My comments were not specific to the $8500 gaming table. They were mainly directed at your shallowness of understanding. I consider it unfortunate when people barely skim the surface of a topic and yet believe they are well informed. Perhaps this is an effect of modern society, where our perception of the world is increasingly influenced by 60 second news clips rather than the in-depth reporting of old-fashioned print media.
For example, when you hear a headline about the latest Earthquake or some retaliatory strike in the Middle East, do you ever stop and try to imagine the reality behind it? Can you picture what it would be like to have a rocket hit your neighbour's house? Can you picture what happens on the ground when your troops are deployed in a foreign land? It's important to be aware that the world is complex. Don't glance at the surface and mistake that for understanding.
Good god - what utter conceit! You look at a large and intricate piece of hardwood furniture, with all kinds of drawers, sliding parts, and recesses, put together with numerous dovetail joints no less, and you think anyone with access to a table saw and a miter saw could build one.
The sheer arrogance of this assumption leads me to believe you've never built anything like this before. If you had, you'd know that even building a single drawer using dovetails is not a trivial endeavour. Add to that the challenge of making many drawers, selecting and mounting hardware that aligns them nicely and lets them slide in and out smoothly. And after you have it all built, there's the significant task of applying a nice finish to the wood.
There is a huge difference between knowing basic carpentry and knowing how to make hardwood furniture. You clearly have no grasp of how much time and skill a project like this requires. It involves hours and hours of planning, measuring, cutting, machining, fitting, gluing, clamping, sanding, and finishing. It requires a sizable workshop with an extensive array of tools, and the quality of the results is directly proportional to the quality of the tools you employ. Don't kid yourself that you could easily build such a thing.
The fact is that most Windows users firstly don't care what runs on their computer, and secondly don't use even a non-negligible fraction their computer's power.
What a moronic statement. Where exactly did you pull this "fact" from? A common side-effect of malware infection is noticeably slow system performance, and I can assure you that users do care when their computers are sluggish to respond. If Windows users didn't care what ran on their computers, there would not be a huge worldwide market for antivirus software.
As for Windows users not using a "non-negligible" fraction of their computers power, that's equally moronic. Are you suggesting that, (as a Linux user perhaps), your disk is constantly grinding, or that your CPU or other resources are frequently pinned? If so, is that something to feel smug about?
Whatever one may think of the health insurance changes brought about by this bill, it is essentially a new tax on all Americans to pay for those who cannot afford it on their own.
Exactly. You can either live in a society that says "f**k the poor", or share the wealth. You have to choose who you're more concerned about - the physician who's tax load will increase by $100,000, or the poor people who are dying because of lack of health insurance.
When the tax alone on some person's income is more than most people's total income will ever be, I think that person is going to survive just fine.
But the people who won't see that money will be master carpenters and their assistants, automobile factory workers, boat builders, waiters and bus boys, and all those businesses that he would have spent the money on.
Boat builders? Seriously? You're concerned that people aren't going to be spending enough money on boats?
Also, the money won't be invested into the stock market.
As in, the money won't be vacuumed up by the tiny percentage of the population that owns a vast percentage of the stocks?
Your heartfelt concern for the rich is telling. I can't say that I blame you. If I'd been born with a silver spoon in my mouth I'd probably favour the status quo as well.
Have a look at Software Restriction Policies. They can prevent unauthorized executables from being launched through a web browser, or from a USB drive, etc. Software Restriction Policies are not infallible, but they're far more effective than other preventive measures like antivirus software.
Internet Explorer already has security zones that apply restrictions based on where content is coming from. Users are prompted whether to run executables.
That's not the same thing *at all* as stripping execute permission.
And you only mention IE. IE is merely one way for a system to import a file. You can download through scp, ftp, gopher, irc, IM, etc. Files brought in from the network need to be stripped of execute permission if you want *any* hope of stopping the automated propagation of badware.
You're missing the point. Imposing an extra step to make something executable won't solve the problem, because the user will be prompted to take that step and will naively agree to do it.
