The linked Icann paper's first line is "Registered Name Holders must be able to transfer their domain name registrations between Registrars". NOTHING TO DO with transferring ownership of domains; but of the registrars. Could be nasty, and even a first step to having the domain hijacked, but the ownership of the domain is unaffected.
That post is not imformative at all. In what case would a name holder NOT respond to a request to transfer a domain name from one registrar to another? If you want to go from verisign to godaddy, and verisign asks you to confirm the transfer, wouldn't you say yes?
Why would you want to have a default to yes if you don't respond? Sadly, spam filters can and do trap legitimate emails. The default should NO via domain locking and the ICANN policy should state that clearly.
Oh, yeah, well, IT colleges at universities are't that academic anymore. The colleges are just high tech trade schools. So why not give students the basics in grade school?
I want to small form factor pc that has a no moving parts except may a cdrom so that I can have a quiet, low power pc for x-10 and internet access stuff running linux. Anyone seen such a beast?
Proof that cost of ownership with Microsoft is too high? Especially in countries that were , in the not too distant past, bombed back to the stone age.
Of course not. Prrof that the cost of a computer is too high compared to necessities like food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, etc.
"A pirated copy of Windows and Office goes for no more than $10" That's still a weeks pay for the average worker by their figures, Microsoft's greed seems inordinate expecting people to pay $140. Well, they seem to have totally priced themselves out of this market.
Hold on there tiger. Remember that only 2 million of Vietnams 80 million people have computers. I am betting that the people who are earning $10 a week don't own computers. The ones that do are a bit richer.
Be careful how your using the term application level firewall. What is not an application level firewall. It runs a variety of protocols over an SSL connection, functions as a reverse HTTP proxy, and does some URL canonicalization. But that is not an application level firewall.
Application level firewalls support multiple applications, typically upto layer 7 in some limited fashion. Examples are Secure Computing Sidewinder G2, Symantec Enterrise firewall, and to some extent, Microsoft's ISA. All these products support multiple applications with better or worse protection features. For HTTP is easy and common, set-up a reverse proxy to ensure the HTTP conforms to the RFC-822 definition for allowed characters in the headers, provide a way to limit header length, and do some other syntax checking and you've got a proxy. FTP, SMTP, DNS are all similiar and simple application level proxies.
More complex protocol support is where you see the difference between application level firewalls and products like Whale--namely support for complex protocols like H.323, T.120, SIP, SQL*Net. It's not just simple protocol conformance checking in the headers, it tracking session state, opening dynamic ports, limiting commands and sub protocols which are far more complex.
There's no stopping the technological march. Still, most researchers are very conscientious about the ethical ramifications of what we are doing.
Yeah, and still scientists note the ethical ramifications and still continue down questionable paths. Many scientists don't concern themselves enough with ethics.
Automatic updates aren't the answer and you can bet that enterprises will rebel against it. There is already an auto-update feature that allows uses to configure how updates are processed. Either never getting the update, downloading but not auto-install, and auto-download and auto-install. That is more than enough.
End users have to become responsible to keep thier systems upto date. Keeping upto date is not Microsoft problem.
For companies, they have to get better at updating remote computers and there is already a cottage industry evloving around patching. But companies also need to have procedures for allowing remote computers to acces the internal network.
It's like the business world is convinced that everything is about trends, ratings, etc.
It is all about ratings. Movies aren't pushed out of hollywood unless the bean counters are convinced they are going to make money (makes you wonder about shit movies like The Real Cancun), get high ratings, and spin off (depending on genre) products.
That doesn't mean there aren't good movies coming out of hollywood. It just means there aren't any good movies that producers don't think will make money coming out of hollywood.
can't the RIAA realize that P2P will just die out on it's own if they provide a better way to obtain music. snip Hell, I for one am never going to buy music again.
Am i the only one to see the contradiction here? Here's the deal, sport. The RIAA and the music industry is against p2p music sharing because it is stealing plain and simple (and for you wannabe lawyers, don't even start in by saying it ain't stealing because nothing material is lost. Money is lost).
You think if someone came up with an easy to use method for buying music on-line all you little theiving bastards would pony your money for the what you can get for free. Hah. Your either a complete idiot or terribly naive.
There may be many problems with the music industry and where the money ends-up, but I can assure you that a high majority of the p2p users don't give a shit about politics or artists. They are just interested in getting what they can for free.
