Received: from hax0rb0xen [2600.com] by mail.riaa.com
Fri, 13 Sept 2002 12:40:53 -0500 From: "Bob Jones" <bjones@riaa.com> To: "Hillary Rosen" <hrosen@riaa.com> Subject: Copyright violator on Verizon Date: Fri, 13 Sept 2002 12:40:59 -0500
Mistress,
We have detected a p2p file-swapper on Verizon networks currently sharing 20GB of Brittany Spears, the Backstreet Boys, N'Sync, Celine Dion and Jennifer Lopez. What should we do?
Moderation is there to bring up the level of good posts so that all will notice them, and in part to rub the backs of those who post these good bits of info or ideas.
My advice to you is to quit worrying about karma and enjoy the good post.
I get a virus on my Linux system. It has permissions to my files, so it infects every file I have. My user gets b0rked, I log on as root and wipe my user.
I get a virus on my Windows box, pre 2K or I'm logged on as admin (seems like most 'normal' users do this anyway). Oops, it has write access to my entire system. Bye bye!
I get a virus on my Windows box post 2K. It has permissions to more than just my files and ends up infecting the majority of the system. How to clean it? I guess a $50 virus scanner.
Yes, there is not a huge and drastic difference. But you can't assume because Linux isn't used by the masses that people who really pay attention can't predict how secure it is. Of course there will be things that are missed. Of course when (yes, when) a very large chunk of people switch to Linux there will me more bugs discovered more often.
But to imply that this is all "normal" because outlook is used the most is ridiculous. There is a very legit reason to complain.
I'm probably talking out of my ass here as I'm not exactly sure if it'll fit what you need, but the closest solution I've seen is Evolution from Ximian. It's very popular these days.
IMO, sometimes being close and using Linux is better than being all the way and not.
Oh, and BTW, just because you don't happen to have any friends (who have you in their mailing list -heh) who end up inadvertantly sending you viruses doesn't mean your client isn't an insecure piece of trash.
Well, I for one agree with what he says, in a general way. Assuming the definition of a geek as a person who loves technology, loves to play with it, and *pays attention to the world and politics because s/he is a smart person*, I think this is very true.
I think more and more people are adopting this definition. I can call someone a geeky person without them knowing the efforts of Senator Bermann, but frankly, I have a hard time calling a guy who preaches the gospel of admining Windows 2k servers a geek.
I don't want to start a flame war here. There are things that Windows is better for, like making your job less complicated. On a tangent, I don't think that point fits what a geek should be, but that's another thread. Generally, Linux will outperform Windows as a server and is much more flexible. I'm no sysadmin for Merril Lynch, but from everything I've seen, I'd say it's fair to say that the facts point to Linux *generally* being better.
I'm getting off on a rant. I think you get the point. I completely agree that geeks don't agree on everything, but I haven't found any geek yet who can convince me Microsoft is a Good Thing (TM) and who I couldn't prove wrong with facts about the company.
I really don't want to start a flame war here, but I'll risk it.
I think this is the same with other issues. When it comes to disliking Microsoft, in my opinion, there is no middle ground here either. I'll explain why.
Geeks, by my definition and that of the parent poster, are about doing what they want to with their own equipment. We like to play with technical gear in a fashion that suits us. This is why I agree that DRM is bad.
Microsoft, to a lesser extent than DRM (for now?), has generally proven themselves to want to control your system, as opposed to an OS like Linux or *BSD. From EULA swapping, silently re-enabling auto-update, forcing IE to visit microsoft.com and report an id number (from what I'm told of early versions of 98), and restrictions on what you can and cannot do with their products, I think it's obvious. This is not as clean-cut of an argument as that of geeks vs. DRM, but I think it makes sense.
In my experience, there are no technically-literate arguments for Microsoft (in its entirety) simply because to anyone who knows their history, what they've attempted to do and what they have done, it seems obvious that it's impossible to find Microsoft innocent.
I would love any response to this so long as it isn't a troll. Respect my view, and prove me wrong by logic, or agree with me and state why.
I believe they used to? I thought I remembered forwarding my account to another address a long time ago. Or maybe I'm thinking about setting the reply-to or something.
Well, let's see, with WineX, I can play Diablo, Starcraft, any Warcraft, Stronghold, Deus Ex, and Counter Strike just to name a few.
