Governments that have become police states criminalize simple, innocuous actions.
Spamming is not innocuous, spam costs a lot of money to ISPs.
This means that virtually everyone is a criminal, and if they don't like you, theyll be able to arrest you and convict you of scads of crimes that you unwittingly comitted.
It is absurd to assume that virtually everyone is a spammer or that people would "unwittingly" spam.
What happens to the people that implement it (ie. the Samba guys) even if they obtain the information without intentionally breaking the license. Are they exposing themselves to expensive litigation? Are they endangering the project?
is put under the header of Comments Containing A Copy of the Specification. Please note that MICRO~1 admits:
This email notification is a statement made under penalty of perjury that we are the copyright owner of the referenced Specification, that we are acting in good faith, and that the above-referenced comments, as part of http://www.slashdot.org, is posting proprietary material without express written permission.
Theoretically you could have metamoderation of government and a peer review process which could make it a little better. However the constitution of the US was largely created so that things like the Third Reich will not as easily happen against a unpopular and small group.
Frankly, I think this kind of notice is totally irresponsible on the part of CERT.
I think it was irresponsible to wait as long with this advisory as CERT has done. The exploits have been known for years. When hotmail forced javascript down the throats of their customers, there was a huge uproar in news.admin.net-abuse.email, because spamfighters have learned the hard way that javascript can easily be abused. One of the threads started with 552549264 at deja.com.
hotmail just requires javascript, it still works without it. Download the source of the simple form I wrote and try it yourself. My form may not look as flashy as the opening screen at hotmail, but it downloads a lot faster.
The web doesn't need javascript, however marketroids love it, because it makes it easier to collect information.
If you don't like it, decide to organize an OPT-IN boycott. Setting up cancelbots, etc, is an OPT-OUT boycott. If a news server admin doesn't want to participate in the UDP, they must specifically change their news server config to do so. I'm pretty sure that most news servers are set by default to accept ANY cancel message whatsoever.
It is very easy to opt-out out of all UDP's, just alias out the pseudo site udpcancel.
If only it was that easy to opt-out out of e-mail spam.
If an ISP were to rise up, comprised entirely of Aryan Nation skinheads, and if their thousands of clients were to post every day their noxious personal opinions all over the web, there is a smal but real possibility that some news admins would call for a UDP against the service.
Usenet is different from the web. News admins can't UDP a web site, yet they can refuse to transfer Usenet articles (just like I have no obligation to mirror your web site).
If I want to e-mail someone I can simply type in the address and send it to anyone I want to.
No, you can only do that if the recipient is willing to accept e-mail from the machine you are using to send the e-mail.
If I want to go to a web page I can as well.
No, you can only get the page if the webserver is willing to serve you the page.
What I cannot easily do is arbitraly look at a particluar news group on any particlar site. There is not simple means yet in place that will allow me to just type in news://alt.jimmy.slashdot-comments.athome.discuss or something like that and then just find a central archive or a mirror that has *every* posting for an agreed period of time.
Have you ever considered to set up your own news server? It would cost you money, of course.
Why do you insist that others spend their money for your benefit?
That's patently false. You can't pay for a non-existing domain name with the NSI's online payment system.
The name passport.com was free for the taking at several registrars mentioned at CORE. NSI had dropped the name at CORE, anyone could register the name at any other registrar. The records at NSI were irrelevant.
And had it been a new registration, he would be paying $70, not $35.
I don't know how NSI operates, it is quite possible they still had a record on passport.com. That would explain why NSI prolongated the name for 35$.
When was the last time the US military came out and defended you from an invading force?
I am not particularly fond of the US armed forces [1], but your statement just shows they are doing their job extremely well. Any country would love to have such a long history of not being invaded by foreign forces.
[1] The US forces managed to cause more civilian deaths in my home town in one minute [2] than the the Spanish army did during the Eighty Years' War.
[2] Actually, it took them half an hour: the first bombing raid only injured people because almost everyone had fled to the shelters, the second raid did kill a lot of people who were helping the injured (they ignored the alarms because the alarms hadn't stopped at that moment and there was nothing left to bomb). The second raid was not intentional, but I still think it was no coincidence that Canadian troops liberated the town from the Nazis.
What I wonder is what the passport.com internic records looked like before Dec 27. That is, was the Billing Contact Carolyn Gudmundson...or was it someone else who may no longer work at MS?
It is possible that there were records at Network Solutions for passport.com. The domain name passport.com was available as soon as Dec. 24. I checked at several registars listed at CORE. Anybody could have claimed it.
