By default, Windows XP looks to be configured for behind- the-scenes connection to sa.windows.com whenever any sort of search is required, particularly when using the search feature within Internet Explorer. I was quickly able to prove that by hitting the search button, the connections were opened immediately. You can turn that off by changing the preferences once you open the search dialog... after getting rid of that cheesy animated pooch, anyway. In the Change Preferences list, click "Change Internet search behavior" and choose "With Classic Internet search". Now when you open the search dialog, the connection to sa.windows.com will no longer be initiated. There may very way be other areas within Windows XP that are tied to that thing, but IE is the most obvious one.
someone had to paste it!:) (from http://www.lockergnome.com/issues/techspecialist/2 0020314.html)
"The SPEWS system is unapologetic about false positives and even regards them as a plus. They've taken the 'ends justify the means' argument way farther than I've seen anyone else take it," Donea said.
Absolutely. I work as the Technical Support Manager at a web hosting company, and handling abuse complaints falls into my realm of responsibility. I have a team of employees who handle the complaints themselves, and I work closely with them and our Network Operations staff to make sure we keep our network as spam-free as possible. I am known to be very militant about getting rid of spam and spammers from our network, as is our Network Operations Manager. We shut down as much as possible, and respond as quickly as possible to complaints.
But that didn't stop us from getting placed on the SPEWS blacklist for several days recently. The reason? Because we "ignored" complaint emails about a spammer. The fact that we had already acted upon the complaint emails was irrelevant to the SPEWS people, apparently.
Thousands of our customers were affected by this blacklisting, as SPEWS decided to block our entire IP range.
And when we politely asked to be removed (and provided legitimate justification for our removal) it was suggested by someone on the newsgroup that we should remain on the blacklist for at least a month as punishment. Thankfully, someone at SPEWS disagreed, and removed us.
We would have had no recourse if they'd chosen to punish us in the manner suggested.
I would love nothing more than to remove spam completely from the Internet. I would love nothing more than to see the people who spam get punished. But how is it fair that an anonymous group of people can completely shut down a portion of our business without reason? And how is it fair that if they do blacklist us, the only way we can get in the clear again is to beg on a newsgroup and pray that the anonymous people on the other end are in a good mood? At least with SpamCop and the like, hosting companies have the opportunity to respond to complaints.
Lots of people have commented that hosting companies and ISPs have a responsibility to keep their network free of open relays and evil spammers, and I agree. But I also believe that we should have the right to explain our actions, instead of being deemed guilty - and punished accordingly - until proven innocent.
Non-response from a hosting company and/or ISP when it comes to a spam complaint is unacceptable. But I believe that blocking a hosting company and/or ISP without consulting with them first is just as bad. We talk of spam being the equivalent of a DOS attack and about how terrible it is, and then fight back with pretty much the same tactics? It just makes no sense.
it may seem easy to you to just charge the customer.. but as the technical support manager at a web hosting company, i can assure you that it isn't.:)
a few hypothetical situations:
* customer cannot afford to pay for bandwidth. customer leaves hosting company for another provider and hosting company has to eat the bill.
* customer is getting hammered so hard that they affect other customers, resulting in a bunch of cranky customers with slow websites.
it doesn't matter whether you offer unlimited bandwidth or charge per byte/mb/gb/whatever.. problems can still arise when someone's site gets slashdotted or someone leaks a password for a porn site..:)
Don't forget about ice cream, energy drinks, green tea, desserts, and LOTS of medication.
I have a heart rhythm disorder and I've been avoiding caffeine for over a year.. it's really difficult at first. But it's amazing how much better I feel without it in my diet. I'm not exhausted and headachy on my weekends like I used to be..
I think that this story PROVES the credibility of science.
In June 1999, scientists at Berkeley discovered 2 new elements.
The scientists and other members of the scientific community attempted to reproduce these elements.
They couldn't.
In July 2001, Berkeley's claims were retracted.