Plus, in terms of malware, you need to broaden your concept of "executable". Lots of things happen within the context of displaying a web page that are potentially risky. If you prevent every risky action from executing you would break things to a degree that most users would not accept. You can't view today's web without taking some risk.
The better test would be to give all the parts set on the table along with all the screws.
Damn straight. I've been assembling for years, and the key to speed is skill with screw insertion.
I prefer an extra long phillips driver for extended reach and increased moment of inertia. The moment of inertia allows screws to be fully inserted by a single spin of the driver. One hand balances the driver lightly, while the other hand gives it a quick spin by the shaft. When the screw head bottoms out, switch to the handle for grip and tighten a final half-turn or so.
A magnetized tip is also essential for guiding screws into place. If your driver is not magnetic, stroke it a dozen or so times in one direction with a strong permanent magnet to make it so.
It takes no more than 1 second to insert a screw this way.
Even if this scheme worked as described, it useless. In the case of malware resident in RAM, it would do absolutely nothing to identify what malware is present or how got loaded into RAM.
In the case of malware resident on disk, it presents no solution at all for detection. The author evidently believes that 100% effective malware scanners exist, and that if malware is stored on disk it is "gauranteed" to be detected.
An effective anti-malware detection scheme is going to have to do a hell of a lot more than produce a one-byte boolean report.
3. Kill ActiveX - I know of no legitimate website besides Microsoft.com that requires ActiveX.
It may be a risk, and there may be alternative ways to do things, but let's not pretend there's only one domain in existence that needs it. As a single example, I recently had to login to a customer's server remotely. The only method of remote access available was through logmein.com. I had to use ActiveX.
4. If a file comes in from the outside world - STRIP ITS PERMISSION TO EXECUTE. MAKE THE USER UNPACK IT FROM AN ARCHIVE OR SET ITS PERMISSION.
Internet Explorer already has security zones that apply restrictions based on where content is coming from. Users are prompted whether to run executables. The problem is that naive users routinely agree when prompted to do dangerous things. This is not an OS-specific problem.
I wouldn't characterize it as a "mess", but I do notice there are some changes to
to pf rules syntax, so some rewriting of your firewall rules might be required.
I've been using OpenBSD since around 2.7. I've come to really trust the judgment of the developers in general, and the pf developers in particular. I've yet to see them break backwards compatibility without good reason.
Re:Sounds rather disappointing, really
on
Hollow Spy Coins
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
True story:
I once made a two-tailed coin as a birthday present for my brother. I used a large file with flat spacers attached that were exactly half the thickness of a coin. With a small jig to hold the coins, I filed away one side from each. I then filed a bevel around each inside edge, sandwiched the halves together and filled in the bevel by soldering. As a final touch, I filed small vertical lines around the edge of the coin.
Aside from having two tails, the result was pretty much indistinguishable from a regular coin. I don't recall that it sounded any different when dropped on a table, for example. With the coin, an endless number of tricks were possible.
Shortly after his birthday, my brother spent the coin.
Re:Sounds rather disappointing, really
on
Hollow Spy Coins
·
· Score: 1
For countries outside the US, you cannot spend a US coin.
US coins are widely accepted at par in Canada. There are so many US pennies in any random pile of "Canadian" pennies that no one could be bothered to sort them out.
In writing.BAT files to run under Windows, the available commands for conditional logic flow are extremely limited. There is an "if" statement, for example, but no "while"" statement. I recall when goto statements and labels became available (MS-DOS version 3?) it suddenly became possible to implement complex logic in.BAT files. Sure, it's not pretty, but it's mighty useful. That primitive syntax still works on Windows today, all the way up to Server 2008. Even though PowerShell is now available, I still like the simplicity and ubiquity of.BAT programming.
If you disagree with my sentiments, please exceute the following code:
Instead, Xenix went on to become SCO Unix. I believe this was the first version of Unix that ran on generic PC hardware. Linux appeared a couple of years later. SCO and Linux went on to have a somewhat rocky relationship.
