Both Smaphaus and SPEWS blocked the range at different times (bounce excerpt below).
Spamhaus was quicker than SPEWS at undoing the blacklist - and again, it appears spammers were in the blocked range so I'm not blaming either organization or anything - Just pointing out that (by design or otherwise) blocking wide address ranges do some collateral dammage.
Here's the old bounce message. 63.205.228.48 does not like recipient. Remote host said: 554 Service unavailable; Client host [69.64.33.64] blocked using sbl.spamhaus.org; http://www.spamhaus.org/SBL/sbl.lasso?query=SBL101 08 Giving up on 63.205.228.48.
And in defense of my ISP, yes, I realize I get what I pay for, and for $49/month a dedicated server where I can run whatever servers I want is still valuable to me. They have a no-spam policy that they do enforce - but they default to presuming innocence, which makes them easily taken advantage of by spammers. As far as I can tell, they do a reasonable job at cutting off the spammers once their identified (and therefore spamhaus removed the blacklist) - but with the presumption of innocence more spammers occasionally come back.
In regards to the poster who suggested that I was hosted in a bad neighborhood, IMHO it's sad to think that high-monthly-ISP-costs may be the best way to prevent spam, by making it too expensive for a spammer to get a dedicated server.
Both Smaphaus and SPEWS blocked the range at different times.
Spamhaus was quicker than SPEWS at undoing the blacklist - and again, it appears spammers were in the blocked range so I'm not blaming either organization or anything - Just pointing out that (by design or otherwise) blocking wide address ranges do some collateral dammage.
63.205.228.48 does not like recipient. Remote host said: 554 Service unavailable; Client host [69.64.33.64] blocked using sbl.spamhaus.org; http://www.spamhaus.org/SBL/sbl.lasso?query=SBL101 08 Giving up on 63.205.228.48.
I didn't say I felt it was "wrong" that owners of networks can block whatever email they want. I agree with their right to do so whether it's because some blacklist says it's IP address is within a few hundred of a spammers, or whether it contains keywords suggesting it's pr0n.
I'm just pointing out that there are quite a few false positives when large IP ranges are blocked.
Any low-cost hosting (in this case, an under $50/month dedicated linux server) that offers the users the ability to run whatever services they like may attract spammers. My hoster does have policies to stop spammers, but with affordible single-dedicated-system hosting spammers come and go. IMHO, blocking large ranges doesn't much affect the spammers or the hosters in this case - it just causes a minor inconvenience to others on the same ip address blocks who have to temporarily route their email through their DSLs for a while.
Note I'm not saying this policy is "wrong" or "right"; and I agree organizations can block whatever they want. I just think blocking large address ranges does as much to create false-positives than to block spam.
Tailhook wrote:
Just off the top of my head (and no astronomical exponents required):
Man-in-the-middle the keyring editor
Scarf it from memory
Monitor keystrokes
And this is exactly why we need Palladium or trusted whateveritscalledthesedays.
With a Palladium-equiped system, none of these attacks are possible - keystrokes are sent as encrypted, signed packets that verify what device they're from - memory's protected by hardware - teh program the keystrokes are going to is checksummed, etc.
As much as people like to bash it, it would be useful in the case you described.
True it's hard to separate out the Novell news, and if their strength is with the server I guess I must agree that is what he should be focusing on.
I guess I just find it interesting that now that there are guys focusing on the consumer desktop (lycoris, lindows, etc) it seems unfortunate to me that RedHat's backing away now.
I also guess I've been very lucky, because most all my hardware and accessories (including the USB camera, DVD burner, etc) worked fine either right out of the box or after RPMs from RedHat's site.
The desktop can be a large market, and I like RedHat think it's a shame if they miss out on it. It just felt kinda discouraging to hear the CEO admit it's not ready. Perhaps a plan on how to make it ready would have made me feel better.
It's falled from 15.45 to 12.52 on very high volume (13.6 million shares yesterday vs 3.5 million shares average).
Yes, I'm sure there could be other factors; but the CEO saying he's not ready for the highest volume market while he has competitors who say they is scary if people were betting on Linux grabbing a piece of the pie from Microsoft. Of course if they (investors and company) counting on growth from other segments, that's smaller and safer.