So what if it turns out that one scientist or a group of scientists did something wrong? The point here is that they didn't get away with it. The scientific process is WORKING.
there's a drug called Adenosine that is administered to people with certain heart rhythm disorders.
"Adenocard (adenosine injection) exerts its effect by decreasing conduction through the A-V node and may produce a short lasting first-, second- or third-degree heart block."
it's not the same as injecting alcohol into someone's heart to stop it, but i wanted to point out that stopping someone's heart to "cure" a condition has already been done.:)
and yes, i realize that heart block and heart attack are two separate things, but they both have the same end result: no heartbeat.
as a tech manager that handles her own hiring.. i can say that those kind of tactics work, at least when it comes to me. throw in the geek terms like "hacker" and "slashdot" and "i refuse to use pico" and your resume is more likely to actually be read by folks like me.;)
now, if the company you are employing has their hr monkeys reading resumes.. you're probably going to get the complete opposite result.
just wondering how this can be considered crap.. upon reading the question, all i could think was "damn, i have no idea how i'd go about doing that" -- and that, to me, is something that a GOOD question does. makes me think.
grr, i'm off topic. it just pisses me off when idiots slam a topic just because they don't care about it or already know the answer. if you don't care, don't read it. and if you already know the answer.. post it, for christ's sake.
phew. bedtime for this cranky girl, i think. heh.
Re:National ISPs that don't block SMTP...
on
SMTP-Friendly ISPs?
·
· Score: 1
it's amazing that I previewed this comment 3 times and missed this...
I work at a hosting company that offers authenticated SMTP service for it's customers. We hate spam a lot, so we decided ASMTP was the way to go.
Our problem? Half of our customers can't USE the service - we spent 45 minutes on hold with Earthlink one night trying to figure out what was wrong with one of our customer's email settings. Turns out that it's not a bug, it's a feature. *smirk*
So if any knows of any national providers that don't block SMTP, it would help *me* a lot.:)
(Disclaimer: I understand WHY providers would block outgoing SMTP server connections. It's mostly justifiable. I just also think that they should notify their customers of this fact in a somewhat obvious fashion.. maybe in their online FAQs.)
The problem with the RBL and other blackhole lists, is that if you're a big provider, you WILL GET COMPLAINTS from your customers.
I should know... we recently tried to implement a spam filtering system at the place where I am employed. We immediately had customers complaining that they are not getting legitimate emails from THEIR customers/associates due to the fact that their providers are running open relays.
We simply do not have the resources to follow-up on every single blocked email, so we can't implement a blackhole list.
There has got to be a better solution. I really have no idea what it would be, but it has to exist.:)
Re:Oh great. Fucking new year. What a fucking joke
on
Farewell, 11111010001
·
· Score: 1
could be worse.. you could be stuck working a graveyard shift on new year's eve.. just like me!:)
That being said. My thanks to all the sys admins out there that are keeping my internet connection fast and stable:)
you're welcome!:)
seriously, though.. our servers/network didn't even so much as burp today at work, which is usually a good thing - but i was so bored because the phones weren't ringing that i almost went into the server room and unplugged a few things for some excitement!
and then the voices in my head said "no, girlfriend.. that's like, totally, a bad idea"..
yes, the voices in my head are from the valley.
in any case.. the reason *i* work the holidays is that i am the manager, and i prefer to schedule myself on the crappy days in order to not make my team work the 'shit shifts'.. i am working day shift all week this week (mon-fri) and i am working graveyards on sunday and monday (new years eve)...
i'm the best boss ever. really.:)
Re:Who are *YOU* spending Christmas with?
on
Merry Christmas
·
· Score: 1
at the risk of being modded off-topic...
that *is* offensive. she's still a child, for goodness sake.
but er.. thanks for the compliments about my site.
and now, back to watching servers behave and wishing that i had something to read other than slashdot..
merry christmas!
Re:Who are *YOU* spending Christmas with?
on
Merry Christmas
·
· Score: 1
I'm spending Christmas with one of my co-workers. We're listening to the phones not ring and watching the Windows servers miraculously stay functioning fine. (The Linux servers, of course, never have problems!)
