But isn't the problem really the lack of static port mapping, not NAT?
(If you don't understand this question, please skip to the next.) Correct, but experience has shown that a large number of installed NAT boxes either cannot map an externally accessible port to an internal IP address and port, or those who install the boxes do not provide their customers adequate information to permit them to do this. Given the trend, discussed in the last question, toward confining individual Internet users to a consumer role, I believe fewer and fewer users will have the ability to statically map ports as time goes on.
I call BULLSHIT. Each and every firewall/nat box I have worked with supports reverse port mapping, DMZ, or uPnP. It sounds like he is having trouble adapting to the changing technology.
researchers are avoiding work with dangerous pathogens, choosing more innocuous micro-organisms."
And have you ever considered that the most dangerous kind of research is not the manipulation of known dangerous organisms (and the associated containment precautions), but of supposedly "innocuous" or "harmless" organisms, organisms where there is no need for increased security or containment protocols?
So tell me, if banning List Generation Software is a bit heavy handed, then please explain its lawful use?
Oh? Do I hear silence? Of course I do. there is NO legitimate reason for list generation software, or email harvesters. If you develop a drug where its only use is to incapacitate a person, you ban its possession and manufacture. The same goes for list generation software.
All Your Base Are Belong to Us.
This is an example of a saying or idea that rockets across the Net and becomes as familiar as an actual person. (The term spam, when used in reference to junk e-mail, is the most famous and successful of these.) The phrase, derived from a bad Japanese-to-English translation in the game Zero Wing, started showing up in the far corners of the Net in 2000 and shot to Web superstardom the following spring. People picked up the phrase and created a panoply of Web sites using it; they built Internet billboards, they morphed photos, they even put together music videos. But like other flashes in the pan, it retreated as quickly as it had appeared.
You only wish it retreated as quickly as it had appeared. We were stuck with the links being emailed to us, or posted on our messagesboards, for months, if not years. Hell, people are STILL sending it to me.
also notes that since it's a proprietary service, when the service provider decides to stop providing it, the device becomes useless.
A proprietary service is the ONLY means of pulling something like this off. Open Source does not have the time, resources, or coordination necessary to produce the hardware, software, and services required. But you forgot to mention that.
Someone should hoover up that bastard child, strip out what little proprietary software they have, and re-release it as the AntiSco Linux distribution. $2.99 for a limited time only.
I don't want to sound like a slashdot fanboy, but one pag (page 8) really caught my eye:
The Windows NT Workstation 3.5 release provided the highest degree of protection yet for critical business applications and data.
While I enjoy nostalgic work such as this, I can live without this kind of revisionist commentary.
Why not set a defined width?
on
Defining "Planet"
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
they say bodies larger than 700km go from being potatoe shaped to round. why not set a defined width above this 'minimum', and anything larger be called a planet? twice the minimum sounds plausible, and that means Pluto would still be defined as planet.
If they can identify and quantify eplicit networks or IP addresses causing the 'abuse', then why don't they send a warning and then block them? They'll fix the problem real quick.....
We had a monster case custom built for a 'luggable' desktop system and LCD screen that had to go from shutdown to shutdown. While they are normally used for musical equipment (consult your local music shop for more info), they work beautifully for computers.
A brief history of JPEG, which started in 1985. I think it can be fought on the premise that the patent was based on the work of the consortium, and not the work of the person who filed the patent. First to invent, not first to file.
Hasn't anyone honed in on the fact that this so called JPEG virus could potentially be a new and dangerous variant? JPEGs and other associated non executable files are not a threat unto themselves, but based on the brief viral description, they serve as a 'harmless' vehicle for transmitting viral code to be executed by what can be described as a 'bootstrap' executable. How else do you expect to get by the web and email scanners which either filter or STOP any executables from getting through?
Manufactured or not, its a concept which could do some serious damage.
Slashdot Mirror
Some of prefer pictures books over pages of text y'know.
So dude, you finally find a site that you can troll without being banned?
After pulling the naming bullshit, I for one will do my damndest to avoid their product. There are better products out there, with far less baggage.
I have to trust my open source providers. These people, I do not trust.
Give BZFlag a try. (Multiplayer CTF Battlezone)
http://www.bzflag.org/
Its small, simple, and a helluvalot of fun to play.
Their rover turned out to be a dog.....
Can you quantify whether there is a change in temperature variations when SCO publishes yety another press release?
