But wait!!! I can prove it's not the virus.
on
SCO Offline
·
· Score: 5, Informative
www.sco.com no longer resolves. They removed it from their name server yesterday. Only sco.com without the www resolves to an ip address. The attack should be almost completely averted by now because of this, but sco.com is still down.
The only possible cause I see for them to still be offline is if they took it offline themselves, or there's been another attack that they've failed to mention to the press, but it's unlikely that they'd turn down any opportunity to slam us if that were the case. Check it yourselves. The worm specifically attacks the domain www.sco.com, which no longer exists, and the dns entry expired yesterday. All that worm traffic should be going to oblivion by now, because Windows doesn't reuse expired dns records when requery attempts fail.
Java doesn't have a compile-time linker either. VM based languages tend to only link at runtime.
You improve one library, retaining interface compatibility, and every program that depends on it benefits without having to recompile. Executable code doesn't get duplicated in memory each time a new process sharing the same library starts. Libraries can benefit from globally shared objects without running the risk that a program compiled with an older version will mess stuff up. Etc.
But you're right about this being imperfect. Upgrading my.NET runtime caused my Visual Studio.NET to become instable. I'll probably have to get the newest Visual Studio before I can get much use out of it again. It makes everything incredibly slow to load as well.
Visual Studio.NET does infact include a linker, for the C++ compiler.
How many Linux desktop users out there do you think installed the SSH root vulnerability updates that came out last year? That's turned on by default on many distributions.
I've gotten 4 or 5 copies already. It's UPX compressed and half of the text is "encrypted" with ROT13. And there's one line in there that could be a reference to Andy Tanenbaum, author of Minix, but that's just speculation at this point.
I believe that the estimated cost caused by viruses is determined by loss of productivity, cost of cleanup, and the cost of precautionary measures that have been taken protect against such a virus, like stricter security settings, employee education, and the cost of antivirus software and monitoring tools.
Where I work, the primary cost of viruses is having to accept the slowdowns caused by anti-virus software.
Some employees open every attachment they recieve with complete trust in the random stranger who sent it to them, regardless of the fact the company's security policy strongly discourages it. So just in case, Symantec Antivirus Corporate Edition is running on every computer. We also patch frequently.
Previously known as http://www.ExpertSexChange.com, but they renamed it after a bunch of people started making "off-topic" posts relating to the domain name.
There's a lot of great info there for Windows developers.
SCO will most definitely use the virus as evidence to their argument that all Linux users are criminals. Because you know, of the millions of Linux users out there, after nearly a year of putting up with outright lies, insults, threats, and slander, one person among the countless millions got angry enough to release a virus against SCO. If one out of the millions of Linux users was capable of that, just imagine what the rest of them are capable of. At least that's how any argument from SCO would probably sound to us, except that it begs the natural response "They were running Windows!!!"
I hope the order goes through. They wanted a company name because it's sold in their small business section, so I filled in my real name and added the word "software" to the end.
It looked like a sweet deal compared to what I've seen elsewhere unless there's something horrifically wrong with it. I also hope that it doesn't get lost/damaged in shipping, returned to sender, or stolen from my front porch. I'm not home during business hours.
A just ending would be for the feds who decided his fate to be arrested and convicted for treason. And of course for Arar to get more more money than he could ever spend.
Would be to have a big most recently used list, as tall as the screen, sorted by name, selectively bolded according to each item's total frequency of use.
Another option would be having something to allow the user to assign hotkeys or mouse gestures to any file/shortcut on their computer.
And if IBM later tries to patent these ideas without permission, I'll sue them in a most public fashion.
Or if you're a packrat like me who never deletes everything, create a folder called "old" on your desktop and drag across everything you haven't used in the last week. I probably have 10000 files in there, all dragged over from previous desktops, and nested in a fashion like old\old\old\.
Same for the start menu. All those things look so important, but you won't miss them. And if you do you can always pull them back out.
Don't forget that they last up to 14 years. Like LZW and MP3.
Nowadays, if you're the tiniest bit inventive, you have a great chance of being sued for it. Patents worked well for manufacturing techniques and physical products where development costs can be huge, but in the area of computer science, you come up with an idea and can have a working prototype the same day. Patenting your day's work can cost a few weeks of wages. And people rarely get their work notarized. Computers are a great equalizer. Suddenly the tools to turn ideas into inventions are in everyone's hands, not just the well funded. But patents still only protect the wealthy.
JPEG2000 is better for images containing smooth gradients, while JPEG is better for textured surfaces. JPEG noticeably damages gradients at typical compression levels.
