Samba 2 does have PDC support. It's BDC and domain trust relationships that it needs right now. IntelliMirror tech would be nice too (directory replication). This won't help further any of those goals.. it'll just allow linux to have backwards combatability with other windows products. Which is nice, but it won't help Samba.
This is the very same NetBeui protocol you see in Windows. Microsoft Windows. Microsoft has GPL'd the NetBEUI protocol!
Sweet jesus, do you know what this means? It means I just lost atleast a dozen bets with my friends... I have to go shave my head bald now... good grief... it's 70 and balmy in hell right now!
Any advice on how to do things like even column width on tables in a standard fashion or other more complex stuff?
We all would like to make standards-compliant websites, but the truth is that MSIE v. Netscape basically killed the idea of using HTML4... anything past 3's extensions and you start getting wierd rendering - is there a solution?
If you put these into high-speed CDROMs I bet you're running the risk of damaging/destroying the drive. Those things aren't balanced!
There's a reason CDs are circular rather than square - it has to do with centrifucal(sp?) force (and yeah, yeah, it doesn't exist - but people know what I'm talking about, so nyaah) - at high speeds that thing is going to be pushing upwards at an uneven speed. And the other problem is that as they spin up they generate airflow, which is now seriously screwed up...
Somebody tell me correct me if I'm wrong.. but that's just my take on it...
Just what we need: a computer that replaces what it thinks are diseased tissues.
Let's pray it doesn't run windows. I'd hate to have the thing GPF while rebuilding my artery walls... "don't worry - that'll be fixed in the next service pack!".... great... and me with a hole in my heart... agh.
Linux isn't designed for this kind of thing, nor would it be a good fit. This is really specialized stuff... I can't imagine any linux user, high-end or entry-level, who would honestly consider a 1000 CPU linux box...
I don't know about anyone else here, but I can see how this could help create vastly more efficient transformers. Each transformer has a unique resonant frequency - the one it transforms most efficiently at. This is also the least "noisy" frequency to convert at - the waveform makes it through without looking like a lawnmower went over it. If we can tune these things to 50 or 60hz that would be.. well.. awesome.
I can sum up the impracticality of this in one sentence: The MS Office suite, it's OS, and most of it's applications are geared towards large corporations, the government, and other "Big Contracts". Until a few Fortune 500 companies go grumbling for Office under linux I can say with confidence MS does not have a team of anything (dogs, programmers, marketdroids, or other) working on a port of Office to linux. Not an option - it's a waste of resources.
MS will do whatever those big corporations say they need. Keep this in mind, always. Corporations demanded a way to validate someone's knowledge of MS products - they created certifications. They needed an easy way to connect hundreds of offices - along came W2K and it's directory services along with Outlook 2000 and it's global directory access. Corporations needed reliable, robust, high performance servers. Whups - Sun got that one. But W2K aims to even up the score. See how it works?
Believe me - there is no port.
Re:PKI and other issues
on
SSH v. SRP
·
· Score: 1
That's true, but the problem still exists.. that's just a partial solution. A true solution requires establishing a trusted path to the server, or a mutual trusted 3rd party to perform verification.
Re:PKI and other issues
on
SSH v. SRP
·
· Score: 1
Well, if it goes through a router you can reprogram it to say "all packets to host X to go my port instead of the default port" in the ruleset. Any router between the source and destination can do, but the ideal scenario would be to compromise a router and a host on a network between host A and host B.
Assuming you can do that, all you need to do then is run your ssh proxy as root. Of course, I don't have the time/skills to write such a proxy, but basically all it would do is keep pre-generated keys in a queue and then dynamically assign them for each host and then setup a translation table to keep track of which "real" key maps to which "fake" one. After that, just dump the decrypted stream to disk or back out to a fourth host for later analysis.
Now, maintaining that route would be more difficult as many routers do BGP / dynamic routing. Forging/those/ packets is left as an excercise for the reader.;) Go bug l0pht for details..
Re:PKI and other issues
on
SSH v. SRP
·
· Score: 1
Aight, you got me. I screw up once with the wrong term and I got called on it.;) Thanks for the correction.
The problem most people side-step or don't even know about is man in the middle attacks:
Works like this... you're host A connecting to host B but the packets go through host C. So unless host A and B have an alternate method to exchange keys, you're vulnerable to having host C replace the key with it's own, so in reality you're talking to host C and it's using a simple form of IP masquarading to make it look as if it's B or A...
So long as host C is the only route between the two (which is suprisingly easy to accomplish) - or through icmp and bgp manipulation makes that the case - you can ensure that host C has access to all the data over the wire even though those two hosts think they now have a trusted connection! Unless you can bypass host C via another path you won't even know it's happening.