We're also doing the following:
* cursing Starbucks for being closed
* actually reading our spam (did you know you can increase your ejaculation by 581%?)
* answering emails that are destined for other departments because no one is emailing us
* reading Slashdot
only to be parrelled by the Verisign business model. Per bit they have to be the most sucessful digital product vendors on the planet.
without having seen their financials, I am going to have to disagree with you...
IMHO, success is not just based on money, but on consumer attitudes... and I challenge you to find *one* domain name registrant who is happy with Verisign. I certainly haven't met one, and as the Tech Support Manager at a web hosting company, I talk to quite a few of them.
(Disclaimer: This is my opinion, not the opinion of the company I work for, etc, etc, etc.)
I'm interested in all the windows worms and I'm glad that Slashdot documents them.
at the risk of being modded redundant.. me, too!
as the support manager at a web hosting company, i use slashdot as a major resource for figuring out when these nasty worms and virii come out. then i am prepared the next day for the rush of people who are having problems with their email, or are complaining about recieving a virus. (why they complain to us, i really don't know.. such is life, i suppose!)
so yeah.. bring on the virus/worm/anti-MS-FUD stories.. they're USEFUL.
i would suggest getting a job and buying hardware yourself... it's much more gratifying to know that you EARNED your new sound card, or video card, or whatever..:)
Slashdot Mirror
url correction: http://www.lockergnome.com/issues/techspecialist/2 0020314.html
By default, Windows XP looks to be configured for behind- the-scenes connection to sa.windows.com whenever any sort of search is required, particularly when using the search feature within Internet Explorer. I was quickly able to prove that by hitting the search button, the connections were opened immediately. You can turn that off by changing the preferences once you open the search dialog... after getting rid of that cheesy animated pooch, anyway. In the Change Preferences list, click "Change Internet search behavior" and choose "With Classic Internet search". Now when you open the search dialog, the connection to sa.windows.com will no longer be initiated. There may very way be other areas within Windows XP that are tied to that thing, but IE is the most obvious one.
:) (from http://www.lockergnome.com/issues/techspecialist/2 0020314.html)
someone had to paste it!
"The SPEWS system is unapologetic about false positives and even regards them as a plus. They've taken the 'ends justify the means' argument way farther than I've seen anyone else take it," Donea said.
Absolutely. I work as the Technical Support Manager at a web hosting company, and handling abuse complaints falls into my realm of responsibility. I have a team of employees who handle the complaints themselves, and I work closely with them and our Network Operations staff to make sure we keep our network as spam-free as possible. I am known to be very militant about getting rid of spam and spammers from our network, as is our Network Operations Manager. We shut down as much as possible, and respond as quickly as possible to complaints.
But that didn't stop us from getting placed on the SPEWS blacklist for several days recently. The reason? Because we "ignored" complaint emails about a spammer. The fact that we had already acted upon the complaint emails was irrelevant to the SPEWS people, apparently.
Thousands of our customers were affected by this blacklisting, as SPEWS decided to block our entire IP range.
And when we politely asked to be removed (and provided legitimate justification for our removal) it was suggested by someone on the newsgroup that we should remain on the blacklist for at least a month as punishment. Thankfully, someone at SPEWS disagreed, and removed us.
We would have had no recourse if they'd chosen to punish us in the manner suggested.
I would love nothing more than to remove spam completely from the Internet. I would love nothing more than to see the people who spam get punished. But how is it fair that an anonymous group of people can completely shut down a portion of our business without reason? And how is it fair that if they do blacklist us, the only way we can get in the clear again is to beg on a newsgroup and pray that the anonymous people on the other end are in a good mood? At least with SpamCop and the like, hosting companies have the opportunity to respond to complaints.
Lots of people have commented that hosting companies and ISPs have a responsibility to keep their network free of open relays and evil spammers, and I agree. But I also believe that we should have the right to explain our actions, instead of being deemed guilty - and punished accordingly - until proven innocent.
