True, unless they block anything that wasn't refered from one of their own pages. (Weird, but possible.) As for the "repost of article text" type cut'n'paste, it's sad when someone does that with a major news site, even posted as an anonymous coward to avoid karma. They're damned unlikely to be slashdotted and newspapers and writers are still going through legal fights over web and archive rights, so they're touchy about the subject.
Not really. Another company could use that name if they were in a completely different line of business that wouldn't cause confusion. (Hard to do against a well-known international chain that can afford lots of lawyers.) "Joe's Plumbing of Texas" vs. "Joe's Computers of New Jersey" for example: different line of business, different locations. That's part of the name search you have to do for a company name or trademark.
By using an assigned numbered name, no one else can incorporate or trademark that "name" in Canada, and I suspect other counties would respect "Canada Inc" and not allow it either.
Eh, it was for a contract that needed an incorporation for tax laws, I wasn't going to waste time thinking up a real name...
But then you've exceeded the bounds of fair use in copyright. Are they blocking because of bandwidth use, or because they somehow thought someone was "stealing" content by providing a link to their site? If the latter, then cut'n'paste would really annoy them.
How is that going to be enforced? An individual can own a company. (With a sole proprietorship, the individual is the company.) In Ontario, a registered business name costs $100, which still could be owned by an individual. A Canadian incorporation cost $200.
If a privately held corporation (that I happen to own) wants to run a blog and homepage with cute cat pictures on it in TLD.com, what are you going to do about it?
I have a numbered name incorporation. Not only is it unique inside Canada, but the name is inherently part of Canadian namespace. If I did get a domain name for it, I can't see how anyone else could trump my rights to it.
Of course, the best protection is that who the hell would want 4176271CanadaInc.ca? (Even me, sheesh!:)
Of course, a resident or external firewall program won't do much if sendmail (or any other app that listens at ports) has an exploitable flaw. After all, it's supposed to be running, and the firewall is supposed to let packets through on that port.
A seperate firewall has to fail such that it's still functional enough to pass information to/from the target system. And even inside a firewall, it's still a good idea to keep systems buttoned up tight with nothing unneeded talking to ports. So an attacker has to carefully exploit your firewall, and then have a way to get into the target--adds an order or two of difficulty to causing damage, especially with different software in firewall/target. Most exploits will just crash the firewall.
Some sort of resident* firewall running inside an external firewall can be good for out-going application-level security--so long as apps can't trivially bypass the resident firewall.
* I prefer to say resident/external over software/hardware, because it's not completely wrong like the latter.
When things get too busy, they just hook up Clippy to an Eliza program. Oddly enough, Clippy has won Salesperson of the Month for three months running.
(The scary part is that I started to think of how I would actually write that...)
I wonder if they asked any Inuit if they liked the idea of a dinky little demi-planet being named Sedna? (Imagine the grumbles if it had been named Allah or Jehovah.) I guess we'll know as soon as the lawyers locate anyone with money who can be sued.
"And C++ programming languages, we own those, have licensed them out multiple times, obviously. We have a lot of royalties coming to us from C++. It was interesting to see the depth of Caldera's intellectual capital."
de-spaced link I'd love to know who is paying Caldera/SCO royalties for C++! (I guess he claims to own the GNU C++ compiler too?) This guy is definitely a few toys short of a Happy Meal.
Did you check the IP address to see where the email was really coming from, or did you blindly accept the other system's word that it was an AOL server? Stuff like 23.really.real.aol.com [208.55.71.153] needs a closer look.:^)
What happens when the spammer slides his web site up to port 3127 or something else used by p2p software? Would they block all servers on dynamic addresses? (I'm sure some ISPs would like to, but I wouldn't pay for half an Internet connection.)
I wonder if they're blocking the whole IP address or just port 80? (After all, port 80 is just the default. No biggy to use any port.) What does AOL do if the link was ftp://, redirect to a directory with a text file explaining the situation?
It could be worse. Some clueless ISPs apply spam blocking/filtering on email to their abuse address. This makes it difficult to claim about spam by their users. (What gets though probably gets tossed becuase it didn't have a copy of the spam...)
The height of strange lack of clue was last week when a South American ISP applied spam filtering to their outgoing email. Everyone still got the spam, but with added headers saying exactly how spammy is was. (Gee, thanks!:^)
Did the actual IP address match that name? Since that name is supplied by the other system, it could be whatever they want. You want check the IP address to be sure. (Usually in [brackets].) And check the Received lines before it to make sure that the whole line isn't a forgery.
Sorry if you know all this, but spammers forge names all the time, and I can't remember when I last got a spam that actually was from AOL.
