No, the chown security issue is that if a user can set the suid bit on a file, and then chown it to someone else (e.g. root) then you just created a window for local privilege escalation.
Unfortunately I don't think there's anywhere you can buy those oldschool spring / mechanical keyboards "new" anymore.
Why do you need a new Model M? For a keyboard built like that, 10 years old is as good as new. Get thee over to ebay and search for "model m." (Just be sure you get the PC version, part number 1391401.)
Could someone point me to (or post) a lowdown on the potential benefits of BSD has over linux (or vice versa) that doesn't include wild speculation and unfounded cynicism?
This page has a good description of the differences between (Free)BSD and Linux:
http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4lin ux/bsd4linux1.php. If you see those differences as benefits (I do), then give a BSD a try. If the differences just differences (i.e., they're not benefits) to you, then stick with whatever you've got now.
You are correct. "Smooshing the layers together" was not the best choice of words for conveying my point, which was that an application layer service should not be performed at the network layer. But saying that twice in one post would have been redundant.:-)
It would be interesting if instead of typing in a mispelled name......it redirected you to a google search. I wonder how it would be received if they did that....and also didn't collect money from it, just offered it as a service....now THAT would be a better version of this whole fiasco, thats for sure.
Interesting, true, and claims about "innovation" might actually be believable if they redirected to Google. However, a service (or "service") such as Sitefinder belongs at the application layer, not the network layer. Part of the power and flexibility of the Internet is the layered approach used to build it. Smooshing the layers together, for commercial benefit or otherwise, is not innovation.
Actually, we need someone to do for computers what the Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corporation does for rechargable batteries. Batteries stamped with the RBRC logo are accepted (free) by local recycling points. (Radio Shack is one, in the DC area at least.)
Of course, the battery manufacturers have to pay to use the RBRC logo, so you pay a little more for an RBRC-logo'd battery, but it beats the environmental cost of dropping a UPS-battery-sized load of lead into a local landfill every time one of those big suckers needs to be replaced.
If you haven't already, you probably want to check out NUT, as mentioned above. I've never used it with a non-APC UPS, but according to NUT's compatibility list, it has support for quite a variety of UPS hardware.
If NUT doesn't support your hardware, you may find others there interested in developing a driver. You also may find it easier to get your UPS manufacturer to contribute a copy of its protocol docs to the project than to you individually.
Slashdot Mirror
Also to the term "head office."
(For those not nautically inclined, on a boat, "head" == "toilet".)
No, the chown security issue is that if a user can set the suid bit on a file, and then chown it to someone else (e.g. root) then you just created a window for local privilege escalation.
/bin/sh . ./sh ./sh ./sh
[tom@builder]~$ cp
[tom@builder]~$ chmod u+s
[tom@builder]~$ chown root
[tom@builder]~$
builder# id
uid=1001(tom) euid=0(root) gid=1001(tom) groups=1001(tom), 0(wheel), 5(operator)
D'oh!
Their LMPeople website (for accessing employee utilities) only works in IE as well... :-(
Tweet! I'm throwing the BS flag.
LMPeople works just fine in Firefox.
Unfortunately I don't think there's anywhere you can buy those oldschool spring / mechanical keyboards "new" anymore.
Why do you need a new Model M? For a keyboard built like that, 10 years old is as good as new. Get thee over to ebay and search for "model m." (Just be sure you get the PC version, part number 1391401.)
This page has a good description of the differences between (Free)BSD and Linux: http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4lin ux/bsd4linux1.php. If you see those differences as benefits (I do), then give a BSD a try. If the differences just differences (i.e., they're not benefits) to you, then stick with whatever you've got now.
The cartesian equivalent would be something like "go to that point 500 paces north and 300 paces west of us".
Actually, that would only put him 583 paces away. He needs to walk more along the lines of 857.5 paces north by 514.5 paces west.
You are correct. "Smooshing the layers together" was not the best choice of words for conveying my point, which was that an application layer service should not be performed at the network layer. But saying that twice in one post would have been redundant. :-)
Interesting, true, and claims about "innovation" might actually be believable if they redirected to Google. However, a service (or "service") such as Sitefinder belongs at the application layer, not the network layer. Part of the power and flexibility of the Internet is the layered approach used to build it. Smooshing the layers together, for commercial benefit or otherwise, is not innovation.
Actually, we need someone to do for computers what the Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corporation does for rechargable batteries. Batteries stamped with the RBRC logo are accepted (free) by local recycling points. (Radio Shack is one, in the DC area at least.)
Of course, the battery manufacturers have to pay to use the RBRC logo, so you pay a little more for an RBRC-logo'd battery, but it beats the environmental cost of dropping a UPS-battery-sized load of lead into a local landfill every time one of those big suckers needs to be replaced.
Try this link for a well laid-out explanation of what XP is and how it {does | doesn't} work.
If you haven't already, you probably want to check out NUT, as mentioned above. I've never used it with a non-APC UPS, but according to NUT's compatibility list, it has support for quite a variety of UPS hardware.
If NUT doesn't support your hardware, you may find others there interested in developing a driver. You also may find it easier to get your UPS manufacturer to contribute a copy of its protocol docs to the project than to you individually.