wacky DNS when using WWW/HTTP: some could argue it's useful
"Some" yes, but remember that "Quality" is defined by the consumer and not the producer. And given the reaction to this new "value-added service" i'd say that the overall quality of the Internet DNS service has rather taken a downturn.
I predict SCO is therefore going to be squashed by IBM, SGI, Red Hat etc.
My worst fears about the SCO case is not wether SCO will legally win a single dollar from someone, there is no chance in hell that will happend.
No, my biggest fear is the SCO will somehow manage to slip away, at the last moment, from the much spectacular death they are running full-speed towards, and they will somehow manage to survive and hide in a small hole somewhere.
The primary difference between your example and Microsoft's is that a Microsoft system would shut down when reporting the error
And what has that got to do with anything ?? I can require that a MCSE jumps in circles on his left foot while the system reports the error, but I am still "infringing" on the MS patent..
No, but claiming that you will be sucessful simply by having the best product is total BS in today's environment.
An Open alternative has a good position to beat the proprietary opposition, especially as it is quite divided already. Open Standards are the "in" thing right now.
Tell that to the 600 pound gorilla who controlls the market by proprietary standards. The whole corporate world can't switch to a different system, risking that tomorrow they will no longer be able to exchange information with their clients. This is called "Consumer-Lock In" and M$ has done a great job of making sure everybody is scared to switch from M$ products.
Make it better than the commercial offerings, and people will come
Welcome stranger, we hope your space travel to our planet has ben a pleasant one.
Unfortunately, on our planet, things are not as simple as on yours. Here on Earth, companies don't hesitade to abuse their market position or enourmous wealth to block normal competition.
It doesn't matter if you create the best mousetrap, as long as Micro$traps controls the market you will get nowhere. You can't even advertise your new trap, since Micro$traps will threaten the magazines to stop advertising in their paper if yours will get printed.
Welcome to earth, we hope you will have a pleasant visit.
It's not hard to see that this patent law will be used in Europe exactly as the DMCA has been used in the USA..
I.e to close websites and stiffle free speech.
And worse, it's very likely to be used to stop open source projects.
And for those that just woke up, I want to inform you that "justice" and "right" are not the things that make you win a court case.. Rather it's "money", "lawyers", and "lobbying".
If MS continue the service they undoubtedly will get flack for helping aid Paedophiles.
What I find totally scandaluse about the "to protect the children" claim. is that nobody seems to want to know what new features are in the new service, and how Microsoft plans to use them to protect the children in ways that can not be done today..
To me it just sounds like marketing blah blah to cover up the real Classical MS motive "To crush the competition"..
Flouride as a preventative measure against cavities was first discovered by the dentists.
True, but it's highly toxic.. Have you seen the space-suits the fluor-handling employees of the toothpaste companies have to wear ?
You're not supposed to eat toothpaste, and there are good reasons for that. One is that fluor builds up in your bones and can cause deformations in high levels.
There realy are reasonable doubts about putting fluor in drinking water.
The article was about NAT... and NAT is not in any way related to firewalling, other than by conveniently often being handled by the same device.
Uhh, read everything again and put things in context, NAT is a service, and in this context of speak-freely-peer-to-peer on the internet it is almost *always* provided by firewalls. That is why the comment reads as it does: I enjoy the added security of a NATed firewall, and without a really good reason, I won't be quick to give it up. "it" is likely a reference to the firewall. Get it ?
Let's pretend for a moment I have a buddy at the ISP, and I've had them add a route to your location for that network... so routing isn't an issue.
Having someone add a route for a private network (as defined in RFC-1918) won't do you any good unless you have buddies on every hop between you and your target. Otherwise, you would have to be on-site at the ISP, and then you would need no route change..
Your claim was: That's nat, full, 100% working nat.
With absolutely no security.
And then you go on describing some James-Bond-style scenario that demonstrates a vulnerability against one type of threats.
I repeat my claim that the single NAT rule is enough for 99% of people out there..
The text says : I know I enjoy the added security of a NATed firewall,
But since this is/. nobody has a brain and you got modded up..
- It hides the real addresses of my machines.