58.14.0.0/15 China
58.16.0.0/13 China
58.24.0.0/15 China
58.30.0.0/15 China
58.32.0.0/11 China
58.66.0.0/15 China
58.68.128.0/17 China
58.82.0.0/15 China
58.87.64.0/18 China
58.99.128.0/17 China
58.100.0.0/15 China
58.116.0.0/14 China
58.128.0.0/13 China
58.144.0.0/16 China
58.154.0.0/15 China
58.192.0.0/11 China
58.240.0.0/12 China
59.32.0.0/11 China
59.64.0.0/12 China
59.80.0.0/14 China
59.107.0.0/16 China
59.108.0.0/14 China
59.151.0.0/17 China
59.155.0.0/16 China
59.172.0.0/14 China
59.191.0.0/16 China
59.192.0.0/10 China
60.0.0.0/11 China
60.55.0.0/16 China
60.63.0.0/16 China
60.160.0.0/11 China
60.194.0.0/15 China
60.200.0.0/13 China
60.208.0.0/12 China
60.232.0.0/15 China
60.235.0.0/16 China
60.245.128.0/17 China
60.247.0.0/16 China
60.252.0.0/16 China
60.253.128.0/17 China
60.255.0.0/16 China
61.4.80.0/20 China
61.4.176.0/20 China
61.8.160.0/20 China
61.28.0.0/17 China
61.29.128.0/17 China
61.45.128.0/18 China
61.47.128.0/18 China
61.48.0.0/13 China
61.87.192.0/18 China
61.128.0.0/10 China
61.232.0.0/14 China
61.236.0.0/15 China
61.240.0.0/14 China
110.6.0.0/15 China
110.16.0.0/14 China
110.40.0.0/14 China
110.48.0.0/16 China
110.51.0.0/16 China
110.52.0.0/15 China
110.56.0.0/13 China
110.64.0.0/15 China
110.72.0.0/15 China
110.75.0.0/16 China
110.76.0.0/18 China
110.76.192.0/18 China
110.77.0.0/17 China
110.80.0.0/13 China
110.88.0.0/14 China
110.94.0.0/15 China
110.96.0.0/11 China
110.152.0.0/14 China
110.156.0.0/15 China
110.166.0.0/15 China
110.172.192.0/18 China
110.173.0.0/19 China
110.173.32.0/20 China
110.173.64.0/18 China
110.173.192.0/19 China
110.176.0.0/12 China
110.192.0.0/11 China
110.228.0.0/14 China
110.232.32.0/19 China
110.236.0.0/15 China
110.240.0.0/12 China
111.0.0.0/10 China
111.66.0.0/16 China
111.67.192.0/20 China
111.68.64.0/19 China
111.72.0.0/13 China
111.85.0.0/16 China
111.91.192.0/19 China
111.112.0.0/14 China
111.116.0.0/15 China
111.119.64.0/18 China
111.119.128.0/19 China
111.120.0.0/14 China
111.124.0.0/16 China
111.126.0.0/15 China
111.128.0.0/11 China
111.160.0.0/13 China
111.170.0.0/16 China
111.172.0.0/14 China
111.176.0.0/13 China
111.186.0.0/15 China
111.192.0.0/12 China
111.208.0.0/13 China
111.221.128.0/17 China
111.222.0.0/16 China
111.224.0.0/13 China
111.235.96.0/19 China
111.235.160.0/19 China
112.0.0.0/10 China
112.64.0.0/14 China
112.73.0.0/16 China
112.74.0.0/15 China
112.80.0.0/13 China
112.109.128.0/17 China
112.111.0.0/16 China
112.112.0.0/14 China
112.116.0.0/15 China
112.122.0.0/15 China
112.124.0.0/14 China
112.128.0.0/14 China
112.132.0.0/16 China
112.192.0.0/14 China
112.224.0.0/11 China
113.0.0.0/13 China
113.8.0.0/15 China
113.11.192.0/19 China
113.12.0.0/14 China
113.16.0.0/15 China
113.18.0.0/16 China
113.24.0.0/14 China
113.31.0.0/16 China
113.44.0.0/14 China
113.48.0.0/14 China
113.52.160.0/19 China
113.54.0.0/15 China
113.56.0.0/15 China
113.58.0.0/16 China
113.59.0.0/17 China
113.62.0.0/15 China
113.64.0.0/10 China
113.128.0.0/15 China
113.130.96.0/20 China
113.130.112.0/21 China
113.132.0.0/14 China
113.136.0.0/13 China
113.194.0.0/15 China
113.200.0.0/15 China
113.202.0.0/16 China
113.204.0.0/14 China
113.208.96.0/19 China
113.208.128.0/17 China
113.209.0.0/16 China
113.212.0.0/18 China
113.213.0.0/17 China
113.214.0.0/15 China
113.218.0.0/15 China
113.220.0.0/14 China
113.224.0.0/12 China
113.240.0.0/13 China
113.248.0.0/14 China
114.28.0.0/16 China
114.54.0.0/15 China
114.60.0.0/14 China
114.64.0.0/14 China
114.68.0.0/16 China
114.80.0.0/12 China
114.96.0.0/13 China