Here, you want to make an impact on RIAA. Stop buying and downloading all music. Let's see where the courage of your convictions will get you.
Saudi Arabia was left in peace by the west because they have oil and they are allies in the Mid-East.
The US left Afganistan alone because they have nothing of value for the US. The only reason the US attack Afganistan is because that is where the Al-Queda were.
Too bad it won't work when your dealing with spam coming from foreign servers. Hell, the US can't effectively police the nuclear world (not saying the US should). How can we police spammers?
Well, maybe there is more incentive to get spammers.
How do you impress the babes ...
on
Smart Pool Table
·
· Score: 3, Funny
with your solid knowlege of geometry if the pool table knows more about angles and proper shot alignment than you do.
Breaking the law in this case willl get attention but probably won't make much of a difference. What the community needs to do is send well throught out letters to thier local politicians at both the state and the federal level educating them to the DMCA and threatening to pull votes.
Then follow that up with boycotts of movies, videos, music, and other "protected" media.
Windows 2000 w/AD has some very strong policy management features that when used correctly can severly limit what users can do. It's called the Group Policy function. Check it out.
In addition, Windows 2000 is far more stalble than previous version of Windows.
Patching is a fact of life kids, I offer the latest OpenSSL bug which had patches available for something like 6 weeks before an 'sploit was running round.
What this does is forward outbound connections down different pipes. So you get better outbound connections. Each outbound is natted as well. Inbound? Well, your stuck with one pipe or another.
Why is this cool? Because we may actually get better performance through the box than you could with one BB connection.
For those of you saying any router that can handle OSPF or BGP is way better, get a grip. Try to find a BB provider that will even talk to you about peering. It's just not in the cards.
Slashdot Mirror
this is news?
...
Next up: People who see a dollar bill on the sidewalk will pick it up and put it in their pocket. See our analysis
The linked Icann paper's first line is "Registered Name Holders must be able to transfer their domain name registrations between Registrars". NOTHING TO DO with transferring ownership of domains; but of the registrars. Could be nasty, and even a first step to having the domain hijacked, but the ownership of the domain is unaffected.
That post is not imformative at all. In what case would a name holder NOT respond to a request to transfer a domain name from one registrar to another? If you want to go from verisign to godaddy, and verisign asks you to confirm the transfer, wouldn't you say yes?
Why would you want to have a default to yes if you don't respond? Sadly, spam filters can and do trap legitimate emails. The default should NO via domain locking and the ICANN policy should state that clearly.
I thought Americans were pretty keen on a concept called "free speech"?
Oh - hang on... What year is it again?
We care about free speech only when it comes from us. Except for the DMCA. And the Patriot Act.
Damn, I should move.
How else will get my Paxil?
Oh, yeah, well, IT colleges at universities are't that academic anymore. The colleges are just high tech trade schools. So why not give students the basics in grade school?
I want to small form factor pc that has a no moving parts except may a cdrom so that I can have a quiet, low power pc for x-10 and internet access stuff running linux. Anyone seen such a beast?
Honestly, schmonesty.
Proof that cost of ownership with Microsoft is too high? Especially in countries that were , in the not too distant past, bombed back to the stone age.
Of course not. Prrof that the cost of a computer is too high compared to necessities like food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, etc.
Jeez, Microsoft isn't to blame for *everything*.
"A pirated copy of Windows and Office goes for no more than $10"
That's still a weeks pay for the average worker by their figures, Microsoft's greed seems inordinate expecting people to pay $140. Well, they seem to have totally priced themselves out of this market.
Hold on there tiger. Remember that only 2 million of Vietnams 80 million people have computers. I am betting that the people who are earning $10 a week don't own computers. The ones that do are a bit richer.
Be careful how your using the term application level firewall. What is not an application level firewall. It runs a variety of protocols over an SSL connection, functions as a reverse HTTP proxy, and does some URL canonicalization. But that is not an application level firewall.
Application level firewalls support multiple applications, typically upto layer 7 in some limited fashion. Examples are Secure Computing Sidewinder G2, Symantec Enterrise firewall, and to some extent, Microsoft's ISA. All these products support multiple applications with better or worse protection features. For HTTP is easy and common, set-up a reverse proxy to ensure the HTTP conforms to the RFC-822 definition for allowed characters in the headers, provide a way to limit header length, and do some other syntax checking and you've got a proxy. FTP, SMTP, DNS are all similiar and simple application level proxies.