I see no mention that it is the administrators who must share responsibility for the compromises and exploits.
But isn't the problem really the lack of static port mapping, not NAT? (If you don't understand this question, please skip to the next.) Correct, but experience has shown that a large number of installed NAT boxes either cannot map an externally accessible port to an internal IP address and port, or those who install the boxes do not provide their customers adequate information to permit them to do this. Given the trend, discussed in the last question, toward confining individual Internet users to a consumer role, I believe fewer and fewer users will have the ability to statically map ports as time goes on.
I call BULLSHIT. Each and every firewall/nat box I have worked with supports reverse port mapping, DMZ, or uPnP. It sounds like he is having trouble adapting to the changing technology.
researchers are avoiding work with dangerous pathogens, choosing more innocuous micro-organisms."
And have you ever considered that the most dangerous kind of research is not the manipulation of known dangerous organisms (and the associated containment precautions), but of supposedly "innocuous" or "harmless" organisms, organisms where there is no need for increased security or containment protocols?
I guess when they upgraded from an 8 bit OS, they can block more. :)
So tell me, if banning List Generation Software is a bit heavy handed, then please explain its lawful use?
Oh? Do I hear silence? Of course I do. there is NO legitimate reason for list generation software, or email harvesters. If you develop a drug where its only use is to incapacitate a person, you ban its possession and manufacture. The same goes for list generation software.
All Your Base Are Belong to Us. This is an example of a saying or idea that rockets across the Net and becomes as familiar as an actual person. (The term spam, when used in reference to junk e-mail, is the most famous and successful of these.) The phrase, derived from a bad Japanese-to-English translation in the game Zero Wing, started showing up in the far corners of the Net in 2000 and shot to Web superstardom the following spring. People picked up the phrase and created a panoply of Web sites using it; they built Internet billboards, they morphed photos, they even put together music videos. But like other flashes in the pan, it retreated as quickly as it had appeared. You only wish it retreated as quickly as it had appeared. We were stuck with the links being emailed to us, or posted on our messagesboards, for months, if not years. Hell, people are STILL sending it to me.
If you feel like lowering yourself to their level, keep that sco.txt link there.
I thought the whole point was to take the high road?
is it really worth signing your rights away for a measely $12?
Its Windows 98, its 49 days, and if a hosting company is using Win98 as a production hosting server they should be prevented from breeding.
also notes that since it's a proprietary service, when the service provider decides to stop providing it, the device becomes useless.
A proprietary service is the ONLY means of pulling something like this off. Open Source does not have the time, resources, or coordination necessary to produce the hardware, software, and services required. But you forgot to mention that.
Someone should hoover up that bastard child, strip out what little proprietary software they have, and re-release it as the AntiSco Linux distribution. $2.99 for a limited time only.
I don't want to sound like a slashdot fanboy, but one pag (page 8) really caught my eye:
The Windows NT Workstation 3.5 release provided the highest degree of protection yet for critical business applications and data.
While I enjoy nostalgic work such as this, I can live without this kind of revisionist commentary.
they say bodies larger than 700km go from being potatoe shaped to round. why not set a defined width above this 'minimum', and anything larger be called a planet? twice the minimum sounds plausible, and that means Pluto would still be defined as planet.
If they can identify and quantify eplicit networks or IP addresses causing the 'abuse', then why don't they send a warning and then block them? They'll fix the problem real quick.....
Until /. reposts this story at least twice......
We had a monster case custom built for a 'luggable' desktop system and LCD screen that had to go from shutdown to shutdown. While they are normally used for musical equipment (consult your local music shop for more info), they work beautifully for computers.
I believe thats what they are doing, except they are using flywheel batteries to store the electricity generated during braking.
http://www.c3.lanl.gov/~brislawn/JPEG.0003/tsld002 .htm
A brief history of JPEG, which started in 1985. I think it can be fought on the premise that the patent was based on the work of the consortium, and not the work of the person who filed the patent. First to invent, not first to file.
Hasn't anyone honed in on the fact that this so called JPEG virus could potentially be a new and dangerous variant? JPEGs and other associated non executable files are not a threat unto themselves, but based on the brief viral description, they serve as a 'harmless' vehicle for transmitting viral code to be executed by what can be described as a 'bootstrap' executable. How else do you expect to get by the web and email scanners which either filter or STOP any executables from getting through?
Manufactured or not, its a concept which could do some serious damage.