114.104.0.0/14 China
114.110.0.0/20 China
114.110.128.0/17 China
114.111.160.0/19 China
114.112.0.0/14 China
114.116.0.0/15 China
114.132.0.0/16 China
114.135.0.0/16 China
114.138.0.0/15 China
114.141.128.0/18 China
114.196.0.0/15 China
114.208.0.0/14 China
114.216.0.0/13 China
114.224.0.0/11 China
115.44.0.0/14 China
115.48.0.0/12 China
115.84.0.0/18 China
115.84
The twisting is used to reduce interference. The idea is that if two wires occupy (nearly) the same physical space, then they should experience (nearly) the same interference, which would induce (nearly) no difference in potential between them.
Shielding, on the other hand, is highly effective at blocking out interference, so long as one end of the shield is properly grounded. Coax cable would probably provide better protection from interference for Ethernet signals than twisted pairs. As others have pointed out, however, the different impedance would adversely affect power transfer.
Did I forget they also don't have a tool that detects duplicate MAC addresses, doesn't tell them that they keep appearing on one port of the switch, no way of knowing where the computer hooked-up to the port may be...
I'm assuming most users are using a wireless connection. How are you going to locate the guy in a crowd of 2,500 people who's playing around with his MAC address?
I didn't say it was foolproof. I'm merely pointing out that automated block rules can almost always be abused to create denial of service attacks. If not on the DNS server's MAC, then some other shmuck on the same interface as you.
The DNS server would, by their definition, be blacklisted almost immediately since it too will be creating a LOT of distinct connections to different addresses.
They're probably only looking at TCP connections. DNS traffic usually runs over UDP.
So we scheduled this script to run each minute to generate a list of offending MAC addresses.
We reasoned that if you had a lot of mappings, and that a large proportion of those mappings were to a lot of distinct remote hosts, and largely not idle, that you are probably a Torrenter. OTOH, if you had, say, 20 connections open to a single host or a low number of hosts then this is probably quite fine.
These scripts output a list of bad MACs, that we then just dropped into a block list in the core switches.
And there you have it. The culprits fingered and booted off the network. Of course, they then just changed their MAC addresses, in which case they were then re-identified as soon as their utilisation crept up, and the new MAC was banned.
This approach will work fine until one of the culprits decides to spoof the MAC address of your DNS servers (or whoever else they want to f*ck with) and gets them "booted off the network".
Do you even use these applications you're commenting on?
Microsoft Excel is bar none the best spreadsheet program in existence, and the 2007 version beats the crap out of the 2000 version. Right-click on a cell and check out the formatting context menu. That alone saves miles of mouse travel.
Slashdot Mirror
My comments were not specific to the $8500 gaming table. They were mainly directed at your shallowness of understanding. I consider it unfortunate when people barely skim the surface of a topic and yet believe they are well informed. Perhaps this is an effect of modern society, where our perception of the world is increasingly influenced by 60 second news clips rather than the in-depth reporting of old-fashioned print media.