Oh, and then there's the ports of the Doom games, the Quake games, Freespace 2, Heroes of Might and Magic, Soldier of Fortune, Rune, and a coming version of Neverwinter Nights that will all run natively on Linux.
Oh, and I can still play all my old awesome DOS games, too!
Now I will admit, I'm not familiar with what Mac supports, but don't imply that Linux can't play games.
I think I'm going to go boot my Gentoo UT2003-Live CD and load UT2003 into memory and have a fragging good time. Talk to you later. =)
I would love to see mouse gestures implemented at the library level. I don't know what level it'd be best to implement it at in Linux (I don't know enough about the relation between X, desktop and WM), but I would *LOVE* to have a close window gesture for all my programs.
It's great that options are coming out so it's easier and easier to use one form of input for most of your actions while working with and given program. When I'm in word processing, keyboard shortcuts are the best. When I'm surfing in Galeon, mouse gestures rock the house. =)
This post will be filled with tangents -- bear with me. =)
I'm a big PC fan and I love Linux. This post made me really think and actually consider buying an Apple. What I want to see is options. When I can customize my desktop to the extent I can with GNOME, I'll start recommending it to folks. However, I'll still probably use Linux for 1) Game compatibility and 2) price.
I agree that Linux doesn't "just work", it does work most of the time. I put RH 7.3 with Ximian GNOME on a box and everything just works for me. No issues with word docs, no issues getting my browser and email to integrate with other apps... etc. I've got my parents and a family friend on Linux, and none of these people are "computer literate." I think the only thing they really need right now is easier installation and management of programs and files and more interoperation.
One of the things that gets me is that some folks arrogantly say Linux is so hard to use, but in fact they haven't touched it past a two year old version of Slackware or they only use Debian. Linux has been moving very fast in the past few years and it's starting to speed up even more. Ximian has been out for a while, I like it and I think it works well. A lot of people are collaborating well on interoperability and things are changing. Linux moves faster than proprietary stuff, so it's a fallacy to base your views of it without having used the stuff that's come out in the last 6 months.
As for Apple, I think the Slashdot readership is just that -- a group of readers. A bunch of different people. You can't call slashdotters fickle when there are overwhelming differences in opinion one day to the next -- some folks are just being quiet, some folks are speaking up and some folks are just expressing their views regarding individual issues with Apple separately.
As for my opinion, I say that Apple should move more towards OSS and prove that it's possible. Not all of their money is based on software, although I'll admit I have no figures. I would be behind them all the way, but they have the mantra that "What's good for Apple is good for you."
Default options are wonderful if you don't want to research configurations. But locking configs down is ridiculous, IMO.
there is a way to ignore file sharing passwords on 9x
I read about something in the NT4 SMB server that allowed a crack as follows:
When logging on to a 'secured' (heh) share, the password was sent along with the length of the password. The server would only check to see if the submitted password matched the real one up to the length submitted. Thus, send a length of 1 and brute force every possible character.
Two questions:
1) I read this in one place and I'm not sure whether this is correct. I haven't tested it. Can anyone corroborate this for me?
2) If 1) is true, which systems does it affect?
Excercise for the trolls on Win 9x: start > run > \\your_shared_dir\con\con (hope I remembered that one correctly).
I love how "keywords" can BSOD a windows box. They don't even *check*....
Sorry if this is redundant, and I hope to God it doesn't get lost in the crowd.
I'm hardly familiar with remote-exploit holes in Windows. Can anyone enlighten me on why 98 is so insecure by default? =\ I'd be interested in any links or whitepapers or whathaveyou.
As to holes relating to the fact that all programs have 'root' access, that's obvious, but most folks seem to run their windows boxen as admin anyway, so I still don't see why 98 is worse off.
My impression is, the more complex (e.g. the more services) Microsoft software gets, the more holes the size of mac trucks will be present. I would think XP would be the worst out of the lot at this point (well, besides an unpatched NT4 server, hehe).
Using Microsoft isn't supporting them [philisophically], IMO. Sometimes you just have to use things you don't like to get by.
However, I find it hard to believe that you can honestly support Linux's free and open philosophy but support MS (not as in using it). If you can like Microsoft overall and you still follow the ideals of OSS, it is my opinion that you are ignorant of the entirety of Microsoft's history, actions and motives.
I'm all up for being fair to MS. They're not all bad (it's hard for anyone to be). But given the overall picture, I think they deserve most of what they get.