There was an link on Fark a week ago to an article about some guy that actually looks forwards to receiving spam, and had bought a lot of things from spam mails. Weird things, like a carpet cleaner, but things.
Same link on Slashdot. But keep in mind that the actual news article didn't go into much detail that this guy is a spammer. (He claimed to have stopped due to CAN SPAM, but Spammer Rule #1 & #2 probably apply in this case.) A spammer saying "The spam is wonderful and warm, come on in"? What's wrong with this picture? He also claims to get spam for old pinball machines--don't know about you, but I've never received spam for that. (Septic tanks, yes.)
Slashdot Mirror
True, unless they block anything that wasn't refered from one of their own pages. (Weird, but possible.) As for the "repost of article text" type cut'n'paste, it's sad when someone does that with a major news site, even posted as an anonymous coward to avoid karma. They're damned unlikely to be slashdotted and newspapers and writers are still going through legal fights over web and archive rights, so they're touchy about the subject.
By using an assigned numbered name, no one else can incorporate or trademark that "name" in Canada, and I suspect other counties would respect "Canada Inc" and not allow it either.
Eh, it was for a contract that needed an incorporation for tax laws, I wasn't going to waste time thinking up a real name...
But then you've exceeded the bounds of fair use in copyright. Are they blocking because of bandwidth use, or because they somehow thought someone was "stealing" content by providing a link to their site? If the latter, then cut'n'paste would really annoy them.
Why not just use !bang paths? :^)
D.C. Comics sued to make them change the name of Lollipop Lane. It was too close to their trademark of Lois Lane.
The Apple border is also heavily armed. I wonder what will happen when Apple Records sells music via a computer?
If a privately held corporation (that I happen to own) wants to run a blog and homepage with cute cat pictures on it in TLD .com, what are you going to do about it?
Of course, the best protection is that who the hell would want 4176271CanadaInc.ca? (Even me, sheesh! :)
Here's some more alarming news for him: His computer is broadcasting an IP address! He should probably sue the Internet.
Of course, a resident or external firewall program won't do much if sendmail (or any other app that listens at ports) has an exploitable flaw. After all, it's supposed to be running, and the firewall is supposed to let packets through on that port.
Some sort of resident* firewall running inside an external firewall can be good for out-going application-level security--so long as apps can't trivially bypass the resident firewall.
* I prefer to say resident/external over software/hardware, because it's not completely wrong like the latter.
Maybe not. Try a test with twins. One raised by PhDs, the other raised in a trailer park by Family Feud rejects.
(The scary part is that I started to think of how I would actually write that...)
Or figures out how to cross-connect two salespeople from different sites.
I wonder if they asked any Inuit if they liked the idea of a dinky little demi-planet being named Sedna? (Imagine the grumbles if it had been named Allah or Jehovah.) I guess we'll know as soon as the lawyers locate anyone with money who can be sued.
Not much difference if you listen to David Icke's kook krowd. Hmm, has anyone tested Darl's DNA recently?
That movie never happened.
Did you check the IP address to see where the email was really coming from, or did you blindly accept the other system's word that it was an AOL server? Stuff like 23.really.real.aol.com [208.55.71.153] needs a closer look. :^)
What happens when the spammer slides his web site up to port 3127 or something else used by p2p software? Would they block all servers on dynamic addresses? (I'm sure some ISPs would like to, but I wouldn't pay for half an Internet connection.)
I wonder if they're blocking the whole IP address or just port 80? (After all, port 80 is just the default. No biggy to use any port.) What does AOL do if the link was ftp://, redirect to a directory with a text file explaining the situation?
The height of strange lack of clue was last week when a South American ISP applied spam filtering to their outgoing email. Everyone still got the spam, but with added headers saying exactly how spammy is was. (Gee, thanks! :^)
Did the actual IP address match that name? Since that name is supplied by the other system, it could be whatever they want. You want check the IP address to be sure. (Usually in [brackets].) And check the Received lines before it to make sure that the whole line isn't a forgery.
Sorry if you know all this, but spammers forge names all the time, and I can't remember when I last got a spam that actually was from AOL.
Same link on Slashdot. But keep in mind that the actual news article didn't go into much detail that this guy is a spammer. (He claimed to have stopped due to CAN SPAM, but Spammer Rule #1 & #2 probably apply in this case.) A spammer saying "The spam is wonderful and warm, come on in"? What's wrong with this picture? He also claims to get spam for old pinball machines--don't know about you, but I've never received spam for that. (Septic tanks, yes.)
If you have 40 hours of MacGyver, you should be able to fix it yourself with some chewing gum, paperclips and a watermelon. :^)