In the Log On to Windows dialog box, type your user name, password, and domain (if required), and then click OK. The Remote Desktop window will open and you will see the desktop settings, files, and programs that are on your office computer. Your office computer will remain locked. Nobody will be able to work at your office computer without a password, nor will anyone see the work you are doing on your office computer remotely.
...this [goatse.cx]? Guess the joke is over, wow, it only took 6 years for Slashdot to figure out that if you write the hostname after the url you can prevent people from clicking on stuff they dont wanna see.
Have you looked at the entry conditions for the Honeynet project? They put random sploitable boxes up on the net and they dont publish the ip's. That way they know all traffic that passes into the honey net is suspect. That means you will only attract hackers who are scanning for sploitable boxes, which only script kiddies do. The blackhats are out there, they just dont attack anything and everything, they are targeted.
When you find a buffer overflow it is trivial to make an exploit that one could use to DOS the service. It's just a few lines of perl, throw lots of AAAA's at it and watch it go down. This serves the purpose of "sysadmins need tools to test the patch" but it is usually not what is released. Usually people release tools which give you a shell and open ended script kiddiness.
Patching binary code is not easy, probably not even safe, but it is possible and maybe some companies could get really good at it, and charge a service for it. Oh wait, there's that whole copyright thing.
Was it just me or did everyone else find level III of Thief to be a total cop out. Here we are playing this cool game that isn't about slashing and killing everything and then wham, we're shoved down a mine shaft shooting at zombies and stumbling around mazes. Lame lame lame.
Absolutely. What I'm talking about is a recent linux virus that manages to jump su and, to a lesser extent, ssh. The virus is per process resident (the same method of residency that is predominate on winNT) and has appeared in the wild. CARO has not named it to date.
Closest I have found is this. Eddie hasn't replied yet, doubt he will. Unplugged from power? wow.. what a witty joke. Sigh. If his challenge is anything like that link then he is grossly misinformed or is playing word games with what he means by "attachments opened". If he is going to run binaries (or open zips) then we can only assume he is relying on the user/kernel user/root seperation in linux to protect himself and that's not such a bad claim, except there are viruses that can jump su (and sudo) and are not reliant on any exploit. That is to say, it is an error of design, not of implementation, as he claims. But yes, I would feel much better about taking up this challenge if it was M$ft offering it. Believe it or not, M$ft is more likely to honour their challenge than Eddie cause they have an interest in seeing the linux virus actually work. Eddie on the other hand is making the challenge because he knows it wont be met, primarily because he will change the rules of engagement after the fact. I dont even think the devil could write up a contract that would cover this challenge down to the smallest detail necessary to prevent Eddie from wigling out of paying. There are too many definitional issues. But rest assured, if you continue to make the bold claim that linux is "uninfectable" you will be proved wrong. Just as M$ft was proved wrong back when they made the same claims about Win95 and again when they made the same claims about WinNT.
The challenge was given to Sophos to infect his computer. Antivirus companies usually dont go around doing this. It's not like he got on #virus on undernet and offered the cash to the people who actually write these things.
This has to be the most poorly researched article I've ever seen. What is this? "I heard Eddie say that he'd give Sophos a bucket load of money if they could infect his Linux box" becomes news? For a start, there are already Unix viruses and they have been reported in the wild. What is all this stuff about "hackers" and "exploits" about? Are we talking about worms or viruses or what? Where is the actual written declaration of the challenge? Who is the third party holding the cash in escrow? How is the challenge supposed to work? Surely Ed isn't suggesting that he will track down and award the author of any virus that ends up on his machine. Surely Ed isn't trying to incite people to write actual viruses and release them into the wild. I have emailed netproject.com, maybe the original "reporter" should have done this, it's called basic research. BTW - I heard Bill Gates said he'd give $1,000,000 to anyone who can sneak a woopie cushion onto his chair before he sits down on monday, should I look for the Slashdot article?
I sent email to netproject.com asking what the deal was. Really, reporting something like this without an actual written challenge is just stupid. Even with the written challenge it is hard enough to get payment on a gentleman's bet.
please elaborate so that I may learn from my mistakes or mysterious one. I would love to work in an environment where I didn't have contempt for my employers (who are generally associating way too much importance to what essentially is just bits).
Sorry to feed trolls and all but I thought someone needs to respond.
When someone says the phrase "business model" people often think of various silly ideas that I would put more into the catagory of "scam". No, when I talk about business models I am talking about how you pay for software, not how to "make money" from software.
There was once a time when software was developed by companies in-house. It was secret, proprietory and built custom for that business. There was little forward progress in software methods as everything had to be reimplemented. Eventually, companies caught onto the idea that they could purchase generic tools from "software companies" which were often as good if not better than in-house development. Many companies sprang up to fill this need and the overall quality of software improved.