You know you're a monopoly when you have the brass balls to piss off a giant like Microsoft over a stupid $35 monthly fee. This is just typical of the arrogance that is Network Solutions.
Removing the DNS entry is just what they do everyday, bouncing the check is the only way to piss off NS. If NS would still be a monopoly they would give the name back to Microsoft even if Michael had registered the name. NS isn't a monopoly anymore, Michael could have taken the domain name.
Be afraid, Microserf, be very afraid. Michael could have damaged Microsoft, he didn't, because Microsoft is irrelevant. Nice guys don't tease losers.
Get WHAT back? He didn't have anything that belonged to them.
Errm, the name passport.com was not taken by anybody at the time he paid. He could have registered the name with any competitor of networkdelutions.com. Just rewriting all the scripts would have cost Microsoft a lot of money, not to mention the problems hotmail users would have experienced during that time.
Call me a cynic, but its got a lot less to do with "community spirit" and "helping out your fellow man" than it has to do with "Linux user helps out megacorp that Linux Users hate to get Front Page News and More Coverage for Linux"
I knew about the problems before Chaney did pay for the domain (it was the early evening of Dec. 24 for me too, but over here, that is 6 hours in advance), I thought about making lots of money by claiming the name.
I didn't: I don't need the money, I like it that people think I'm honest. An article on news.admin.net-abuse.email mentioned the problem. It was canceled by HipCrime, a repost is still available at deja.com.
I could have helped micros~1, I didn't. That was just a brain block, my fault. Kudos for Michael for his creative solution.
I do think it shows that Linux users and spam fighters have higher moral standards than the "Evil Empire". Bill Gates would take any legal opportunity to increase his wealth by 1%. A lot of people could have made a lot of money; none of then did, because they like their reputation more than their wallet.
We are considering e-mailing every registred user once a year - e-mail would be used to find out if the address is still OK, and it would give the registred users some info about the status of the counter... I hope one e-mail a year is not too much. WDYT?
Please do not send e-mail to people who haven't asked for it. It would not be one e-mail per year, it would be 120,000 e-mails per year.
I would not mind getting an e-mail, but as long as people haven't asked for it, don't send it. Microsoft is getting flamed for their Y2K spam. Don't give them the excuse that Linux does it too.
As a (terribly aselect) sample, I looked at registrations from NL::Groningen of people I know, ml.org is down, flits.rug.nl can't accept connections to port 25 (SMTP). Only flits102-126.flits.rug.nl can accept e-mail and you would wake a bot there. However all the people I checked with *.ml.org or flits10?-*.flits.rug.nl addresses still use Linux.
Re:What a tangled web we weave...
on
RMS Responds
·
· Score: 1
But it is not free to tell someone else what they can do with their lives. They do not allow it to be free in the libre sense
They make the software free, the freedom of the software means you have no right to take the software as your property. You are free, your freedom means I have no right to take you as my property.
Re:Philanthropy != Communism
on
RMS Responds
·
· Score: 1
Conversely, if I want to earn a dollar, I have to offer you something worth more to you than that dollar.
No, you can just steal it. File a patent for something someone else thought up, for instance. Or use free software in your copyrighted program and sue everyone who makes the same "innovation" to the free software.
Slashdot Mirror
Just read AOL's page on Junk E-mail and remember that AOL does sue.
Spamming is not innocuous, spam costs a lot of money to ISPs.
This means that virtually everyone is a criminal, and if they don't like you, theyll be able to arrest you and convict you of scads of crimes that you unwittingly comitted.
It is absurd to assume that virtually everyone is a spammer or that people would "unwittingly" spam.
Not all of them, e.g. smartin's post on 00-05-02 21:20 MET:
is put under the header of Comments Containing A Copy of the Specification. Please note that MICRO~1 admits: IANAL, but why shouldTell that to the native Americans.
I think it was irresponsible to wait as long with this advisory as CERT has done. The exploits have been known for years. When hotmail forced javascript down the throats of their customers, there was a huge uproar in news.admin.net-abuse.email, because spamfighters have learned the hard way that javascript can easily be abused. One of the threads started with 552549264 at deja.com.
hotmail just requires javascript, it still works without it. Download the source of the simple form I wrote and try it yourself. My form may not look as flashy as the opening screen at hotmail, but it downloads a lot faster.
The web doesn't need javascript, however marketroids love it, because it makes it easier to collect information.
It is better (in the 2.2.* kernels it is almost necessary) to use /dev/ttyS3 instead of /dev/cua3.
It is very easy to opt-out out of all UDP's, just alias out the pseudo site udpcancel.
If only it was that easy to opt-out out of e-mail spam.