Now, let me make this clear: there is no method for you to ensure data integrity over a public network like the internet. You must exchange keys over a secure medium before you can communicate securely over any network unless you can ensure that the entire network is under the same (trusted) administrative domain and have verified that it has not been tampered with (very, very difficult).
So in short: Yeah, SSH has problems. But this new program isn't going to make any leaps forward. You really need a PGP-style distributed key server system where you can verify the key's integrity through a trust network and/or via multiple independent routes / hosts. Otherwise, the alternative is a Kerberos-style system. Unfortunately THAT system has a single point of failure - if the key server is compromised your entire network is compromised. I'm not an expert though on Kerberos, so feedback is appreciated.
Anyone ever play Catz or petz? If so, you know what I'm thinking of: I want to train my legion of robotic pets to fear me. I want psychotic pets. I want my neighbors to wonder why there's 30 glowing eyes on my roof all howling at the moon in a tin-can like voice. I want them to BEG for their batteries. I want them to develop a strong hatred for the Energizer Bunny, Barney, and Teletubbies. They are to be lasered on sight.
For their service, I will provide robotic modifications - ultraviolet lasers with a 1.5M volt output (ultraviolet lasers leave the air the laser fired through ionized providing a path for electrons to follow. Think: tesla coil), evil glowing eyes, 180 db pizo-electric buzzers from hell and IR / RF outputs to mess with electronics. These will be the pets from hell
I like that.. the perfect compliment to a BOFH's LART - 30 evil robotic cats. "Awww, aren't they cute - look at those 6" long metal claws.... oh.. wait..." *electronic growling* RUN FOOL RUN!!!!!
Unfortunately the solutions we've employed up until recently are fatally flawed - they all use magnetic storage. The problem is that the higher the density, the sooner "bit rot" occurs - those magnetized iron oxide particles work against each other to depolarize. After several years (or several dozen, depending on the media) the data's unsalvagable. That's problem #1.
The solution would be to use an optical storage media, but as others have pointed out, CDR storage has a life expectancy of 75-100 years depending on the brand. Which wouldn't be too bad except you have to realize that in 100 years you need to start putting resources into copying all that data off and re-writing it again. After awhile you'll have a snowball effect where you spend more time writing the old data than the new!
What we really need is a piece of technology that doesn't age - an entirely self-contained computer (nuclear powered, maybe?) that has the media, the reading/writing mechanisms and has several failsafe mechanisms to alert you well before any data is lost. Think of it as a computer time capsule - you bury it and in 500 years come back and it has all the human interface necessary to reproduce the data in a usable format. Of course, you'll still need someone who reads English then..
Very nice - the faster seek times and latency will
Latency of the drive is not directly proportional to the RPM rate - you also have to take into account several other factors such as how many heads, the speed of those heads (how quickly it gets into position). RPMs != latency. That's a common misconception.
There's other factors to take into account such as the Internal Transfer Rate of the drive - how fast can that head move the data? You also need to take into account the delay (electrically, not physically) to "switch heads" - you can't have all those heads reading/writing at once b/c at it's core a harddrive is a SERIAL-based system. It processes one request, then the next, then the next. Yes, it sucks, but that's how it works.. and THAT has a bigger impact on latency than rotational delay.
Also, you mentioned that faster = noiser. No. Noise is caused by improper sound-proofing / vibration reduction. It's/that/ simple - anybody can cut their drive noise in half by putting a sock around it. I'm serious - take a sock and wrap it around your HDD. Make sure it doesn't come in direct contact with your case. Notice that whisper of noise now? Nice, isn't it? Be sure when you try this to leave the air hole on top CLEAR or you'll heat that thing up faster than an overclocked PIII without a heat sink.
Don't know about the rest of you, but I play with a female model in Tribes to gain tactical advantage - smaller model is harder to hit, and some people hesitate when shooting female models. It's just psychological too, but when somebody gets upset over being fragged by a "girl" they tend to lose their edge and become easier targets because they are less focused.
I have yet to see somebody do any "gender exploration" in Quake3.. that usually fares worse than doing so in real life - you usually don't explode into giblets for cross-dressing. Try IRC if you're into that kind of thing...
The fact that they feel it's necessary to edit/modify it for exhibition is telling enough for me.
Does it matter whether censorship occurs because of government intervention or because of fear of retribution by the public? The end result is the same, regardless of what you choose to call it.
A truly free society is one in which it is safe to be unpopular. Think about that quote for awhile and reflect on it - because after awhile you'll realize the US isn't "free" in that sense, and neither is 95% of the rest of the people on this planet.