To me the problem with the JPEG2000 standard has been that it's become bloated. All many of us wanted was a replacement for JPEG that supported an alpha channel and optional wavelet compression.
The ongoing rumor for the last couple decades has been that our prisons are a great place to be forcibly gang raped by other men on a weekly basis, especially if you're a soft, corporate type who doesn't get along well. Chances are he'll survive by dressing up as a woman and giving head for protection.
They've shown themselves to be: Copyright violators suing for copyright violation. Contract violators suing for breach of contract. Royalty stiffs (withheld payments from Novell) sending fraudulent invoices for royalties. And now they're slanderers suing for slander. Though technically it's libel.
All you need is a program to append a couple random bytes to each file you download through p2p. They'll still play except maybe in rare cases that I haven't heard of. A downside is that you'll lose the download splitting aspect of p2p.
Making small changes to break the hash checking can be defeated though. You only need a few pieces of a media file to identify it with certainty. And you can create a signature in a way that is offset neutral. Suppose for every unique x bytes whereby the hash matches a specific constant for the rightmost n bits (determined by file size), you recorded the following y bytes. Those strings of y bytes form the signature. Signatures can be matched with only a few strings in common between them.
But then, people could always re-encode or encrypt their files.
Is suing a kid who posed no threat to them more important than trying to regain a trustworthy image? Microsoft keeps piling on one reason after another for their customers to dump them. When will they see that it's not individuals and other companies who are screwing them, but that they're screwing themselves? Product activation, insecure defaults, lock-in tactics, fud campaigns, suing just because they can, all of that makes people not want to deal with them.
Slashdot Mirror
www.sco.com no longer resolves. They removed it from their name server yesterday. Only sco.com without the www resolves to an ip address. The attack should be almost completely averted by now because of this, but sco.com is still down.
The only possible cause I see for them to still be offline is if they took it offline themselves, or there's been another attack that they've failed to mention to the press, but it's unlikely that they'd turn down any opportunity to slam us if that were the case. Check it yourselves. The worm specifically attacks the domain www.sco.com, which no longer exists, and the dns entry expired yesterday. All that worm traffic should be going to oblivion by now, because Windows doesn't reuse expired dns records when requery attempts fail.
> www.sco.com
Server: ns.calderasystems.com
Address: 216.250.130.1
*** ns.calderasystems.com can't find www.sco.com: Non-existent domain
> sco.com
Server: ns.calderasystems.com
Address: 216.250.130.1
Non-authoritative answer:
Name: sco.com
Address: 216.250.128.12
Are you bashing Hinduism?
Though it still made me laugh. Can't help it.
Java doesn't have a compile-time linker either. VM based languages tend to only link at runtime.
.NET runtime caused my Visual Studio .NET to become instable. I'll probably have to get the newest Visual Studio before I can get much use out of it again. It makes everything incredibly slow to load as well.
.NET does infact include a linker, for the C++ compiler.
You improve one library, retaining interface compatibility, and every program that depends on it benefits without having to recompile. Executable code doesn't get duplicated in memory each time a new process sharing the same library starts. Libraries can benefit from globally shared objects without running the risk that a program compiled with an older version will mess stuff up. Etc.
But you're right about this being imperfect. Upgrading my
Visual Studio
Yeah, it seems we've slashdotted our friends at groklaw again.
If Steve is so much smarter, then how did Bill manage to overtake him selling inferior software on inferior hardware at higher prices?
How many Linux desktop users out there do you think installed the SSH root vulnerability updates that came out last year? That's turned on by default on many distributions.
I've gotten 4 or 5 copies already. It's UPX compressed and half of the text is "encrypted" with ROT13. And there's one line in there that could be a reference to Andy Tanenbaum, author of Minix, but that's just speculation at this point.
I believe that the estimated cost caused by viruses is determined by loss of productivity, cost of cleanup, and the cost of precautionary measures that have been taken protect against such a virus, like stricter security settings, employee education, and the cost of antivirus software and monitoring tools.
Where I work, the primary cost of viruses is having to accept the slowdowns caused by anti-virus software.
Some employees open every attachment they recieve with complete trust in the random stranger who sent it to them, regardless of the fact the company's security policy strongly discourages it. So just in case, Symantec Antivirus Corporate Edition is running on every computer. We also patch frequently.
No doubt with a few quick body measurements they could just stretch a premade model to match your proportions.
Or there's also the T-ray camera that can take black and white nude photos through most clothing.
