which do not run Cisco IOS software are not affected. Devices which run only Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) are not affected.
Tho I realy wish you were correct, since none of the (many) cisco devices in my net are 7200s...
I think it's an interesting sidenote that the new UoP website (http://www.phoenix.edu/) shows: ------ ------ Microsoft VBScript runtime error '800a000d'... ---------- on their index page. Wonder if their webbies took courses there?
I've heard a lot about false positives here, but I'm running SpamAssassin with nearly the default ruleset, and I've had a grand total of 1 false positive in 6 months (on the second day I had it running). I had a few legit mails just a hair below the cutoff for flagging them as spam, and they all hit the FAKED_UNDISC_RECIPS rule. I added the following entry to local.cf, and the problem was solved. Btw, does anyone know what criteria they use for 'faked'?
score FAKED_UNDISC_RECIPS 1.0
I've also given a bunch more weight to the RBL scoring, which has helped a fair amount with blocking...
um, try actually encrypting it (lots of solid encrypted loopback FS options these days). If she can crack that, DON'T LET HER GET AWAY, she will make you both very wealthy...
I use fetchmail/mutt so I can read mail in a real threaded mail client. I get a kick out of seeing 'Joe Luser would like to recall the message $subject' in mutt, where it's magically evaporated from my OutHouse INBOX.
I'd be surprised if similar things didn't happen here, MS doesn't seem to bother considering those who don't use their products exclusively....
As a 'techie' being forced to upgrade to windows XP at work, I wholeheartedly agree with the last statement in the article:
This is what I say: "Give me back my old computer stuff. And this is what I mean: I'd really like to have the system before that."
Really, given that the average office worker spends most of their day staring at MS Office, how could they NOT hate the people that bring them technology...
No-one here seems to have pointed out the other real risk of making the pre-trial stuff so public:
His lawyers could use it as evidence that he couldn't get a fair trial, and he could be freed based on that, despite any evidence proving his guilt, and that'd truly be a tragedy.
So, sure. You can MAYBE read data from pre-1993 hard drives, and maybe in 10 years the examination technology will have advanced enough to read today's drives (if hard drive technology stands perfectly still, eh?). The only people who need protection, then, are folks whose adversaries are incredibly wealthy AND willing to spend gobs of money on getting to them, and who would still be harmed if their ten-year old data is read.
um, the way I read this, you just negated your own argument. If it will EVER be possible for your data to be read after 'deletion' (and if its being read would bother you) then you should take stronger measures to delete it. Do you pick the size of keys for PGP et al based on current technology or projected future technology?
If the data will only matter for the next month, it may not be an issue, but if it will matter in a long-term way you should plan for long-term solutions...
Slashdot Mirror
Affected Products This issue affects all Cisco devices running Cisco IOS software and configured to process Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) packets. Cisco devices which do not run Cisco IOS software are not affected. Devices which run only Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) are not affected.
Tho I realy wish you were correct, since none of the (many) cisco devices in my net are 7200s...
well, spending any time working with windows makes me want to go to the bar...
I think it's an interesting sidenote that the new UoP website- ------ ...
(http://www.phoenix.edu/)
shows:
-----
Microsoft VBScript runtime error '800a000d'
----------
on their index page. Wonder if their webbies took courses there?
> If seen, please contact Detective Christopher Robinson.
:)
I think you mean 'Christopher Robin'
Same here in Canada, and I'd like to thank StArSkY for reminding me to make mp3s to take to work... :)
are all those cases programs written originally for win32?
I've seen it work both ways, usually the original is more stable than the port...
I've heard a lot about false positives here, but
I'm running SpamAssassin with nearly the default ruleset, and I've had a grand total of 1 false positive in 6 months (on the second day I had it running). I had a few legit mails just a hair below the cutoff for flagging them as spam, and they all hit the FAKED_UNDISC_RECIPS rule. I added the following entry to local.cf, and the problem was solved. Btw, does anyone know what criteria they use for 'faked'?
score FAKED_UNDISC_RECIPS 1.0
I've also given a bunch more weight to the RBL scoring, which has helped a fair amount with blocking...
um, try actually encrypting it (lots of solid encrypted loopback FS options these days).
If she can crack that, DON'T LET HER GET AWAY, she will make you both very wealthy...
Yes, of course, that must be it.
Wait, what was this thread about again?
you forgot the bottle of scotch, to numb the pain of telling them
"you have to turn 'caps lock' off before logging in" for the 97th time.
I didn't read 'remove MS products,' I just saw
'don't buy new ones'
that wouldn't preclude continuing to use those MS products in place, or buying products that run only on windows
Nor did I read 'no $$ to be spent on supporting existing windows'
Basically, it looks like 'I'll give you a bunch of money, but don't give Bill any'
Absolutely.
If you can use emacs day to day, and can't figure info out, it MUST be overly complex
** ducks **
what is this 'start' you speak of?
but those recalls are just a suggestion.
I use fetchmail/mutt so I can read mail in a real threaded mail client. I get a kick out of seeing 'Joe Luser would like to recall the message $subject' in mutt, where it's magically evaporated from my OutHouse INBOX.
I'd be surprised if similar things didn't happen here, MS doesn't seem to bother considering those who don't use their products exclusively....
At least 'David' seems to be losing popularity, there are way to damned many Daves out there...
...
2001 12
2000 16
1999 16
1992 8
1991 7
1990 6
I've seen those errors on 3 drives over the years, and all 3 have failed within a month of starting to see them.
:)
Check your backups...
>> Sounds like prison. Or a sweatshop.
or a job where you work for a living.
It was like that when I worked at a sawmill, and for that it was fine, but it'd be $%#@$ irritating at a tech job...
This is what I say: "Give me back my old computer stuff. And this is what I mean: I'd really like to have the system before that."
Really, given that the average office worker spends most of their day staring at MS Office, how could they NOT hate the people that bring them technology...
I can't believe that no-one has mentioned it, yet...
floppies are by far the most convenient way to handle data that must be read-only most, but not all, of the time. Like tripwire database files.
And not every computer has network access, remember, floppies are still the storage of choice for sneakernets.
nope, sorry, I have yet to see a work that honors redirects...
would be nice, tho
error, poster is a dolt :)
I've been reading 'is linux ready' for so long
I see it when it's not even there
of course it is, but is he ready for linux :)
>>More reason to go to retinal scans.
yeah, then they have to physically damage you to steal your car, instead of just trying key variations.
This might reduce theft a bit, but personally I'd rather have my (insured) car stolen 10 times than have my retina stolen once...
No-one here seems to have pointed out the other real risk of making the pre-trial stuff so public:
His lawyers could use it as evidence that he couldn't get a fair trial, and he could be freed based on that, despite any evidence proving his guilt, and that'd truly be a tragedy.
um, the way I read this, you just negated your own argument. If it will EVER be possible for your data to be read after 'deletion' (and if its being read would bother you) then you should take stronger measures to delete it. Do you pick the size of keys for PGP et al based on current technology or projected future technology?
If the data will only matter for the next month, it may not be an issue, but if it will matter in a long-term way you should plan for long-term solutions...