For example, when you hear a headline about the latest Earthquake or some retaliatory strike in the Middle East, do you ever stop and try to imagine the reality behind it? Can you picture what it would be like to have a rocket hit your neighbour's house? Can you picture what happens on the ground when your troops are deployed in a foreign land? It's important to be aware that the world is complex. Don't glance at the surface and mistake that for understanding.
Good god - what utter conceit! You look at a large and intricate piece of hardwood furniture, with all kinds of drawers, sliding parts, and recesses, put together with numerous dovetail joints no less, and you think anyone with access to a table saw and a miter saw could build one.
The sheer arrogance of this assumption leads me to believe you've never built anything like this before. If you had, you'd know that even building a single drawer using dovetails is not a trivial endeavour. Add to that the challenge of making many drawers, selecting and mounting hardware that aligns them nicely and lets them slide in and out smoothly. And after you have it all built, there's the significant task of applying a nice finish to the wood.
There is a huge difference between knowing basic carpentry and knowing how to make hardwood furniture. You clearly have no grasp of how much time and skill a project like this requires. It involves hours and hours of planning, measuring, cutting, machining, fitting, gluing, clamping, sanding, and finishing. It requires a sizable workshop with an extensive array of tools, and the quality of the results is directly proportional to the quality of the tools you employ. Don't kid yourself that you could easily build such a thing.
The fact is that most Windows users firstly don't care what runs on their computer, and secondly don't use even a non-negligible fraction their computer's power.
What a moronic statement. Where exactly did you pull this "fact" from? A common side-effect of malware infection is noticeably slow system performance, and I can assure you that users do care when their computers are sluggish to respond. If Windows users didn't care what ran on their computers, there would not be a huge worldwide market for antivirus software.
As for Windows users not using a "non-negligible" fraction of their computers power, that's equally moronic. Are you suggesting that, (as a Linux user perhaps), your disk is constantly grinding, or that your CPU or other resources are frequently pinned? If so, is that something to feel smug about?
Whatever one may think of the health insurance changes brought about by this bill, it is essentially a new tax on all Americans to pay for those who cannot afford it on their own.
Exactly. You can either live in a society that says "f**k the poor", or share the wealth. You have to choose who you're more concerned about - the physician who's tax load will increase by $100,000, or the poor people who are dying because of lack of health insurance.
When the tax alone on some person's income is more than most people's total income will ever be, I think that person is going to survive just fine.
But the people who won't see that money will be master carpenters and their assistants, automobile factory workers, boat builders, waiters and bus boys, and all those businesses that he would have spent the money on.
Boat builders? Seriously? You're concerned that people aren't going to be spending enough money on boats?
Also, the money won't be invested into the stock market.
As in, the money won't be vacuumed up by the tiny percentage of the population that owns a vast percentage of the stocks?
Your heartfelt concern for the rich is telling. I can't say that I blame you. If I'd been born with a silver spoon in my mouth I'd probably favour the status quo as well.
Have a look at Software Restriction Policies. They can prevent unauthorized executables from being launched through a web browser, or from a USB drive, etc. Software Restriction Policies are not infallible, but they're far more effective than other preventive measures like antivirus software.
Internet Explorer already has security zones that apply restrictions based on where content is coming from. Users are prompted whether to run executables.
That's not the same thing *at all* as stripping execute permission.
And you only mention IE. IE is merely one way for a system to import a file. You can download through scp, ftp, gopher, irc, IM, etc. Files brought in from the network need to be stripped of execute permission if you want *any* hope of stopping the automated propagation of badware.
You're missing the point. Imposing an extra step to make something executable won't solve the problem, because the user will be prompted to take that step and will naively agree to do it.
Plus, in terms of malware, you need to broaden your concept of "executable". Lots of things happen within the context of displaying a web page that are potentially risky. If you prevent every risky action from executing you would break things to a degree that most users would not accept. You can't view today's web without taking some risk.
The better test would be to give all the parts set on the table along with all the screws.
Damn straight. I've been assembling for years, and the key to speed is skill with screw insertion.
I prefer an extra long phillips driver for extended reach and increased moment of inertia. The moment of inertia allows screws to be fully inserted by a single spin of the driver. One hand balances the driver lightly, while the other hand gives it a quick spin by the shaft. When the screw head bottoms out, switch to the handle for grip and tighten a final half-turn or so.