Open source offers a way to return to in-house development. Companies can have all the advantages of in-house development along with the free testing, debugging and features provided by contributing to community software. Co-operation can replace competition.
To address your concerns (or those who truely have these concerns, as you are obviously just trolling) I can personally state that it would be a relief if my job was not directly tied to the sale of a product. To put it frankly: customers piss me off. In-house development and maintenance is a much lighter atmosphere, without the headaches of release schedules or the lunacy of checkbox marketing requirements.
It doesn't mean you're stupid, it just means you're stupid about this. If I walked into a wood work shop and asked what this big turning machine was the guy would look at me like I'm an alien. "Errr.. It's a turning machine?" and if 40 people did this a day and often weren't as polite as me (hehe) screaming "Teach me to make chairs, teach me to make chairs!!!" What would you do? You'd say "get out of my shop you lame ass chair makin' wannabe". Come to think of it, can you imagine how a turner must feel when he sees people sitting on plastic or steel chairs and using chipboard desks? "People, I make kickass chairs and tables over here and you bastards dont even use em. Steal cabinets? Are you kidding me?"
the MMM is to project management as the law of thermodynamics is to inventors. These monday's experts quote it totally out of context, exclude the parts that dont support their world view and generally have never actually witnessed the effect first hand.
Man, you are onto something there. I have often thought, "you know, if I'm willing to donate money to Freenet, why dont I send a few call girls round the Theo da Raadt's place?" Now there's a guy who needs to chill out.
Well it sounds like you're on the ball. I was talking about some specific posts to rec.gambling, not in general. You can definitely do some analysis that a regular casino cannot do so you can tune your systems on the fly. If you're not opposed to professional gamblers playing by the rules that you have set, then I dont see a reason to be against your analysis.
If you are actually putting games of skill on the net unchanged, you should know in games of skill the player can get a slight advantage over the house. So maybe you'll get 1000 poor players but you will get 10 or 20 "professional" players who will write programs to play better than a person ever could and they will milk you. Maybe you dont care because you've got those 1000 poor players to suck cash off, but most casinos, including real ones, dont appreciate professional gamblers. This is all old hat, I suggest you read rec.gambling if you're actually in the biz.
Slashdot Mirror
In the Log On to Windows dialog box, type your user name, password, and domain (if required), and then click OK. The Remote Desktop window will open and you will see the desktop settings, files, and programs that are on your office computer. Your office computer will remain locked. Nobody will be able to work at your office computer without a password, nor will anyone see the work you are doing on your office computer remotely.
What WinXP are you talking about?
...this [goatse.cx]? Guess the joke is over, wow, it only took 6 years for Slashdot to figure out that if you write the hostname after the url you can prevent people from clicking on stuff they dont wanna see.
Have you looked at the entry conditions for the Honeynet project? They put random sploitable boxes up on the net and they dont publish the ip's. That way they know all traffic that passes into the honey net is suspect. That means you will only attract hackers who are scanning for sploitable boxes, which only script kiddies do. The blackhats are out there, they just dont attack anything and everything, they are targeted.
Old school bsd flaws, rehashed for your amuzement.
When you find a buffer overflow it is trivial to make an exploit that one could use to DOS the service. It's just a few lines of perl, throw lots of AAAA's at it and watch it go down. This serves the purpose of "sysadmins need tools to test the patch" but it is usually not what is released. Usually people release tools which give you a shell and open ended script kiddiness.
Patching binary code is not easy, probably not even safe, but it is possible and maybe some companies could get really good at it, and charge a service for it. Oh wait, there's that whole copyright thing.
Is that customers being harmed is a good way to force the vendor to release a patch. right.
Was it just me or did everyone else find level III of Thief to be a total cop out. Here we are playing this cool game that isn't about slashing and killing everything and then wham, we're shoved down a mine shaft shooting at zombies and stumbling around mazes. Lame lame lame.
Absolutely. What I'm talking about is a recent linux virus that manages to jump su and, to a lesser extent, ssh. The virus is per process resident (the same method of residency that is predominate on winNT) and has appeared in the wild. CARO has not named it to date.
Closest I have found is this. Eddie hasn't replied yet, doubt he will. Unplugged from power? wow.. what a witty joke. Sigh. If his challenge is anything like that link then he is grossly misinformed or is playing word games with what he means by "attachments opened". If he is going to run binaries (or open zips) then we can only assume he is relying on the user/kernel user/root seperation in linux to protect himself and that's not such a bad claim, except there are viruses that can jump su (and sudo) and are not reliant on any exploit. That is to say, it is an error of design, not of implementation, as he claims. But yes, I would feel much better about taking up this challenge if it was M$ft offering it. Believe it or not, M$ft is more likely to honour their challenge than Eddie cause they have an interest in seeing the linux virus actually work. Eddie on the other hand is making the challenge because he knows it wont be met, primarily because he will change the rules of engagement after the fact. I dont even think the devil could write up a contract that would cover this challenge down to the smallest detail necessary to prevent Eddie from wigling out of paying. There are too many definitional issues. But rest assured, if you continue to make the bold claim that linux is "uninfectable" you will be proved wrong. Just as M$ft was proved wrong back when they made the same claims about Win95 and again when they made the same claims about WinNT.
