In the 90's, Linux advocates used "stability" as their main argument against Windows. Microsoft took that argument away with XP (regardless of the idiotic BSOD comments tossed around these parts).
Sure. If you don't mind rebooting your servers monthly. Ten OS patches out next Tuesday remember!
From 2001 to now, Linux advocates have used "security" as their main argument against Windows. Microsoft is in the process of taking that argument away.
Like securing Vista by rewriting the relatively mature TCP/IP stack?. There are a lot of security enhancements in Vista - e.g. Address Space Layout Randomization to mitigate buffer overflow issues. But don't expect anyone who cares to be deploying it in security-critical places until it's proved itself in the field.
Nobody knows, they couldn't get wireless up and running on it.
Requests for testing have been sent to the guy in California who were rumoured to have gotten it running though.
Simply follow my method:
* buy netgear PCMCIA wireless card
* use on Windows
* wait 6 months - now magically works under debian-unstable
(Disclaimer: I have an article on snort up on there somewhere.)
Re:dumber than an arkansas hound dog, these guys
on
Halving Half Lives
·
· Score: 2, Informative
you slow down an atom to near absolute zero, you would be lengthening the half-life, say from 200,000 years to 400,000 or whatever, because the binding energy would stay the same, just the ability of the particles to break free would be reduced because of the slowed movements between the particles. you might even generate a spike in atomic activity when it warms up.
Why is this modded informative? Has the poster or the moderator actually done this experiment? Have they even Read the Fine Article?
"Using the university's particle accelerator [Rolfs] fired protons and deuterons (nuclei containing a proton and a neutron) at various light nuclei. He noticed that the rate of fusion reactions was significantly greater when the nuclei were encased in metals than when they were inserted into insulators."
Counterintuitive, maybe. But then so is most of Quantum ElectroDynamics.
Sniffing has nothing to do with subnetting. It has very much to do with the hardware that connects you. If you're both connected to the same hub, you can see all of each other's traffic. If you're both connected to the same switch, you can't.
Note that as a Slashdot comment, this an extremely simplified explanation and not a complete picture.
If you're both connected to the same switch, you can, very easily. Google for dsniff.
If it was true that you don't see such destructive security breeches on these other OSs because they are not popular, then why don't we see the same on servers running Linux/BsdUnix etc.
I have a pair of security breeches. They're made of kevlar.
Given the effort required to be able to offer support on a third party distro I wonder if over time Oracle will come to the conclusion they can provide their own distro as easily as carry out support for distro over which they have no/limited control.
w00t! Then I could wait three years for an OS patch as well. Where do I sign up?
NEVER use tabs in code - or if you do, use an editor like jEdit that can automatically change them to spaces.
Or when you edit code and just have to change someone else's layout, do a find-replace on tabs with however number of spaces you want instead?
If you use a revision control system, you'll tend to find yourself pursued by mobs of programmers (with scythes, pitchforks and burning torches) for mucking up their diffs.
It says that only the one "validated" smtp server can send mail
No, you can specify which hosts plural are allowed to send mail, up to and including all the Internet. And if you want to send your mail from tom@192.168.0.1, there's no way to do a SPF lookup anyway. No-one should be rejecting on lack of an SPF record.
This is the last SPF record I created, meaning the outgoing mailserver is definitely OK, but anywhere is possible.
foo.ac.nz. 7200 IN TXT "v=spf1 a:mail.foo.ac.nz ~all"
If your DNS or rDNS is incorrect, or you're sending directly from dynamic IP space, or you don't want to use a hostname, plenty of people will be rejecting your mail without bothering to look up SPF records. I don't particularly like it, but that's the way of things now.
For instance, the Sender Policy Framework (SPF) so-called spam solution is being adopted all over the place without nary a complaint.
Huh? The guy who does the DNS records gets to decide which hosts are allowed to send mail for a particular domain. S/he can break email for that domain in plenty of ways without SPF. And I fail to see how my saying you can't send mail for my domain is breaking the end-to-end model. If you were talking about port 25 blocking, I could agree.
"On Great Britain shade tolerant species like oak and ash are replaced in the pollen record by hazels, brambles, grasses and nettles. Removal of the forests led to decreased transpiration resulting in the formation of upland peat bogs. Widespread decreased in elm pollen across Europe between 6400-6300 BP and 5200-5000 BP, starting in southern Europe and gradually moving north to Great Britain, may represent land clearing by fire at the onset of Neolithic agriculture."
They need exposed as the frauds they are and for people to stop accepting the lie that they are an environmental group. They are a political group that has done more to harm environmental progress (look at their record on nuclear energy for a prime example) than anybody short of big industry.
It's posts like this that really make my membership worth every cent. GO GREENPEACE!