I was a boss who approved debian/testing and debian/stable on certain machines. Aproved Oracle and Solaris on others. The latter was at least as hard as the former, because of the cost.
If I were a RedHat shareholder, I'd want someone who buys into the vision of Linux on every desktop.
He doesn't seem to know his own product well, as evidenced by the quote in the article: "Consumers want USB drivers and digital camera support; but for the enterprise desktop, that is a little bit different--that area is ripe". Last I tried RedHat, it worked wonderfully with my USB digital camera.
If his goals are smaller (take market share from Open Unix 8 consultants?) perhaps he's not a great fit for that company.
If I'm going to be spending 8-hours-of-my-life somewhere, I want it to be a plesant experience.
Spending a third of my life in an environment that's just a "means to an end" sounds depressing.
There are good work environments out there, where people actually enjoy the culture, the company, and the experience while getting paid:
http://www.secretservice.gov/alert419.shtml
"The Financial Crimes Division of the Secret Service receives approximately 100 telephone calls from victims/potential victims and 300-500 pieces of related correspondence per day."
Elon Musk's (the guy from PayPal playing the X-prize game) already has launch customers.
Best of all, his rocket's designed such that
these two stages would be the later stages of a three stage rocket that could put things in much higher orbits.
SpaceX Announces Defense Department Launch Customer
Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) today announced that the Office of the Secretary of Defense, through the Office of Force Transformation (OFT) , has purchased the first flight of the Falcon orbital launch vehicle. The launch will take place in early 2004 from the SpaceX launch complex at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California
Personally I think it would be nice if when our experienced Air Force pilots get displaced by unmanned craft, that these guys can find jobs in the space program.
Actually, I like the "standard" system; and think it's easier on my mind.
Much easier to split feet or yards into 3 even pieces than trying the same with meters. I don't understand why society never migrated towards base-12 or 60.
Slashdot Mirror
cp /mnt/hda1 whatever
whith
cp /dev/hda1 whatever
dd(1) uses read(2) just like cp(1) does.
dd if=/dev/hda1 of=/dev/hdb1
instead of
cp /dev/hda1 /dev/hdb1
Both Smaphaus and SPEWS blocked the range at different times (bounce excerpt below).
1 08
Spamhaus was quicker than SPEWS at undoing the blacklist - and again, it appears spammers were in the blocked range so I'm not blaming either organization or anything - Just pointing out that (by design or otherwise) blocking wide address ranges do some collateral dammage.
Here's the old bounce message.
63.205.228.48 does not like recipient.
Remote host said: 554 Service unavailable; Client host [69.64.33.64] blocked using sbl.spamhaus.org; http://www.spamhaus.org/SBL/sbl.lasso?query=SBL10
Giving up on 63.205.228.48.
And in defense of my ISP, yes, I realize I get what I pay for, and for $49/month a dedicated server where I can run whatever servers I want is still valuable to me. They have a no-spam policy that they do enforce - but they default to presuming innocence, which makes them easily taken advantage of by spammers. As far as I can tell, they do a reasonable job at cutting off the spammers once their identified (and therefore spamhaus removed the blacklist) - but with the presumption of innocence more spammers occasionally come back.
In regards to the poster who suggested that I was hosted in a bad neighborhood, IMHO it's sad to think that high-monthly-ISP-costs may be the best way to prevent spam, by making it too expensive for a spammer to get a dedicated server.
Both Smaphaus and SPEWS blocked the range at different times.
1 08
Spamhaus was quicker than SPEWS at undoing the blacklist - and again, it appears spammers were in the blocked range so I'm not blaming either organization or anything - Just pointing out that (by design or otherwise) blocking wide address ranges do some collateral dammage.
63.205.228.48 does not like recipient.
Remote host said: 554 Service unavailable; Client host [69.64.33.64] blocked using sbl.spamhaus.org; http://www.spamhaus.org/SBL/sbl.lasso?query=SBL10
Giving up on 63.205.228.48.
I'm just pointing out that there are quite a few false positives when large IP ranges are blocked.
Any low-cost hosting (in this case, an under $50/month dedicated linux server) that offers the users the ability to run whatever services they like may attract spammers. My hoster does have policies to stop spammers, but with affordible single-dedicated-system hosting spammers come and go. IMHO, blocking large ranges doesn't much affect the spammers or the hosters in this case - it just causes a minor inconvenience to others on the same ip address blocks who have to temporarily route their email through their DSLs for a while.