Not really... or more accurately, to an outside attacker, those addresses dont mean anyhting anyway. Whether they are known or not is not relevant. A firewall in front of a network of routable addresses could hide things equally well.
Uhh, a network appliance that does NAT, usually has a configuration that makes it a firewall.. Can you name any network device that does NAT and is not used as a Firewall ?
NAT by itslef does not reduce exposure. The best example of this would be those who configure nat in a hurry on linux 2.4 systems..... they set up an SNAT or masquerade rule in postrouting, and that's it.
That's nat, full, 100% working nat.
With absolutely no security.
I think you either are trolling or you don't understand the concept.
A single SNAT rule (as people use) only works one way. i.e. You can connect from "inside" to "outside" but the braindead Microsoft services that run on the workstations behind it are not exposed to attackers or Worms (F.ex. Sobig.f)..
"NAT", just as a "Firewall" is a *service* provided by one or more network appliances, and there is no one *right* combination of services that can be called the "one true firewall".
This EULA should be copied and kept as a proof of that nobody ever reads the EULAs, or takes them seriously..
And my previous post should also be saved a s a proof of that nobody ever reads the text in question... The text in the original post does not appear in the EULA (or has been removed).
Making modifications to the Materials or creating derivative works based on the Materials is prohibited, as is using the Materials on any networked computer environment or other website."
This EULA should be copied and kept as a proof of that nobody ever reads the EULAs, or takes them seriously..
A similar thing happened here in France. But it was in a way more serious since the French have "Unfalsifiable" (yeah right), identity papers.
A guy got arrested for not paying his fines for travelling with the trains without ticket.. (If you get busted without a ticket they take your name and address and send you the fine.)
Problem was that he didn't live in France at all but in one of the former colonies, and had never actually been to those places where he was supposed to have been.
After a bit of investigation he found quite a number of bank accounts in his name, in various banks. Along with other things he was supposed to be doing.. All in all, quite a activity he was supposed to be practicing.
He finally found out that some years ago his father had lost the family's papers, along with his ID card (they were stolen). And his old ID card was then falsified by replacing the picture with a picture of someone else.
When the new "Unfalsifiable" cards came along, the guy who was using his old card, managed to replace it with the new "Unfalsifiable" version..
With that card, he then collected fines for everyting we felt like doing..
The guy wasn't sentenced in the end and got an apoligy from the judge.
This story does a good job of demonstrating that the weakest security link is almost always human and phrases like "Unfalsifiable" and "Unbreakable" are not good for anything but selling the product to the public.
This absolutely has to be one of the best examples of how the graphic card companies are using the ignorant "tech" sites to spread false stats.
Those guys got an offer from nVidia to do the Benchmarking along with "A new and unreleased nVidia driver" (yeah right !).
And even when the nVidia card smoked the Radeon card by a difference of 70% at a resolution of 1600x1200, these guys didn't even have a single clue about what was happening..
I still hope ATI wins in the end, though. I like their technology quite a bit better than nVidia's....
The open source ATI drivers, both in XFree86 and other libraries, are written with technical specs and support from ATI. .. nVidia does no such thing..
Slashdot Mirror
I think ICANN should basically tell VeriSign, "If you pull this crap again you're through."
What do you mean "again" ?? They're still doing it.
wacky DNS when using WWW/HTTP: some could argue it's useful
"Some" yes, but remember that "Quality" is defined by the consumer and not the producer. And given the reaction to this new "value-added service" i'd say that the overall quality of the Internet DNS service has rather taken a downturn.
If everyone practiced Zionism, the world would be a lot better place.
Given the only example we have of a Zionist state,I wouldn't want to bet on it.
Just look at all the new "Settlements" they are building, the wall, the hate, etc ...
I predict SCO is therefore going to be squashed by IBM, SGI, Red Hat etc.
My worst fears about the SCO case is not wether SCO will legally win a single dollar from someone, there is no chance in hell that will happend.
No, my biggest fear is the SCO will somehow manage to slip away, at the last moment, from the much spectacular death they are running full-speed towards, and they will somehow manage to survive and hide in a small hole somewhere.