However, I'd still agree that there is a lot of immature MS bashing on Slashdot. Chalk it up to trolls and move on.
I stand corrected. Thanks for putting me in my place. =)
When the whole Palladium issue came about, the first article posted about it on MSNBC (which was pulled) mentioned that Palladium would stop viruses, trojans, etc. by only allowing authorized programs to run.
And as of eh... a month or so ago (I haven't been keeping up with this, obviously), Microsoft still hadn't told us much about it.
3) People will want faster connections once more entertainment services (read: radio, television, movies, VR chatrooms, etc. etc.) become [more] common on the web. Also, as broadband gets cheaper, more people get it. As new connection technologies become cheaper, the same will happen.
Most folks just use their computers for the web, email and documents. Once people find that they can have all of their current entertainment on the web, make it interactive, and best of all save it and play it again, they'll make that switch.
Will the entertainment companies do this? They fought VHS tapes, they faught cassettes, etc. etc. They're now fighting the net, but in the same breath services are creeping up to offer music on the web.
1) There is typically always a solution where a market exists. Non-DRM hardware and software will likely be sold.
2) OSS is unlikely to contain DRM. And if it does, remove it and recompile.
I won't get into legal barriers to 1), I think we all know those won't last too long.
I also won't get into my prediction that OSS is going to take over the majority of software, at least the foundation of software (a la OS X). That's another thread.
Slashdot Mirror
Received: from hax0rb0xen [2600.com] by mail.riaa.com
Fri, 13 Sept 2002 12:40:53 -0500
From: "Bob Jones" <bjones@riaa.com>
To: "Hillary Rosen" <hrosen@riaa.com>
Subject: Copyright violator on Verizon
Date: Fri, 13 Sept 2002 12:40:59 -0500
Mistress,
We have detected a p2p file-swapper on Verizon networks currently sharing 20GB of Brittany Spears, the Backstreet Boys, N'Sync, Celine Dion and Jennifer Lopez. What should we do?
Dear Karmaless in Cancun:
Moderation is there to bring up the level of good posts so that all will notice them, and in part to rub the backs of those who post these good bits of info or ideas.
My advice to you is to quit worrying about karma and enjoy the good post.
=)
I get a virus on my Linux system. It has permissions to my files, so it infects every file I have. My user gets b0rked, I log on as root and wipe my user.
I get a virus on my Windows box, pre 2K or I'm logged on as admin (seems like most 'normal' users do this anyway). Oops, it has write access to my entire system. Bye bye!
I get a virus on my Windows box post 2K. It has permissions to more than just my files and ends up infecting the majority of the system. How to clean it? I guess a $50 virus scanner.
Yes, there is not a huge and drastic difference. But you can't assume because Linux isn't used by the masses that people who really pay attention can't predict how secure it is. Of course there will be things that are missed. Of course when (yes, when) a very large chunk of people switch to Linux there will me more bugs discovered more often.
But to imply that this is all "normal" because outlook is used the most is ridiculous. There is a very legit reason to complain.
I'm probably talking out of my ass here as I'm not exactly sure if it'll fit what you need, but the closest solution I've seen is Evolution from Ximian. It's very popular these days.
IMO, sometimes being close and using Linux is better than being all the way and not.
Enjoying your new EULA? =)
Oh, and BTW, just because you don't happen to have any friends (who have you in their mailing list -heh) who end up inadvertantly sending you viruses doesn't mean your client isn't an insecure piece of trash.
Sounds pretty restrictive and annoying to me.
And no, I'm not being two faced...
Writing a secure client beats putting pop-ups that warn you that the client is insecure.
I'll admit I'm generalizing it a bit, but the point sticks...
Well, I for one agree with what he says, in a general way. Assuming the definition of a geek as a person who loves technology, loves to play with it, and *pays attention to the world and politics because s/he is a smart person*, I think this is very true.
I think more and more people are adopting this definition. I can call someone a geeky person without them knowing the efforts of Senator Bermann, but frankly, I have a hard time calling a guy who preaches the gospel of admining Windows 2k servers a geek.
I don't want to start a flame war here. There are things that Windows is better for, like making your job less complicated. On a tangent, I don't think that point fits what a geek should be, but that's another thread. Generally, Linux will outperform Windows as a server and is much more flexible. I'm no sysadmin for Merril Lynch, but from everything I've seen, I'd say it's fair to say that the facts point to Linux *generally* being better.