A magnetized tip is also essential for guiding screws into place. If your driver is not magnetic, stroke it a dozen or so times in one direction with a strong permanent magnet to make it so.
It takes no more than 1 second to insert a screw this way.
Even if this scheme worked as described, it useless. In the case of malware resident in RAM, it would do absolutely nothing to identify what malware is present or how got loaded into RAM.
In the case of malware resident on disk, it presents no solution at all for detection. The author evidently believes that 100% effective malware scanners exist, and that if malware is stored on disk it is "gauranteed" to be detected.
An effective anti-malware detection scheme is going to have to do a hell of a lot more than produce a one-byte boolean report.
How about we change things in Windows so it actually prevents infection in the first place?
1. Educate users. Microsoft does a piss-poor job of this.
Aside from the obvious infeasibility of this, how would this be changing Windows?
2. STOP DEPENDING ON 3 MAGIC LETTERS TO DETERMINE IF SOMETHING IS CODE OR DATA. COME ON, SERIOUSLY. THIS SHOULD HAVE DIED WITH CP/M.
Ever heard of DEP?
3. Kill ActiveX - I know of no legitimate website besides Microsoft.com that requires ActiveX.
It may be a risk, and there may be alternative ways to do things, but let's not pretend there's only one domain in existence that needs it. As a single example, I recently had to login to a customer's server remotely. The only method of remote access available was through logmein.com. I had to use ActiveX.
4. If a file comes in from the outside world - STRIP ITS PERMISSION TO EXECUTE. MAKE THE USER UNPACK IT FROM AN ARCHIVE OR SET ITS PERMISSION.
Internet Explorer already has security zones that apply restrictions based on where content is coming from. Users are prompted whether to run executables. The problem is that naive users routinely agree when prompted to do dangerous things. This is not an OS-specific problem.
I wouldn't characterize it as a "mess", but I do notice there are some changes to to pf rules syntax, so some rewriting of your firewall rules might be required.
I've been using OpenBSD since around 2.7. I've come to really trust the judgment of the developers in general, and the pf developers in particular. I've yet to see them break backwards compatibility without good reason.
True story:
I once made a two-tailed coin as a birthday present for my brother. I used a large file with flat spacers attached that were exactly half the thickness of a coin. With a small jig to hold the coins, I filed away one side from each. I then filed a bevel around each inside edge, sandwiched the halves together and filled in the bevel by soldering. As a final touch, I filed small vertical lines around the edge of the coin.
Aside from having two tails, the result was pretty much indistinguishable from a regular coin. I don't recall that it sounded any different when dropped on a table, for example. With the coin, an endless number of tricks were possible.
Shortly after his birthday, my brother spent the coin.
For countries outside the US, you cannot spend a US coin.
US coins are widely accepted at par in Canada. There are so many US pennies in any random pile of "Canadian" pennies that no one could be bothered to sort them out.
In writing .BAT files to run under Windows, the available commands for conditional logic flow are extremely limited. There is an "if" statement, for example, but no "while"" statement. I recall when goto statements and labels became available (MS-DOS version 3?) it suddenly became possible to implement complex logic in .BAT files. Sure, it's not pretty, but it's mighty useful. That primitive syntax still works on Windows today, all the way up to Server 2008. Even though PowerShell is now available, I still like the simplicity and ubiquity of .BAT programming.
If you disagree with my sentiments, please exceute the following code:
@echo off
SET DESTINATION=HELL
GOTO %DESTINATION%
Instead, Xenix went on to become SCO Unix. I believe this was the first version of Unix that ran on generic PC hardware. Linux appeared a couple of years later. SCO and Linux went on to have a somewhat rocky relationship.