I don't agree with them across the board, but then they're only a lobby group so it's not like I'm electing them as the government or anything.
It was as if the #1 requirement was "Must cost at least $57,000, but list for $75k, so the purchasing manager can get a nice fat bonus for 'saving' money."
OK, I'll list postgres for $75K, but I'll let you have it for the low, low price of $10K, and if you call in the next 10 minutes, I'll throw in a copy of 'Practical PostgreSQL' and a 100-user licence for free!
Actually, the Bush gang does seem to have wised up that the denial isn't really going over all that well. So they've switched to the traditional "Further research is needed" approach.
Bush could be wading across his ranch and still say "Further research is needed."
Slashdot Mirror
Don't forget to bzip2 it a couple more times to make it even smaller!
Endace make some decent offload cards, suitable for snorting hundreds of Mb/s and above, if that's what you're looking for.
Sure. If you don't mind rebooting your servers monthly. Ten OS patches out next Tuesday remember!
Like securing Vista by rewriting the relatively mature TCP/IP stack?. There are a lot of security enhancements in Vista - e.g. Address Space Layout Randomization to mitigate buffer overflow issues. But don't expect anyone who cares to be deploying it in security-critical places until it's proved itself in the field.
Simply follow my method:
* buy netgear PCMCIA wireless card
* use on Windows
* wait 6 months - now magically works under debian-unstable
(Joking aside, Knoppix picked it up immediately.)
http://www.debian-administration.org/ is good for all things Debian.
(Disclaimer: I have an article on snort up on there somewhere.)
Why is this modded informative? Has the poster or the moderator actually done this experiment? Have they even Read the Fine Article?
Counterintuitive, maybe. But then so is most of Quantum ElectroDynamics.
Don't tell me that tops the bit where the big ape gets the little ape back in Donkey Kong, or whatever it was.
If you're both connected to the same switch, you can, very easily. Google for dsniff.
Yes, everything in the world is exactly as portrayed in Hollywood movies. Hope This Helps, etc.
I have a pair of security breeches. They're made of kevlar.
D'oh! I was going to say Mogadishu, but then I changed it to Sudan. I'll have to stop letting work distract me from Slashdot like this.
So move to Sudan, and let us know how you get on.
"..yes?"
"So, can I interest you in an opportunity in Human Resources?
w00t! Then I could wait three years for an OS patch as well. Where do I sign up?
Well, we're outta cake. We only had three pieces and we didn't expect such a rush.
If you use a revision control system, you'll tend to find yourself pursued by mobs of programmers (with scythes, pitchforks and burning torches) for mucking up their diffs.
No, you can specify which hosts plural are allowed to send mail, up to and including all the Internet. And if you want to send your mail from tom@192.168.0.1, there's no way to do a SPF lookup anyway. No-one should be rejecting on lack of an SPF record.
This is the last SPF record I created, meaning the outgoing mailserver is definitely OK, but anywhere is possible.
foo.ac.nz. 7200 IN TXT "v=spf1 a:mail.foo.ac.nz ~all"If your DNS or rDNS is incorrect, or you're sending directly from dynamic IP space, or you don't want to use a hostname, plenty of people will be rejecting your mail without bothering to look up SPF records. I don't particularly like it, but that's the way of things now.
Huh? The guy who does the DNS records gets to decide which hosts are allowed to send mail for a particular domain. S/he can break email for that domain in plenty of ways without SPF. And I fail to see how my saying you can't send mail for my domain is breaking the end-to-end model. If you were talking about port 25 blocking, I could agree.
And that's just trying to get GNUS to deliver email!
Er, around then.
"On Great Britain shade tolerant species like oak and ash are replaced in the pollen record by hazels, brambles, grasses and nettles. Removal of the forests led to decreased transpiration resulting in the formation of upland peat bogs. Widespread decreased in elm pollen across Europe between 6400-6300 BP and 5200-5000 BP, starting in southern Europe and gradually moving north to Great Britain, may represent land clearing by fire at the onset of Neolithic agriculture."
I think I speak for all of us here when I say: FOR THE LOVE OF BOB, MAN! WHY ARE YOU RUNNING X ON YOUR SERVERS?
It's posts like this that really make my membership worth every cent. GO GREENPEACE!
I don't agree with them across the board, but then they're only a lobby group so it's not like I'm electing them as the government or anything.
OK, I'll list postgres for $75K, but I'll let you have it for the low, low price of $10K, and if you call in the next 10 minutes, I'll throw in a copy of 'Practical PostgreSQL' and a 100-user licence for free!
Bush could be wading across his ranch and still say "Further research is needed."
MS finally wakened
and smells the coffee
but I have no cup for them
There, I fixed your haiku for you