The challenge was given to Sophos to infect his computer. Antivirus companies usually dont go around doing this. It's not like he got on #virus on undernet and offered the cash to the people who actually write these things.
This has to be the most poorly researched article I've ever seen. What is this? "I heard Eddie say that he'd give Sophos a bucket load of money if they could infect his Linux box" becomes news? For a start, there are already Unix viruses and they have been reported in the wild. What is all this stuff about "hackers" and "exploits" about? Are we talking about worms or viruses or what? Where is the actual written declaration of the challenge? Who is the third party holding the cash in escrow? How is the challenge supposed to work? Surely Ed isn't suggesting that he will track down and award the author of any virus that ends up on his machine. Surely Ed isn't trying to incite people to write actual viruses and release them into the wild. I have emailed netproject.com, maybe the original "reporter" should have done this, it's called basic research. BTW - I heard Bill Gates said he'd give $1,000,000 to anyone who can sneak a woopie cushion onto his chair before he sits down on monday, should I look for the Slashdot article?
I sent email to netproject.com asking what the deal was. Really, reporting something like this without an actual written challenge is just stupid. Even with the written challenge it is hard enough to get payment on a gentleman's bet.
every single day, now I'm seriously drunk, I've moved from beer to rum and now I'm onto wine.
ok, I'm drunk, what's the deal with that! now, you step off.
If not on the other side of the globe, at least on the other side of the country! There's plenty of drunk californias your should hire!
please elaborate so that I may learn from my mistakes or mysterious one. I would love to work in an environment where I didn't have contempt for my employers (who are generally associating way too much importance to what essentially is just bits).
Sorry to feed trolls and all but I thought someone needs to respond.
When someone says the phrase "business model" people often think of various silly ideas that I would put more into the catagory of "scam". No, when I talk about business models I am talking about how you pay for software, not how to "make money" from software.
There was once a time when software was developed by companies in-house. It was secret, proprietory and built custom for that business. There was little forward progress in software methods as everything had to be reimplemented. Eventually, companies caught onto the idea that they could purchase generic tools from "software companies" which were often as good if not better than in-house development. Many companies sprang up to fill this need and the overall quality of software improved.
Open source offers a way to return to in-house development. Companies can have all the advantages of in-house development along with the free testing, debugging and features provided by contributing to community software. Co-operation can replace competition.
To address your concerns (or those who truely have these concerns, as you are obviously just trolling) I can personally state that it would be a relief if my job was not directly tied to the sale of a product. To put it frankly: customers piss me off. In-house development and maintenance is a much lighter atmosphere, without the headaches of release schedules or the lunacy of checkbox marketing requirements.
5 months in cramped quarters hurtling through the vacuum of space seems sucky on the face of it.
Reminds me of a job I had once.
No, see, most people are more than willing to talk about the law of thermodynamics in open systems, like, I dont know, say, a canoe on a lake?
It doesn't mean you're stupid, it just means you're stupid about this. If I walked into a wood work shop and asked what this big turning machine was the guy would look at me like I'm an alien. "Errr.. It's a turning machine?" and if 40 people did this a day and often weren't as polite as me (hehe) screaming "Teach me to make chairs, teach me to make chairs!!!" What would you do? You'd say "get out of my shop you lame ass chair makin' wannabe". Come to think of it, can you imagine how a turner must feel when he sees people sitting on plastic or steel chairs and using chipboard desks? "People, I make kickass chairs and tables over here and you bastards dont even use em. Steal cabinets? Are you kidding me?"
the MMM is to project management as the law of thermodynamics is to inventors. These monday's experts quote it totally out of context, exclude the parts that dont support their world view and generally have never actually witnessed the effect first hand.
Man, you are onto something there. I have often thought, "you know, if I'm willing to donate money to Freenet, why dont I send a few call girls round the Theo da Raadt's place?" Now there's a guy who needs to chill out.
Well it sounds like you're on the ball. I was talking about some specific posts to rec.gambling, not in general. You can definitely do some analysis that a regular casino cannot do so you can tune your systems on the fly. If you're not opposed to professional gamblers playing by the rules that you have set, then I dont see a reason to be against your analysis.
If you are actually putting games of skill on the net unchanged, you should know in games of skill the player can get a slight advantage over the house. So maybe you'll get 1000 poor players but you will get 10 or 20 "professional" players who will write programs to play better than a person ever could and they will milk you. Maybe you dont care because you've got those 1000 poor players to suck cash off, but most casinos, including real ones, dont appreciate professional gamblers. This is all old hat, I suggest you read rec.gambling if you're actually in the biz.