OK then, here's the list:
58.14.0.0/15 China 58.16.0.0/13 China 58.24.0.0/15 China 58.30.0.0/15 China 58.32.0.0/11 China 58.66.0.0/15 China 58.68.128.0/17 China 58.82.0.0/15 China 58.87.64.0/18 China 58.99.128.0/17 China 58.100.0.0/15 China 58.116.0.0/14 China 58.128.0.0/13 China 58.144.0.0/16 China 58.154.0.0/15 China 58.192.0.0/11 China 58.240.0.0/12 China 59.32.0.0/11 China 59.64.0.0/12 China 59.80.0.0/14 China 59.107.0.0/16 China 59.108.0.0/14 China 59.151.0.0/17 China 59.155.0.0/16 China 59.172.0.0/14 China 59.191.0.0/16 China 59.192.0.0/10 China 60.0.0.0/11 China 60.55.0.0/16 China 60.63.0.0/16 China 60.160.0.0/11 China 60.194.0.0/15 China 60.200.0.0/13 China 60.208.0.0/12 China 60.232.0.0/15 China 60.235.0.0/16 China 60.245.128.0/17 China 60.247.0.0/16 China 60.252.0.0/16 China 60.253.128.0/17 China 60.255.0.0/16 China 61.4.80.0/20 China 61.4.176.0/20 China 61.8.160.0/20 China 61.28.0.0/17 China 61.29.128.0/17 China 61.45.128.0/18 China 61.47.128.0/18 China 61.48.0.0/13 China 61.87.192.0/18 China 61.128.0.0/10 China 61.232.0.0/14 China 61.236.0.0/15 China 61.240.0.0/14 China 110.6.0.0/15 China 110.16.0.0/14 China 110.40.0.0/14 China 110.48.0.0/16 China 110.51.0.0/16 China 110.52.0.0/15 China 110.56.0.0/13 China 110.64.0.0/15 China 110.72.0.0/15 China 110.75.0.0/16 China 110.76.0.0/18 China 110.76.192.0/18 China 110.77.0.0/17 China 110.80.0.0/13 China 110.88.0.0/14 China 110.94.0.0/15 China 110.96.0.0/11 China 110.152.0.0/14 China 110.156.0.0/15 China 110.166.0.0/15 China 110.172.192.0/18 China 110.173.0.0/19 China 110.173.32.0/20 China 110.173.64.0/18 China 110.173.192.0/19 China 110.176.0.0/12 China 110.192.0.0/11 China 110.228.0.0/14 China 110.232.32.0/19 China 110.236.0.0/15 China 110.240.0.0/12 China 111.0.0.0/10 China 111.66.0.0/16 China 111.67.192.0/20 China 111.68.64.0/19 China 111.72.0.0/13 China 111.85.0.0/16 China 111.91.192.0/19 China 111.112.0.0/14 China 111.116.0.0/15 China 111.119.64.0/18 China 111.119.128.0/19 China 111.120.0.0/14 China 111.124.0.0/16 China 111.126.0.0/15 China 111.128.0.0/11 China 111.160.0.0/13 China 111.170.0.0/16 China 111.172.0.0/14 China 111.176.0.0/13 China 111.186.0.0/15 China 111.192.0.0/12 China 111.208.0.0/13 China 111.221.128.0/17 China 111.222.0.0/16 China 111.224.0.0/13 China 111.235.96.0/19 China 111.235.160.0/19 China 112.0.0.0/10 China 112.64.0.0/14 China 112.73.0.0/16 China 112.74.0.0/15 China 112.80.0.0/13 China 112.109.128.0/17 China 112.111.0.0/16 China 112.112.0.0/14 China 112.116.0.0/15 China 112.122.0.0/15 China 112.124.0.0/14 China 112.128.0.0/14 China 112.132.0.0/16 China 112.192.0.0/14 China 112.224.0.0/11 China 113.0.0.0/13 China 113.8.0.0/15 China 113.11.192.0/19 China 113.12.0.0/14 China 113.16.0.0/15 China 113.18.0.0/16 China 113.24.0.0/14 China 113.31.0.0/16 China 113.44.0.0/14 China 113.48.0.0/14 China 113.52.160.0/19 China 113.54.0.0/15 China 113.56.0.0/15 China 113.58.0.0/16 China 113.59.0.0/17 China 113.62.0.0/15 China 113.64.0.0/10 China 113.128.0.0/15 China 113.130.96.0/20 China 113.130.112.0/21 China 113.132.0.0/14 China 113.136.0.0/13 China 113.194.0.0/15 China 113.200.0.0/15 China 113.202.0.0/16 China 113.204.0.0/14 China 113.208.96.0/19 China 113.208.128.0/17 China 113.209.0.0/16 China 113.212.0.0/18 China 113.213.0.0/17 China 113.214.0.0/15 China 113.218.0.0/15 China 113.220.0.0/14 China 113.224.0.0/12 China 113.240.0.0/13 China 113.248.0.0/14 China 114.28.0.0/16 China 114.54.0.0/15 China 114.60.0.0/14 China 114.64.0.0/14 China 114.68.0.0/16 China 114.80.0.0/12 China 114.96.0.0/13 China 114.104.0.0/14 China 114.110.0.0/20 China 114.110.128.0/17 China 114.111.160.0/19 China 114.112.0.0/14 China 114.116.0.0/15 China 114.132.0.0/16 China 114.135.0.0/16 China 114.138.0.0/15 China 114.141.128.0/18 China 114.196.0.0/15 China 114.208.0.0/14 China 114.216.0.0/13 China 114.224.0.0/11 China 115.44.0.0/14 China 115.48.0.0/12 China 115.84.0.0/18 China 115.84