Non-response from a hosting company and/or ISP when it comes to a spam complaint is unacceptable. But I believe that blocking a hosting company and/or ISP without consulting with them first is just as bad. We talk of spam being the equivalent of a DOS attack and about how terrible it is, and then fight back with pretty much the same tactics? It just makes no sense.
If only the SPEWS people agreed..
it may seem easy to you to just charge the customer.. but as the technical support manager at a web hosting company, i can assure you that it isn't. :)
:)
a few hypothetical situations:
* customer cannot afford to pay for bandwidth. customer leaves hosting company for another provider and hosting company has to eat the bill.
* customer is getting hammered so hard that they affect other customers, resulting in a bunch of cranky customers with slow websites.
it doesn't matter whether you offer unlimited bandwidth or charge per byte/mb/gb/whatever.. problems can still arise when someone's site gets slashdotted or someone leaks a password for a porn site..
sweetening chocolate was a Spanish idea... when they brought it home, they experimented with it.
m l
http://www.fmnh.org/Chocolate/history_intro2.ht
Don't forget about ice cream, energy drinks, green tea, desserts, and LOTS of medication.
I have a heart rhythm disorder and I've been avoiding caffeine for over a year.. it's really difficult at first. But it's amazing how much better I feel without it in my diet. I'm not exhausted and headachy on my weekends like I used to be..
.. and while we're talking about the bad side of caffeine, don't forget heart arrhythmias.
e s/ diet.html/ heart/other /arrhyth.htm#causes
http://www.naspe-patients.org/patients/substanc
http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/public
I think that this story PROVES the credibility of science.
:)
In June 1999, scientists at Berkeley discovered 2 new elements.
The scientists and other members of the scientific community attempted to reproduce these elements.
They couldn't.
In July 2001, Berkeley's claims were retracted.
So what if it turns out that one scientist or a group of scientists did something wrong? The point here is that they didn't get away with it. The scientific process is WORKING.
IMHO, of course.
there's a drug called Adenosine that is administered to people with certain heart rhythm disorders.
:)
"Adenocard (adenosine injection) exerts its effect by decreasing conduction through the A-V node and may produce a short lasting first-, second- or third-degree heart block."
Source: http://www.fujisawa.com/medinfo/pi/pi_page_ac.htm
it's not the same as injecting alcohol into someone's heart to stop it, but i wanted to point out that stopping someone's heart to "cure" a condition has already been done.
and yes, i realize that heart block and heart attack are two separate things, but they both have the same end result: no heartbeat.
as a tech manager that handles her own hiring.. i can say that those kind of tactics work, at least when it comes to me. throw in the geek terms like "hacker" and "slashdot" and "i refuse to use pico" and your resume is more likely to actually be read by folks like me. ;)
now, if the company you are employing has their hr monkeys reading resumes.. you're probably going to get the complete opposite result.
just wondering how this can be considered crap.. upon reading the question, all i could think was "damn, i have no idea how i'd go about doing that" -- and that, to me, is something that a GOOD question does. makes me think.
grr, i'm off topic. it just pisses me off when idiots slam a topic just because they don't care about it or already know the answer. if you don't care, don't read it. and if you already know the answer.. post it, for christ's sake.
phew. bedtime for this cranky girl, i think. heh.
it's amazing that I previewed this comment 3 times and missed this...
s/any/anyone
:)
I work at a hosting company that offers authenticated SMTP service for it's customers. We hate spam a lot, so we decided ASMTP was the way to go.
:)
Our problem? Half of our customers can't USE the service - we spent 45 minutes on hold with Earthlink one night trying to figure out what was wrong with one of our customer's email settings. Turns out that it's not a bug, it's a feature. *smirk*
So if any knows of any national providers that don't block SMTP, it would help *me* a lot.