The primary difference between your example and Microsoft's is that a Microsoft system would shut down when reporting the error
And what has that got to do with anything ?? I can require that a MCSE jumps in circles on his left foot while the system reports the error, but I am still "infringing" on the MS patent ..
Well, the movie studios are doing the same thing, or what do you think this thing is used for ?
I'm interested to see how this pans out in a democracy.
Well, the French don't allow anything "Nazi" to enter France. Both Yahoo and eBay have had to change the way they operate in France as a result..
You can't even operate a website discussing the things the Nazis belived at the time ..
Welcome to France ...
Since the site will likely be
So we should just crawl into a hole and die?
No, but claiming that you will be sucessful simply by having the best product is total BS in today's environment.
An Open alternative has a good position to beat the proprietary opposition, especially as it is quite divided already. Open Standards are the "in" thing right now.
Tell that to the 600 pound gorilla who controlls the market by proprietary standards. The whole corporate world can't switch to a different system, risking that tomorrow they will no longer be able to exchange information with their clients. This is called "Consumer-Lock In" and M$ has done a great job of making sure everybody is scared to switch from M$ products.
Make it better than the commercial offerings, and people will come
Welcome stranger, we hope your space travel to our planet has ben a pleasant one.
Unfortunately, on our planet, things are not as simple as on yours. Here on Earth, companies don't hesitade to abuse their market position or enourmous wealth to block normal competition.
It doesn't matter if you create the best mousetrap, as long as Micro$traps controls the market you will get nowhere. You can't even advertise your new trap, since Micro$traps will threaten the magazines to stop advertising in their paper if yours will get printed.
Welcome to earth, we hope you will have a pleasant visit.
1. There is no such thing as contributory patent infringement, I believe.
Apples, and oranges.. It doesn't matter which, if you get a ton of either on your head, it will break you, period.
It's not hard to see that this patent law will be used in Europe exactly as the DMCA has been used in the USA..
I.e to close websites and stiffle free speech.
And worse, it's very likely to be used to stop open source projects.
And for those that just woke up, I want to inform you that "justice" and "right" are not the things that make you win a court case.. Rather it's "money", "lawyers", and "lobbying".
If MS continue the service they undoubtedly will get flack for helping aid Paedophiles.
What I find totally scandaluse about the "to protect the children" claim. is that nobody seems to want to know what new features are in the new service, and how Microsoft plans to use them to protect the children in ways that can not be done today..
To me it just sounds like marketing blah blah to cover up the real Classical MS motive "To crush the competition" ..
Flouride as a preventative measure against cavities was first discovered by the dentists.
True, but it's highly toxic.. Have you seen the space-suits the fluor-handling employees of the toothpaste companies have to wear ?
You're not supposed to eat toothpaste, and there are good reasons for that. One is that fluor builds up in your bones and can cause deformations in high levels.
There realy are reasonable doubts about putting fluor in drinking water.
The article was about NAT... and NAT is not in any way related to firewalling, other than by conveniently often being handled by the same device.
Uhh, read everything again and put things in context, NAT is a service, and in this context of speak-freely-peer-to-peer on the internet it is almost *always* provided by firewalls. That is why the comment reads as it does: I enjoy the added security of a NATed firewall, and without a really good reason, I won't be quick to give it up.
"it" is likely a reference to the firewall. Get it ?
Let's pretend for a moment I have a buddy at the ISP, and I've had them add a route to your location for that network... so routing isn't an issue.
Having someone add a route for a private network (as defined in RFC-1918) won't do you any good unless you have buddies on every hop between you and your target. Otherwise, you would have to be on-site at the ISP, and then you would need no route change..
Your claim was:
That's nat, full, 100% working nat.
With absolutely no security.
And then you go on describing some James-Bond-style scenario that demonstrates a vulnerability against one type of threats.
I repeat my claim that the single NAT rule is enough for 99% of people out there..
The text says : I know I enjoy the added security of a NATed firewall,
But since this is /. nobody has a brain and you got modded up..
- It hides the real addresses of my machines.