Usenet is different from the web. News admins can't UDP a web site, yet they can refuse to transfer Usenet articles (just like I have no obligation to mirror your web site).
No, you can only do that if the recipient is willing to accept e-mail from the machine you are using to send the e-mail.
If I want to go to a web page I can as well.
No, you can only get the page if the webserver is willing to serve you the page.
What I cannot easily do is arbitraly look at a particluar news group on any particlar site. There is not simple means yet in place that will allow me to just type in news://alt.jimmy.slashdot-comments.athome.discuss or something like that and then just find a central archive or a mirror that has *every* posting for an agreed period of time.
Have you ever considered to set up your own news server? It would cost you money, of course.
Why do you insist that others spend their money for your benefit?
Yes, it just happens to be the first full moon of the year.
seems like if we're all lined up enough to make an eclipse it is bound to be a full moon.
Indeed.
The name passport.com was free for the taking at several registrars mentioned at CORE. NSI had dropped the name at CORE, anyone could register the name at any other registrar.
The records at NSI were irrelevant.
And had it been a new registration, he would be paying $70, not $35.
I don't know how NSI operates, it is quite possible they still had a record on passport.com. That would explain why NSI prolongated the name for 35$.
I think so, but I am not one of them.
Do hackers not use other operating systems?
Sure, they also use FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD &c. and I even know hackers who use Windows, just like most crackers.
I am not particularly fond of the US armed forces [1], but your statement just shows they are doing their job extremely well. Any country would love to have such a long history of not being invaded by foreign forces.
[1] The US forces managed to cause more civilian deaths in my home town in one minute [2] than the the Spanish army did during the Eighty Years' War.
[2] Actually, it took them half an hour: the first bombing raid only injured people because almost everyone had fled to the shelters, the second raid did kill a lot of people who were helping the injured (they ignored the alarms because the alarms hadn't stopped at that moment and there was nothing left to bomb).
The second raid was not intentional, but I still think it was no coincidence that Canadian troops liberated the town from the Nazis.
It is possible that there were records at Network Solutions for passport.com. The domain name passport.com was available as soon as Dec. 24. I checked at several registars listed at CORE.
Anybody could have claimed it.
Removing the DNS entry is just what they do everyday, bouncing the check is the only way to piss off NS. If NS would still be a monopoly they would give the name back to Microsoft even if Michael had registered the name. NS isn't a monopoly anymore, Michael could have taken the domain name.
Be afraid, Microserf, be very afraid. Michael could have damaged Microsoft, he didn't, because Microsoft is irrelevant.
Nice guys don't tease losers.
Errm, the name passport.com was not taken by anybody at the time he paid. He could have registered the name with any competitor of networkdelutions.com. Just rewriting all the scripts would have cost Microsoft a lot of money, not to mention the problems hotmail users would have experienced during that time.
I knew about the problems before Chaney did pay for the domain (it was the early evening of Dec. 24 for me too, but over here, that is 6 hours in advance), I thought about making lots of money by claiming the name.
I didn't: I don't need the money, I like it that people think I'm honest. An article on news.admin.net-abuse.email mentioned the problem. It was canceled by HipCrime, a repost is still available at deja.com.
I could have helped micros~1, I didn't. That was just a brain block, my fault. Kudos for Michael for his creative solution.
I do think it shows that Linux users and spam fighters have higher moral standards than the "Evil Empire". Bill Gates would take any legal opportunity to increase his wealth by 1%. A lot of people could have made a lot of money; none of then did, because they like their reputation more than their wallet.
Please do not send e-mail to people who haven't asked for it. It would not be one e-mail per year, it would be 120,000 e-mails per year.
I would not mind getting an e-mail, but as long as people haven't asked for it, don't send it. Microsoft is getting flamed for their Y2K spam.
Don't give them the excuse that Linux does it too.
As a (terribly aselect) sample, I looked at registrations from NL::Groningen of people I know, ml.org is down, flits.rug.nl can't accept connections to port 25 (SMTP). Only flits102-126.flits.rug.nl can accept e-mail and you would wake a bot there. However all the people I checked with *.ml.org or flits10?-*.flits.rug.nl addresses still use Linux.
Please look at vrfy first.
They make the software free, the freedom of the software means you have no right to take the software as your property.
You are free, your freedom means I have no right to take you as my property.
No, you can just steal it. File a patent for something someone else thought up, for instance. Or use free software in your copyrighted program and sue everyone who makes the same "innovation" to the free software.
> As for RFCs or drafts regarding IP location, I can't immediately find one...
RFC 1876, the LOC resource record.