(Disclaimer: I understand WHY providers would block outgoing SMTP server connections. It's mostly justifiable. I just also think that they should notify their customers of this fact in a somewhat obvious fashion.. maybe in their online FAQs.)
The problem with the RBL and other blackhole lists, is that if you're a big provider, you WILL GET COMPLAINTS from your customers.
:)
I should know... we recently tried to implement a spam filtering system at the place where I am employed. We immediately had customers complaining that they are not getting legitimate emails from THEIR customers/associates due to the fact that their providers are running open relays.
We simply do not have the resources to follow-up on every single blocked email, so we can't implement a blackhole list.
There has got to be a better solution. I really have no idea what it would be, but it has to exist.
could be worse.. you could be stuck working a graveyard shift on new year's eve.. just like me! :)
That being said. My thanks to all the sys admins out there that are keeping my internet connection fast and stable :)
:)
:)
you're welcome!
seriously, though.. our servers/network didn't even so much as burp today at work, which is usually a good thing - but i was so bored because the phones weren't ringing that i almost went into the server room and unplugged a few things for some excitement!
and then the voices in my head said "no, girlfriend.. that's like, totally, a bad idea"..
yes, the voices in my head are from the valley.
in any case.. the reason *i* work the holidays is that i am the manager, and i prefer to schedule myself on the crappy days in order to not make my team work the 'shit shifts'.. i am working day shift all week this week (mon-fri) and i am working graveyards on sunday and monday (new years eve)...
i'm the best boss ever. really.
at the risk of being modded off-topic...
that *is* offensive. she's still a child, for goodness sake.
but er.. thanks for the compliments about my site.
and now, back to watching servers behave and wishing that i had something to read other than slashdot..
merry christmas!
I'm spending Christmas with one of my co-workers. We're listening to the phones not ring and watching the Windows servers miraculously stay functioning fine. (The Linux servers, of course, never have problems!)
We're also doing the following:
* cursing Starbucks for being closed
* actually reading our spam (did you know you can increase your ejaculation by 581%?)
* answering emails that are destined for other departments because no one is emailing us
* reading Slashdot
:)
haha... me, too!
:)
and the phone has not rang *once* today. me and one of my employees are sitting here actually *reading* our spam.
only to be parrelled by the Verisign business model. Per bit they have to be the most sucessful digital product vendors on the planet.
without having seen their financials, I am going to have to disagree with you...
IMHO, success is not just based on money, but on consumer attitudes... and I challenge you to find *one* domain name registrant who is happy with Verisign. I certainly haven't met one, and as the Tech Support Manager at a web hosting company, I talk to quite a few of them.
(Disclaimer: This is my opinion, not the opinion of the company I work for, etc, etc, etc.)
I'm interested in all the windows worms and I'm glad that Slashdot documents them.
at the risk of being modded redundant.. me, too!
as the support manager at a web hosting company, i use slashdot as a major resource for figuring out when these nasty worms and virii come out. then i am prepared the next day for the rush of people who are having problems with their email, or are complaining about recieving a virus. (why they complain to us, i really don't know.. such is life, i suppose!)
so yeah.. bring on the virus/worm/anti-MS-FUD stories.. they're USEFUL.
if i was a moderator (i am not) i would definetly NOT mod your post down.
:)
since i happen to agree.
i'm a 22 year old female, and *gasp* a fan of making fun of popular culture. so this story is pretty on target for me, at least.
people, please.. if you dislike jon katz's movie reviews, TURN THEM OFF.
The same reason everyone uses Internet Explorer is why people use Windows. Because its already there, and it works.
i hate to quibble with you, but that's not why *I* use internet explorer. i use it because it is better than the alteratives. (imho, of course)
if i could run stable windows apps on linux, i'd be using linux.
that's exactly how i metamoderate, so you're not alone.
:)
just as an aside, though.. i find that on slashdot, moderation generally appears to be on par. so at least it's working. i think.
i would suggest getting a job and buying hardware yourself... it's much more gratifying to know that you EARNED your new sound card, or video card, or whatever.. :)