If you don't expect/want traffic from China, configure your firewall to block IP addresses assigned to China.
The article describes a 1993 incident where a female player was "raped" in a text-based multiplayer game, where
the harm involved 'a real-time non-consensual textual description of the rape' through 'the display of graphic and offensive sentences'
The twisting is used to reduce interference. The idea is that if two wires occupy (nearly) the same physical space, then they should experience (nearly) the same interference, which would induce (nearly) no difference in potential between them.
Shielding, on the other hand, is highly effective at blocking out interference, so long as one end of the shield is properly grounded. Coax cable would probably provide better protection from interference for Ethernet signals than twisted pairs. As others have pointed out, however, the different impedance would adversely affect power transfer.
Did I forget they also don't have a tool that detects duplicate MAC addresses, doesn't tell them that they keep appearing on one port of the switch, no way of knowing where the computer hooked-up to the port may be...
I'm assuming most users are using a wireless connection. How are you going to locate the guy in a crowd of 2,500 people who's playing around with his MAC address?
I didn't say it was foolproof. I'm merely pointing out that automated block rules can almost always be abused to create denial of service attacks. If not on the DNS server's MAC, then some other shmuck on the same interface as you.
The rickrolling described in the article was accomplished by DNS poisoning. They are obviously running their own (local) DNS servers.
Yeah, I'm sure they don't have a whitelist of MAC addresses from their own infrastructure that gets dropped very early in the scripts.
Hence the "or whoever else" part of what I wrote.
The DNS server would, by their definition, be blacklisted almost immediately since it too will be creating a LOT of distinct connections to different addresses.
They're probably only looking at TCP connections. DNS traffic usually runs over UDP.
From TFA:
So we scheduled this script to run each minute to generate a list of offending MAC addresses.
We reasoned that if you had a lot of mappings, and that a large proportion of those mappings were to a lot of distinct remote hosts, and largely not idle, that you are probably a Torrenter. OTOH, if you had, say, 20 connections open to a single host or a low number of hosts then this is probably quite fine.
These scripts output a list of bad MACs, that we then just dropped into a block list in the core switches.
And there you have it. The culprits fingered and booted off the network. Of course, they then just changed their MAC addresses, in which case they were then re-identified as soon as their utilisation crept up, and the new MAC was banned.
This approach will work fine until one of the culprits decides to spoof the MAC address of your DNS servers (or whoever else they want to f*ck with) and gets them "booted off the network".
Do you even use these applications you're commenting on?
Microsoft Excel is bar none the best spreadsheet program in existence, and the 2007 version beats the crap out of the 2000 version. Right-click on a cell and check out the formatting context menu. That alone saves miles of mouse travel.