From Symantec:
"Due to the logic used to verify the date, the DoS only occurs 25% of the time."
Previously known as http://www.ExpertSexChange.com, but they renamed it after a bunch of people started making "off-topic" posts relating to the domain name.
There's a lot of great info there for Windows developers.
SCO will most definitely use the virus as evidence to their argument that all Linux users are criminals. Because you know, of the millions of Linux users out there, after nearly a year of putting up with outright lies, insults, threats, and slander, one person among the countless millions got angry enough to release a virus against SCO. If one out of the millions of Linux users was capable of that, just imagine what the rest of them are capable of. At least that's how any argument from SCO would probably sound to us, except that it begs the natural response "They were running Windows!!!"
Which distribution should they use?
If you buy PC to run Linux on, chances are you're going to want to download and install it yourself.
I hope the order goes through. They wanted a company name because it's sold in their small business section, so I filled in my real name and added the word "software" to the end.
It looked like a sweet deal compared to what I've seen elsewhere unless there's something horrifically wrong with it. I also hope that it doesn't get lost/damaged in shipping, returned to sender, or stolen from my front porch. I'm not home during business hours.
A just ending would be for the feds who decided his fate to be arrested and convicted for treason. And of course for Arar to get more more money than he could ever spend.
Would be to have a big most recently used list, as tall as the screen, sorted by name, selectively bolded according to each item's total frequency of use.
Another option would be having something to allow the user to assign hotkeys or mouse gestures to any file/shortcut on their computer.
And if IBM later tries to patent these ideas without permission, I'll sue them in a most public fashion.
Or if you're a packrat like me who never deletes everything, create a folder called "old" on your desktop and drag across everything you haven't used in the last week. I probably have 10000 files in there, all dragged over from previous desktops, and nested in a fashion like old\old\old\.
Same for the start menu. All those things look so important, but you won't miss them. And if you do you can always pull them back out.
That's not an invention! They just took an existing business model and slapped the words "Open Source" on it.
So, where can I sign up?
Don't forget that they last up to 14 years. Like LZW and MP3.
Nowadays, if you're the tiniest bit inventive, you have a great chance of being sued for it. Patents worked well for manufacturing techniques and physical products where development costs can be huge, but in the area of computer science, you come up with an idea and can have a working prototype the same day. Patenting your day's work can cost a few weeks of wages. And people rarely get their work notarized. Computers are a great equalizer. Suddenly the tools to turn ideas into inventions are in everyone's hands, not just the well funded. But patents still only protect the wealthy.
I'm just wondering. It'd be awfully funny if it is.
JPEG2000 is better for images containing smooth gradients, while JPEG is better for textured surfaces. JPEG noticeably damages gradients at typical compression levels.
To me the problem with the JPEG2000 standard has been that it's become bloated. All many of us wanted was a replacement for JPEG that supported an alpha channel and optional wavelet compression.
I don't advocate the use of such block lists.
SPEWS especially has a long history of adding non-spammers to block lists, or large blocks of addresses exceeding the ip addresses used by spammers.
The ongoing rumor for the last couple decades has been that our prisons are a great place to be forcibly gang raped by other men on a weekly basis, especially if you're a soft, corporate type who doesn't get along well. Chances are he'll survive by dressing up as a woman and giving head for protection.
They've shown themselves to be:
Copyright violators suing for copyright violation.
Contract violators suing for breach of contract.
Royalty stiffs (withheld payments from Novell) sending fraudulent invoices for royalties.
And now they're slanderers suing for slander. Though technically it's libel.
All you need is a program to append a couple random bytes to each file you download through p2p. They'll still play except maybe in rare cases that I haven't heard of. A downside is that you'll lose the download splitting aspect of p2p.
Making small changes to break the hash checking can be defeated though. You only need a few pieces of a media file to identify it with certainty. And you can create a signature in a way that is offset neutral. Suppose for every unique x bytes whereby the hash matches a specific constant for the rightmost n bits (determined by file size), you recorded the following y bytes. Those strings of y bytes form the signature. Signatures can be matched with only a few strings in common between them.
But then, people could always re-encode or encrypt their files.
Is suing a kid who posed no threat to them more important than trying to regain a trustworthy image? Microsoft keeps piling on one reason after another for their customers to dump them. When will they see that it's not individuals and other companies who are screwing them, but that they're screwing themselves? Product activation, insecure defaults, lock-in tactics, fud campaigns, suing just because they can, all of that makes people not want to deal with them.