Note I'm not saying this policy is "wrong" or "right"; and I agree organizations can block whatever they want. I just think blocking large address ranges does as much to create false-positives than to block spam.
My particular server (a dedicated box) was innocent, but my hosting facility had spammers on other dedicated boxes.
Isn't blocking a /20 like swatting flys with a hand grenade?
Man-in-the-middle the keyring editor
Scarf it from memory
Monitor keystrokes
And this is exactly why we need Palladium or trusted whateveritscalledthesedays.
With a Palladium-equiped system, none of these attacks are possible - keystrokes are sent as encrypted, signed packets that verify what device they're from - memory's protected by hardware - teh program the keystrokes are going to is checksummed, etc.
As much as people like to bash it, it would be useful in the case you described.
I guess I just find it interesting that now that there are guys focusing on the consumer desktop (lycoris, lindows, etc) it seems unfortunate to me that RedHat's backing away now.
I also guess I've been very lucky, because most all my hardware and accessories (including the USB camera, DVD burner, etc) worked fine either right out of the box or after RPMs from RedHat's site.
The desktop can be a large market, and I like RedHat think it's a shame if they miss out on it. It just felt kinda discouraging to hear the CEO admit it's not ready. Perhaps a plan on how to make it ready would have made me feel better.
It's falled from 15.45 to 12.52 on very high volume (13.6 million shares yesterday vs 3.5 million shares average).
Yes, I'm sure there could be other factors; but the CEO saying he's not ready for the highest volume market while he has competitors who say they is scary if people were betting on Linux grabbing a piece of the pie from Microsoft. Of course if they (investors and company) counting on growth from other segments, that's smaller and safer.
I don't understand your bosses.
He doesn't seem to know his own product well, as evidenced by the quote in the article: "Consumers want USB drivers and digital camera support; but for the enterprise desktop, that is a little bit different--that area is ripe". Last I tried RedHat, it worked wonderfully with my USB digital camera.
If his goals are smaller (take market share from Open Unix 8 consultants?) perhaps he's not a great fit for that company.
If I'm going to be spending 8-hours-of-my-life somewhere, I want it to be a plesant experience. Spending a third of my life in an environment that's just a "means to an end" sounds depressing.
There are good work environments out there, where people actually enjoy the culture, the company, and the experience while getting paid:
Why not make work plesant enough that people enjoy it.
http://www.secretservice.gov/alert419.shtml "The Financial Crimes Division of the Secret Service receives approximately 100 telephone calls from victims/potential victims and 300-500 pieces of related correspondence per day."
"Australian scientists want to field test new contraceptive virus [altered immunocontraceptive Mouse Cytomegalovirus (MCMV)] to stop mice breeding. "
Not necessarily.
You might still have people distributing Open Source Software illegally -- i.e. binary only distributions.
Wouldn't that count as piracy too?
Elon Musk's (the guy from PayPal playing the X-prize game) already has launch customers. Best of all, his rocket's designed such that these two stages would be the later stages of a three stage rocket that could put things in much higher orbits.
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=12794
SpaceX Announces Defense Department Launch Customer
Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) today announced that the Office of the Secretary of Defense, through the Office of Force Transformation (OFT) , has purchased the first flight of the Falcon orbital launch vehicle. The launch will take place in early 2004 from the SpaceX launch complex at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California
No, it will attract people who believe they can make money from buy/selling stock. '
Ah, but that is indeed inline with google's ideals and stratgies!
Jobs in many industries will go unmanned.
Personally I think it would be nice if when our experienced Air Force pilots get displaced by unmanned craft, that these guys can find jobs in the space program.
With X Prize successes possibly being one year away, it sounds like a good opportunity to help this new industry.
Looks like the company discussed in that article never made it and changed business models.
But on the subject of sesame seeds... they're a very big crop - the sixth largest in the world production of edible oil seeds.
And yes, there is valuable intellectual property in sesame seed genetics.
Would Linux be better or worse off without Samba?
Much easier to split feet or yards into 3 even pieces than trying the same with meters. I don't understand why society never migrated towards base-12 or 60.
The US seems to like hanging on while the rest of the world moves on.
http://news.com.com/2030-1011_3-5086029.html