Not really... or more accurately, to an outside attacker, those addresses dont mean anyhting anyway. Whether they are known or not is not relevant. A firewall in front of a network of routable addresses could hide things equally well.
Uhh, a network appliance that does NAT, usually has a configuration that makes it a firewall.. Can you name any network device that does NAT and is not used as a Firewall ?
NAT by itslef does not reduce exposure. The best example of this would be those who configure nat in a hurry on linux 2.4 systems..... they set up an SNAT or masquerade rule in postrouting, and that's it.
That's nat, full, 100% working nat.
With absolutely no security.
I think you either are trolling or you don't understand the concept.
A single SNAT rule (as people use) only works one way. i.e. You can connect from "inside" to "outside" but the braindead Microsoft services that run on the workstations behind it are not exposed to attackers or Worms (F.ex. Sobig.f)..
"NAT", just as a "Firewall" is a *service* provided by one or more network appliances, and there is no one *right* combination of services that can be called the "one true firewall".
The cable industry is already worried enough about piracy and you can't figure out why they don't want open source set top boxes? Wow.
The problems the cable industry is having with pirace are big, despite all the secrecy that has been asosiated with the systems in the past.
Today there is indeed an Open standard for digital satelite and cable services. And almost all of europe is using it.
As long as the encryption keys are kept in tamper proof smartcards there is no need to hide the algoriths or the inner workings of the hardware.
This EULA should be copied and kept as a proof of that nobody ever reads the EULAs, or takes them seriously..
And my previous post should also be saved a s a proof of that nobody ever reads the text in question... The text in the original post does not appear in the EULA (or has been removed).
Mea culpa,
Making modifications to the Materials or creating derivative works based on the Materials is prohibited, as is using the Materials on any networked computer environment or other website."
This EULA should be copied and kept as a proof of that nobody ever reads the EULAs, or takes them seriously..
A similar thing happened here in France.
But it was in a way more serious since the French have "Unfalsifiable" (yeah right), identity papers.
A guy got arrested for not paying his fines for travelling with the trains without ticket.. (If you get busted without a ticket they take your name and address and send you the fine.)
Problem was that he didn't live in France at all but in one of the former colonies, and had never actually been to those places where he was supposed to have been.
After a bit of investigation he found quite a number of bank accounts in his name, in various banks. Along with other things he was supposed to be doing.. All in all, quite a activity he was supposed to be practicing.
He finally found out that some years ago his father had lost the family's papers, along with his ID card (they were stolen). And his old ID card was then falsified by replacing the picture with a picture of someone else.
When the new "Unfalsifiable" cards came along, the guy who was using his old card, managed to replace it with the new "Unfalsifiable" version..
With that card, he then collected fines for everyting we felt like doing..
The guy wasn't sentenced in the end and got an apoligy from the judge.
This story does a good job of demonstrating that the weakest security link is almost always human and phrases like "Unfalsifiable" and "Unbreakable" are not good for anything but selling the product to the public.
he advertising is only applied to the free download version - if you buy it in the shops, you don't get advertising.
What then, prevents someone who has bought a boxed set to put the ISOs on a FTP server ?
Will the Boxed-Set "ISO layout" be copyrighted like the BSD ?
The report can be found Here but it looks like it costs around 29.38
What a brilliant way to get rid of criticism ..
Yeah, they disected an old ATI and found out how they were cheating on Q3 numbers so they figured they'd better join the race and start cheating.
I must say, they are doing an Excellent Job
This absolutely has to be one of the best examples of how the graphic card companies are using the ignorant "tech" sites to spread false stats.
Those guys got an offer from nVidia to do the Benchmarking along with "A new and unreleased nVidia driver" (yeah right !).
And even when the nVidia card smoked the Radeon card by a difference of 70% at a resolution of 1600x1200, these guys didn't even have a single clue about what was happening..
Freedom is about having a choise.
If the USA made a policy of not allowing any women on future space flights, you can be sure there would be a response..
I still hope ATI wins in the end, though. I like their technology quite a bit better than nVidia's....
The open source ATI drivers, both in XFree86 and other libraries, are written with technical specs and support from ATI.
.. nVidia does no such thing..