I'm getting off on a rant. I think you get the point. I completely agree that geeks don't agree on everything, but I haven't found any geek yet who can convince me Microsoft is a Good Thing (TM) and who I couldn't prove wrong with facts about the company.
I really don't want to start a flame war here, but I'll risk it.
I think this is the same with other issues. When it comes to disliking Microsoft, in my opinion, there is no middle ground here either. I'll explain why.
Geeks, by my definition and that of the parent poster, are about doing what they want to with their own equipment. We like to play with technical gear in a fashion that suits us. This is why I agree that DRM is bad.
Microsoft, to a lesser extent than DRM (for now?), has generally proven themselves to want to control your system, as opposed to an OS like Linux or *BSD. From EULA swapping, silently re-enabling auto-update, forcing IE to visit microsoft.com and report an id number (from what I'm told of early versions of 98), and restrictions on what you can and cannot do with their products, I think it's obvious. This is not as clean-cut of an argument as that of geeks vs. DRM, but I think it makes sense.
In my experience, there are no technically-literate arguments for Microsoft (in its entirety) simply because to anyone who knows their history, what they've attempted to do and what they have done, it seems obvious that it's impossible to find Microsoft innocent.
I would love any response to this so long as it isn't a troll. Respect my view, and prove me wrong by logic, or agree with me and state why.
Even better is when you read the story about Allchin saying [Microsoft source] Disclosure May Endanger U.S. and there's a big fat Microsoft ad sitting in the middle of the article... that mentions security no less.
Oh, the irony...
Doh! Guess I'm out of date. =(
I believe they used to? I thought I remembered forwarding my account to another address a long time ago. Or maybe I'm thinking about setting the reply-to or something.
Hmph.
Don't forget kids! You shouldn't redirect your 5 spa^H^H^Hhotmail accounts to his email address, either! =)
Hurry! Someone sign this guy up for a hotmail account! =)
Well, let's see, with WineX, I can play Diablo, Starcraft, any Warcraft, Stronghold, Deus Ex, and Counter Strike just to name a few.
Oh, and then there's the ports of the Doom games, the Quake games, Freespace 2, Heroes of Might and Magic, Soldier of Fortune, Rune, and a coming version of Neverwinter Nights that will all run natively on Linux.
Oh, and I can still play all my old awesome DOS games, too!
Now I will admit, I'm not familiar with what Mac supports, but don't imply that Linux can't play games.
I think I'm going to go boot my Gentoo UT2003-Live CD and load UT2003 into memory and have a fragging good time. Talk to you later. =)
Probably -1 Redundant, but I haven't read much...
I would love to see mouse gestures implemented at the library level. I don't know what level it'd be best to implement it at in Linux (I don't know enough about the relation between X, desktop and WM), but I would *LOVE* to have a close window gesture for all my programs.
It's great that options are coming out so it's easier and easier to use one form of input for most of your actions while working with and given program. When I'm in word processing, keyboard shortcuts are the best. When I'm surfing in Galeon, mouse gestures rock the house. =)
This post will be filled with tangents -- bear with me. =)
I'm a big PC fan and I love Linux. This post made me really think and actually consider buying an Apple. What I want to see is options. When I can customize my desktop to the extent I can with GNOME, I'll start recommending it to folks. However, I'll still probably use Linux for 1) Game compatibility and 2) price.
I agree that Linux doesn't "just work", it does work most of the time. I put RH 7.3 with Ximian GNOME on a box and everything just works for me. No issues with word docs, no issues getting my browser and email to integrate with other apps... etc. I've got my parents and a family friend on Linux, and none of these people are "computer literate." I think the only thing they really need right now is easier installation and management of programs and files and more interoperation.
One of the things that gets me is that some folks arrogantly say Linux is so hard to use, but in fact they haven't touched it past a two year old version of Slackware or they only use Debian. Linux has been moving very fast in the past few years and it's starting to speed up even more. Ximian has been out for a while, I like it and I think it works well. A lot of people are collaborating well on interoperability and things are changing. Linux moves faster than proprietary stuff, so it's a fallacy to base your views of it without having used the stuff that's come out in the last 6 months.
As for Apple, I think the Slashdot readership is just that -- a group of readers. A bunch of different people. You can't call slashdotters fickle when there are overwhelming differences in opinion one day to the next -- some folks are just being quiet, some folks are speaking up and some folks are just expressing their views regarding individual issues with Apple separately.
