I have this exact problem at my school, University of Illinois Chicago.
With about 3000 students on my res hall network, about 2700 of those Windows machines, and about 2000 of those infected, the extra network traffic across my network card took 25% CPU, nonstop. This interfered greatly with my MUDing, and I was not pleased.
The ACCC (Academic Computer and Communications Center) at UIC had a good idea for the dorms -- send someone around to every room and install the patch on every Windows machine. Any machine that wasn't updated by this weekend (i.e. today) will have their common account disabled, e.g. no internet access, no email, no ability to do schoolwork, etc.
It's the perfect solution to people who think if they don't see Cookie Monster eating their files ala Hackers, they aren't infected with any malware.
In the last 24 hours, my CPU usage has dropped by half. By gum, it works:)
i use Fire, a GPL'd OS X IM client, which supports MSN messenger.
but since i never gave them my social in the first place... how would it be verification... ?
tricky.
If M$ ports Word to Linux, I'll buy it, regardless of price. It's just better than AbiWord.
I try to avoid using MS products, unless they make a product that is simply better than it's competition. The only real example of this that I've seen is Word. Word is simply well done... although I'd cut out some of the idiot-proofing, if I had my druthers.
if you've seen Revolution OS, which is a pretty good flick to begin with, Bruce Perens (leader of the Debian project) talks about how he got an email asking how to use some sort of serial console with debian. he played with it, got something to work, and replied to the guy's post. the guy wrote back "Thanks, that works! I'll use it in the Space Shuttle."
so there ya go.
hrm, not really. 1st world is the US and its allies, 2nd is the USSR and its allies, 3rd world are all the others. but since the cold war is over (or so they tell us;)) 3rd world means nothing.
Overall, how do you feel about Microsoft's Palladium, and efforts in general to only allow signed code to execute on processors in order to prevent buffer overflow and other attacks? Do you think it is necessary to keep security one step above the black hat community, or does it carry to many risks as far as open source is concerned?
look at this url:
https://memberservices.passport.net/ppsecure/MSRV_ ResetPW.srf?lc=1033&sf=1&id=2&ru=http://www.hotmai l.msn.com/cgi-bin/sbox&tw=20&fs=1&cb=&cbid=24325&t s=0&sec=&mspp_shared=&seclog=0&kpp=2&svc=mail&mspp jph=1&em=jameslongs@hotmail.com
my favorite parts:
&sec=
&seclog=0
good to know they're still keeping track of possible exploits even as much as 12 hours after this has been discovered...
with only 2 data registers (and 8 bit at that) i'm surprised you can write any code on the apple ii... but then again, brainfuck is even less...
hmm... an assembly language brainfuck interpreter for the apple ii would be a good idea...
It's not exactly Mac OS X, but it's the Darwin core -- http://www.gnu-darwin.org.
Apple did make an "x86-compatible" Mac a few years back, I think it had a 486 chip alongside the PPC (or even 040?) I don't remember too much about this, I think it worked by pressing Cmd-return, at which point it would switch to the 486, while maintaining state on the PPC. Essentially like the Orange Micro PC compatibility cards they used to make. (NuBus what!)
I'd love to see an Apple/AMD collaboration, either a licensed port of the whole Mac OS X to x86 architecture, or a dual-processor machine. It'd be pretty badass.
perhaps sierra won't be bitchy this time round and release a mac port? i for one have never gotten good at CS because of the lack of macintosh support.
also, it would prevent the starcraft-playin', iPod-totin' mac addict gamers from boycotting sierra.
Slashdot Mirror
I have this exact problem at my school, University of Illinois Chicago.
:)
With about 3000 students on my res hall network, about 2700 of those Windows machines, and about 2000 of those infected, the extra network traffic across my network card took 25% CPU, nonstop. This interfered greatly with my MUDing, and I was not pleased.
The ACCC (Academic Computer and Communications Center) at UIC had a good idea for the dorms -- send someone around to every room and install the patch on every Windows machine. Any machine that wasn't updated by this weekend (i.e. today) will have their common account disabled, e.g. no internet access, no email, no ability to do schoolwork, etc.
It's the perfect solution to people who think if they don't see Cookie Monster eating their files ala Hackers, they aren't infected with any malware.
In the last 24 hours, my CPU usage has dropped by half. By gum, it works
i use Fire, a GPL'd OS X IM client, which supports MSN messenger. but since i never gave them my social in the first place... how would it be verification... ? tricky.
If M$ ports Word to Linux, I'll buy it, regardless of price. It's just better than AbiWord. I try to avoid using MS products, unless they make a product that is simply better than it's competition. The only real example of this that I've seen is Word. Word is simply well done... although I'd cut out some of the idiot-proofing, if I had my druthers.
if you've seen Revolution OS, which is a pretty good flick to begin with, Bruce Perens (leader of the Debian project) talks about how he got an email asking how to use some sort of serial console with debian. he played with it, got something to work, and replied to the guy's post. the guy wrote back "Thanks, that works! I'll use it in the Space Shuttle." so there ya go.
hrm, not really. 1st world is the US and its allies, 2nd is the USSR and its allies, 3rd world are all the others. but since the cold war is over (or so they tell us ;)) 3rd world means nothing.
Overall, how do you feel about Microsoft's Palladium, and efforts in general to only allow signed code to execute on processors in order to prevent buffer overflow and other attacks? Do you think it is necessary to keep security one step above the black hat community, or does it carry to many risks as far as open source is concerned?
look at this url: https://memberservices.passport.net/ppsecure/MSRV_ ResetPW.srf?lc=1033&sf=1&id=2&ru=http://www.hotmai l.msn.com/cgi-bin/sbox&tw=20&fs=1&cb=&cbid=24325&t s=0&sec=&mspp_shared=&seclog=0&kpp=2&svc=mail&mspp jph=1&em=jameslongs@hotmail.com
my favorite parts:
&sec=
&seclog=0
good to know they're still keeping track of possible exploits even as much as 12 hours after this has been discovered...
with only 2 data registers (and 8 bit at that) i'm surprised you can write any code on the apple ii... but then again, brainfuck is even less... hmm... an assembly language brainfuck interpreter for the apple ii would be a good idea...
It's not exactly Mac OS X, but it's the Darwin core -- http://www.gnu-darwin.org.
Apple did make an "x86-compatible" Mac a few years back, I think it had a 486 chip alongside the PPC (or even 040?) I don't remember too much about this, I think it worked by pressing Cmd-return, at which point it would switch to the 486, while maintaining state on the PPC. Essentially like the Orange Micro PC compatibility cards they used to make. (NuBus what!)
I'd love to see an Apple/AMD collaboration, either a licensed port of the whole Mac OS X to x86 architecture, or a dual-processor machine. It'd be pretty badass.
perhaps sierra won't be bitchy this time round and release a mac port? i for one have never gotten good at CS because of the lack of macintosh support.
also, it would prevent the starcraft-playin', iPod-totin' mac addict gamers from boycotting sierra.
i just tried in 10.1.5... nothing. i think the second mydir that was created just disappeared. someone should tell apple though.