I can't change that - I could try to feed everyone on the planet and give away all my money trying to accomplish that but it would make little difference - the task is too big for me, or even a large group of people like me, to make any impact. The problem is THAT big. So I pick something smaller - because it's big enough to matter and small enough to win.
South Park happens to be one small thing that matters enough, and is small enough, that I can make a difference on, hence my post.
Censor it and it dies. The reason South Park is popular is because it pokes fun at the people who want to censor and control modern media. SP is a slap in the face for the so-called "christian coalition", political correctness, and the general stupidity and holy war activism going on down in DC and around the country.
Modify it and you effectively kill it AND compromise your position. Don't do it.
Not gonna happen. Don't get your hopes up. We'd have solar power too if the electric company could figure out how to run a sunbeam through a meter. The oil monopolies are no different. You've got mega-corporations with big bucks willing to go to congress to get anything like this delayed for "environmental" reasons (bacteria? is it dangerous?), or because it could be explosive (OMG - hydrogen and oxygen! But leave gas alone - it's harmless..), or for a dozen other regulatory reasons. Believe me, they'll be going through hoops.
In the meanwhile, oil companies around the world will mobilize to capture the patent for themselves. They'll also put strong pressure on the US saying "market this and we'll make prices go higher!" Considering it's already approaching $2.50/gal in our area that threat will be taken seriously.
In short, good luck guys - great tech but you're up against goliath.
Slashdot Mirror
Samba 2 does have PDC support. It's BDC and domain trust relationships that it needs right now. IntelliMirror tech would be nice too (directory replication). This won't help further any of those goals.. it'll just allow linux to have backwards combatability with other windows products. Which is nice, but it won't help Samba.
Sweet jesus, do you know what this means? It means I just lost atleast a dozen bets with my friends... I have to go shave my head bald now... good grief... it's 70 and balmy in hell right now!
We all would like to make standards-compliant websites, but the truth is that MSIE v. Netscape basically killed the idea of using HTML4... anything past 3's extensions and you start getting wierd rendering - is there a solution?
There's a reason CDs are circular rather than square - it has to do with centrifucal(sp?) force (and yeah, yeah, it doesn't exist - but people know what I'm talking about, so nyaah) - at high speeds that thing is going to be pushing upwards at an uneven speed. And the other problem is that as they spin up they generate airflow, which is now seriously screwed up...
Somebody tell me correct me if I'm wrong.. but that's just my take on it...
Stopped by to rap for abit? Gee, and here I was thinking Rob was gonna bust a tune out on us and go the way of RMS. Man, and *I* disappointed... :)
Let's pray it doesn't run windows. I'd hate to have the thing GPF while rebuilding my artery walls... "don't worry - that'll be fixed in the next service pack!".... great... and me with a hole in my heart... agh.
You really don't want that. You'd never be able to balance your checkbook........
doesn't that open the possibility of shorting yourself out? And isn't the human body made up of lots of water? :)
Just a reality check for everyone..
I don't know about anyone else here, but I can see how this could help create vastly more efficient transformers. Each transformer has a unique resonant frequency - the one it transforms most efficiently at. This is also the least "noisy" frequency to convert at - the waveform makes it through without looking like a lawnmower went over it. If we can tune these things to 50 or 60hz that would be.. well.. awesome.
MS will do whatever those big corporations say they need. Keep this in mind, always. Corporations demanded a way to validate someone's knowledge of MS products - they created certifications. They needed an easy way to connect hundreds of offices - along came W2K and it's directory services along with Outlook 2000 and it's global directory access. Corporations needed reliable, robust, high performance servers. Whups - Sun got that one. But W2K aims to even up the score. See how it works?
Believe me - there is no port.
That's true, but the problem still exists.. that's just a partial solution. A true solution requires establishing a trusted path to the server, or a mutual trusted 3rd party to perform verification.
Assuming you can do that, all you need to do then is run your ssh proxy as root. Of course, I don't have the time/skills to write such a proxy, but basically all it would do is keep pre-generated keys in a queue and then dynamically assign them for each host and then setup a translation table to keep track of which "real" key maps to which "fake" one. After that, just dump the decrypted stream to disk or back out to a fourth host for later analysis.
Now, maintaining that route would be more difficult as many routers do BGP / dynamic routing. Forging /those/ packets is left as an excercise for the reader. ;) Go bug l0pht for details..
Aight, you got me. I screw up once with the wrong term and I got called on it. ;) Thanks for the correction.
Detecting satire not your forte?
Works like this... you're host A connecting to host B but the packets go through host C. So unless host A and B have an alternate method to exchange keys, you're vulnerable to having host C replace the key with it's own, so in reality you're talking to host C and it's using a simple form of IP masquarading to make it look as if it's B or A...