As for my opinion, I say that Apple should move more towards OSS and prove that it's possible. Not all of their money is based on software, although I'll admit I have no figures. I would be behind them all the way, but they have the mantra that "What's good for Apple is good for you."
Default options are wonderful if you don't want to research configurations. But locking configs down is ridiculous, IMO.
there is a way to ignore file sharing passwords on 9x
I read about something in the NT4 SMB server that allowed a crack as follows:
When logging on to a 'secured' (heh) share, the password was sent along with the length of the password. The server would only check to see if the submitted password matched the real one up to the length submitted. Thus, send a length of 1 and brute force every possible character.
Two questions:
1) I read this in one place and I'm not sure whether this is correct. I haven't tested it. Can anyone corroborate this for me?
2) If 1) is true, which systems does it affect?
Excercise for the trolls on Win 9x: start > run > \\your_shared_dir\con\con (hope I remembered that one correctly).
I love how "keywords" can BSOD a windows box. They don't even *check*....
Sorry if this is redundant, and I hope to God it doesn't get lost in the crowd.
I'm hardly familiar with remote-exploit holes in Windows. Can anyone enlighten me on why 98 is so insecure by default? =\ I'd be interested in any links or whitepapers or whathaveyou.
As to holes relating to the fact that all programs have 'root' access, that's obvious, but most folks seem to run their windows boxen as admin anyway, so I still don't see why 98 is worse off.
My impression is, the more complex (e.g. the more services) Microsoft software gets, the more holes the size of mac trucks will be present. I would think XP would be the worst out of the lot at this point (well, besides an unpatched NT4 server, hehe).
Am I way off?
Price goes up either way. Method A) you pay in taxes, method B) you pay on your own if you want wireless.
I'd rather make my own decisions on what my money is spent on, kthx.
Using Microsoft isn't supporting them [philisophically], IMO. Sometimes you just have to use things you don't like to get by.
However, I find it hard to believe that you can honestly support Linux's free and open philosophy but support MS (not as in using it). If you can like Microsoft overall and you still follow the ideals of OSS, it is my opinion that you are ignorant of the entirety of Microsoft's history, actions and motives.
I'm all up for being fair to MS. They're not all bad (it's hard for anyone to be). But given the overall picture, I think they deserve most of what they get.
However, I'd still agree that there is a lot of immature MS bashing on Slashdot. Chalk it up to trolls and move on.
I stand corrected. Thanks for putting me in my place. =)
When the whole Palladium issue came about, the first article posted about it on MSNBC (which was pulled) mentioned that Palladium would stop viruses, trojans, etc. by only allowing authorized programs to run.
And as of eh... a month or so ago (I haven't been keeping up with this, obviously), Microsoft still hadn't told us much about it.
I was out of date, sorry for the old info.
I think this might be a more precise answer:
User Friendly, July 29, 2000
Oh, I should also add...
Disclaimer: speculation ahead
3) People will want faster connections once more entertainment services (read: radio, television, movies, VR chatrooms, etc. etc.) become [more] common on the web. Also, as broadband gets cheaper, more people get it. As new connection technologies become cheaper, the same will happen.
Most folks just use their computers for the web, email and documents. Once people find that they can have all of their current entertainment on the web, make it interactive, and best of all save it and play it again, they'll make that switch.
Will the entertainment companies do this? They fought VHS tapes, they faught cassettes, etc. etc. They're now fighting the net, but in the same breath services are creeping up to offer music on the web.
I dunno. It seems feasible to me.
I disagree.
1) There is typically always a solution where a market exists. Non-DRM hardware and software will likely be sold.
2) OSS is unlikely to contain DRM. And if it does, remove it and recompile.
I won't get into legal barriers to 1), I think we all know those won't last too long.
I also won't get into my prediction that OSS is going to take over the majority of software, at least the foundation of software (a la OS X). That's another thread.
Well, if this stuff about cheating on your MCSE is a rumor, it's a pretty big rumor.
Some of these MCSEs are so fscking clueless it's scary. I wouldn't be at all surprised.
Ohhhhhh that's a good laugh that I needed right now.
Wish I had some mod points. =)
Now I knew there were some peace loving hippy folks who used UNIX, but I always thought the Linux folks took the cake... =)