More complex protocol support is where you see the difference between application level firewalls and products like Whale--namely support for complex protocols like H.323, T.120, SIP, SQL*Net. It's not just simple protocol conformance checking in the headers, it tracking session state, opening dynamic ports, limiting commands and sub protocols which are far more complex.
There's no stopping the technological march. Still, most researchers are very conscientious about the ethical ramifications of what we are doing.
Yeah, and still scientists note the ethical ramifications and still continue down questionable paths. Many scientists don't concern themselves enough with ethics.
do you have a current URL for the latest pathces and the development team? I used to follow it, but rl got in the way, now I lost them.
Automatic updates aren't the answer and you can bet that enterprises will rebel against it. There is already an auto-update feature that allows uses to configure how updates are processed. Either never getting the update, downloading but not auto-install, and auto-download and auto-install. That is more than enough.
End users have to become responsible to keep thier systems upto date. Keeping upto date is not Microsoft problem.
For companies, they have to get better at updating remote computers and there is already a cottage industry evloving around patching. But companies also need to have procedures for allowing remote computers to acces the internal network.
It's like the business world is convinced that everything is about trends, ratings, etc.
It is all about ratings. Movies aren't pushed out of hollywood unless the bean counters are convinced they are going to make money (makes you wonder about shit movies like The Real Cancun), get high ratings, and spin off (depending on genre) products.
That doesn't mean there aren't good movies coming out of hollywood. It just means there aren't any good movies that producers don't think will make money coming out of hollywood.
How the fuck does this comment get "insightful"?
can't the RIAA realize that P2P will just die out on it's own if they provide a better way to obtain music. snip Hell, I for one am never going to buy music again.
Am i the only one to see the contradiction here? Here's the deal, sport. The RIAA and the music industry is against p2p music sharing because it is stealing plain and simple (and for you wannabe lawyers, don't even start in by saying it ain't stealing because nothing material is lost. Money is lost).
You think if someone came up with an easy to use method for buying music on-line all you little theiving bastards would pony your money for the what you can get for free. Hah. Your either a complete idiot or terribly naive.
There may be many problems with the music industry and where the money ends-up, but I can assure you that a high majority of the p2p users don't give a shit about politics or artists. They are just interested in getting what they can for free.
Here, you want to make an impact on RIAA. Stop buying and downloading all music. Let's see where the courage of your convictions will get you.
Saudi Arabia was left in peace by the west because they have oil and they are allies in the Mid-East.
The US left Afganistan alone because they have nothing of value for the US. The only reason the US attack Afganistan is because that is where the Al-Queda were.
Too bad it won't work when your dealing with spam coming from foreign servers. Hell, the US can't effectively police the nuclear world (not saying the US should). How can we police spammers?
Well, maybe there is more incentive to get spammers.
with your solid knowlege of geometry if the pool table knows more about angles and proper shot alignment than you do.
Easy? How do you plan on getting the MAC? You don't have access to it, do you? MAC's only matter on the *local* network.
Breaking the law in this case willl get attention but probably won't make much of a difference. What the community needs to do is send well throught out letters to thier local politicians at both the state and the federal level educating them to the DMCA and threatening to pull votes.
Then follow that up with boycotts of movies, videos, music, and other "protected" media.
Speak with your words, vote with your wallet.
Your operating on old information.
Windows 2000 w/AD has some very strong policy management features that when used correctly can severly limit what users can do. It's called the Group Policy function. Check it out.
In addition, Windows 2000 is far more stalble than previous version of Windows.
Patching is a fact of life kids, I offer the latest OpenSSL bug which had patches available for something like 6 weeks before an 'sploit was running round.
99.9% of websites are offer crap. Roll the presses!
It is just ridiclous that SF caved on this issue. Another good list bites the dust.
That's because NexLand OEM's the hardware and software to Symantec. Symantec adds some functionality like the firewall.
What this does is forward outbound connections down different pipes. So you get better outbound connections. Each outbound is natted as well. Inbound? Well, your stuck with one pipe or another.
Why is this cool? Because we may actually get better performance through the box than you could with one BB connection.
For those of you saying any router that can handle OSPF or BGP is way better, get a grip. Try to find a BB provider that will even talk to you about peering. It's just not in the cards.