So long as host C is the only route between the two (which is suprisingly easy to accomplish) - or through icmp and bgp manipulation makes that the case - you can ensure that host C has access to all the data over the wire even though those two hosts think they now have a trusted connection! Unless you can bypass host C via another path you won't even know it's happening.
Now, let me make this clear: there is no method for you to ensure data integrity over a public network like the internet. You must exchange keys over a secure medium before you can communicate securely over any network unless you can ensure that the entire network is under the same (trusted) administrative domain and have verified that it has not been tampered with (very, very difficult).
So in short: Yeah, SSH has problems. But this new program isn't going to make any leaps forward. You really need a PGP-style distributed key server system where you can verify the key's integrity through a trust network and/or via multiple independent routes / hosts. Otherwise, the alternative is a Kerberos-style system. Unfortunately THAT system has a single point of failure - if the key server is compromised your entire network is compromised. I'm not an expert though on Kerberos, so feedback is appreciated.
That is all,
For their service, I will provide robotic modifications - ultraviolet lasers with a 1.5M volt output (ultraviolet lasers leave the air the laser fired through ionized providing a path for electrons to follow. Think: tesla coil), evil glowing eyes, 180 db pizo-electric buzzers from hell and IR / RF outputs to mess with electronics. These will be the pets from hell
I like that.. the perfect compliment to a BOFH's LART - 30 evil robotic cats. "Awww, aren't they cute - look at those 6" long metal claws.... oh.. wait..." *electronic growling* RUN FOOL RUN!!!!!
Buwhahahaahahahaha!
The solution would be to use an optical storage media, but as others have pointed out, CDR storage has a life expectancy of 75-100 years depending on the brand. Which wouldn't be too bad except you have to realize that in 100 years you need to start putting resources into copying all that data off and re-writing it again. After awhile you'll have a snowball effect where you spend more time writing the old data than the new!
What we really need is a piece of technology that doesn't age - an entirely self-contained computer (nuclear powered, maybe?) that has the media, the reading/writing mechanisms and has several failsafe mechanisms to alert you well before any data is lost. Think of it as a computer time capsule - you bury it and in 500 years come back and it has all the human interface necessary to reproduce the data in a usable format. Of course, you'll still need someone who reads English then..
agh, the problems, the problems....
Not quite. That's avg. seek time you're thinking of. Latency has more factors than that to take into consideration. [details]
Latency of the drive is not directly proportional to the RPM rate - you also have to take into account several other factors such as how many heads, the speed of those heads (how quickly it gets into position). RPMs != latency. That's a common misconception.
There's other factors to take into account such as the Internal Transfer Rate of the drive - how fast can that head move the data? You also need to take into account the delay (electrically, not physically) to "switch heads" - you can't have all those heads reading/writing at once b/c at it's core a harddrive is a SERIAL-based system. It processes one request, then the next, then the next. Yes, it sucks, but that's how it works.. and THAT has a bigger impact on latency than rotational delay.
Also, you mentioned that faster = noiser. No. Noise is caused by improper sound-proofing / vibration reduction. It's /that/ simple - anybody can cut their drive noise in half by putting a sock around it. I'm serious - take a sock and wrap it around your HDD. Make sure it doesn't come in direct contact with your case. Notice that whisper of noise now? Nice, isn't it? Be sure when you try this to leave the air hole on top CLEAR or you'll heat that thing up faster than an overclocked PIII without a heat sink.
I have yet to see somebody do any "gender exploration" in Quake3.. that usually fares worse than doing so in real life - you usually don't explode into giblets for cross-dressing. Try IRC if you're into that kind of thing...
Does it matter whether censorship occurs because of government intervention or because of fear of retribution by the public? The end result is the same, regardless of what you choose to call it.
A truly free society is one in which it is safe to be unpopular. Think about that quote for awhile and reflect on it - because after awhile you'll realize the US isn't "free" in that sense, and neither is 95% of the rest of the people on this planet.
I can't change that - I could try to feed everyone on the planet and give away all my money trying to accomplish that but it would make little difference - the task is too big for me, or even a large group of people like me, to make any impact. The problem is THAT big. So I pick something smaller - because it's big enough to matter and small enough to win.
South Park happens to be one small thing that matters enough, and is small enough, that I can make a difference on, hence my post.
Modify it and you effectively kill it AND compromise your position. Don't do it.
In the meanwhile, oil companies around the world will mobilize to capture the patent for themselves. They'll also put strong pressure on the US saying "market this and we'll make prices go higher!" Considering it's already approaching $2.50/gal in our area that threat will be taken seriously.
In short, good luck guys - great tech but you're up against goliath.